CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF Scottsbluff City Hall Council Chambers 2525 Circle Drive, Scottsbluff, NE 69361 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting May 18, 2026 6:00 PM 1. Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. For public information, a copy of the Nebraska Open Meetings Act is available for review 4. Notice of changes in the agenda by the city clerk (Additions may not be made to this agenda less than 24 hours before the beginning of the meeting unless added under Item 5 of this agenda.) 5. Citizens with business not scheduled on the agenda (As required by state law, no matter may be considered under this item unless council determines that the matter requires emergency action.) 6. Closed Session a) Council reserves the right to enter into closed session if deemed necessary if the item is on the agenda as per Section 84-1410 of the Nebraska Revised Statutes. 7. Consent Calendar (Items in the consent calendar are proposed for adoption by one action for all items unless any member of the council requests that an item be considered separately.) a) Council to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2026 Regular Meeting. b) Council to excuse the absence of Council Member Stricker from the May 4, 2026 Regular Meeting. c) Council to approve the appointment of Krista Baird, to the Business Improvement Board, to fill an unexpired term ending September 30, 2029. d) Council to consider and take action on claims of the City. 8. Claim Removed From Consent Calendar Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 Page 1 Page 1 of 657 a) Council to consider and take action on the claim to Intralinks in the amount of $10,097.10. 9. Financial Report a) Council to receive the April 2026 Financial Report. 10. Public Hearings a) Council to convene as the Board of Equalization. b) Council to adjourn as the Board of Equalization and reconvene as the Scottsbluff City Council. 11. Resolution & Ordinances a) Council to consider action on the first reading of the Ordinance levying special assessments on the land and real estate upon which unsafe structures were located at 1216 and 1220 5th Avenue, resulting in their subsequent demolition. b) Council to consider action on the first reading of the Ordinance dealing with the number of apprentice plumbers that may assist master plumbers and journeyman plumbers. c) Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to Annex Two Tracts of Land situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and the Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M., commonly identified as 21st Avenue and County Road K Right-of-Way. d) Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to consider the Zoning Text Amendment to Chapter 25, Article 4 regarding Fences. e) Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code to create the Public Use District within the City’s zoning jurisdiction. f) Council to consider action on the third reading of the Ordinance regarding the definition of fowl and to provide an exception for chickens in Chapter 2, Articles 2 and 3. g) Council to consider action on the third reading of the Ordinance to Annex a tract of land situated in the East Half of Section 10, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, commonly identified as 4500 and 4502 Avenue I. h) Council to discuss and consider action on a Resolution extending the obligation of funding for ambulance services for an additional four years, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Resolution. Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 Page 2 Page 2 of 65712. Petitions, Communications, Public Input a) Council to discuss and consider action on a Community Festival Permit for Broadway Bar and Arcade, 1717 Broadway, Scottsbluff, NE for the Broadway Bar and Arcade Anniversary Car Show on May 23, 2026 from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Permit includes closing Broadway and between 18th and 17th Streets from 7:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. 13. Reports from Staff, Boards & Commissions a) Council to discuss and consider action on approving and accepting the final report for the Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Project. b) Council to discuss and consider action on the Agreement with M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering Services for Sanitary Sewer District No. 169, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement. c) Council to receive the 2025 Annual Report from the Police Department. 14. Council reports (informational only): This item is intended for Council Members to update and inform other Council Members of meetings attended since the last City Council meeting. 15. Adjournment Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 Page 3 Page 3 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 6.a Council reserves the right to enter into closed session if deemed necessary if the item is on the agenda as per Section 84-1410 of the Nebraska Revised Statutes. Staff Contact: Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 4 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 7.a Council to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2026 Regular Meeting. Staff Contact: Kimberley Wright Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 5 of 657 Regular Meeting May 4, 2026 The Scottsbluff City Council met in a regular meeting on May 4, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 2525 Circle Drive, Scottsbluff. A notice of the meeting had been published on April 30, 2026 in the Star Herald, a newspaper published and of general circulation in the City. The notice stated the date, hour and place of the meeting, that the meeting would be open to the public, that anyone with a disability desiring reasonable accommodations to attend the Council meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Office, and that an agenda of the meeting kept continuously current was available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk in City Hall; provided, the City Council could modify the agenda at the meeting if it determined that an emergency so required. A similar notice, together with a copy of the agenda, also had been emailed to each council member, made available to radio stations KNEB, KMOR, KOAQ, and the Star Herald. The notice was also available on the City’s website on May 1, 2026. Mayor Vidlak presided and City Clerk Wright recorded the proceedings. The meeting was called to order and The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Mayor Vidlak welcomed everyone in attendance and encouraged all citizens to participate in the Council meeting asking those wishing to speak to come to the microphone and state their name and who they are representing for the record. Mayor Vidlak informed those in attendance that a copy of the Nebraska open meetings act is posted in the back of the room on the west wall for the public’s review. The following Council Members were present: Betsy Vidlak, Jeanne McKerrigan, Matt Salomon, and Scott Phillips. Also, present were City Manager Kevin Spencer and City Attorney Kent Hadenfeldt. Absent: Jerry Stricker. Mayor Vidlak asked if there were any changes to the agenda. There was none. Mayor Vidlak asked if any citizens with business not scheduled on the agenda wished to include an item providing the City Council determines the item requires emergency action. There was none. Moved by Council Member Phillips, seconded by Council Member McKerrigan, a) The minutes of the April 20, 2026 Regular Meeting be approved, b) A public hearing be set for May 18, 2026 at 6:05 p.m. for the Board of Equalization to assess payments for the demolition of two dilapidated houses that were located at 1216 and 1220 5th Avenue, Scottsbluff, NE, c) Approve Resolution No. 26-05-01 terminating the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Authority (CRA) to establish the Scottsbluff Aquatic Center Agency, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Resolution, d) The claims, be approved and paid as provided by law out of the respective funds designated in the list of claims dated May 4, 2026, as on file with the City Clerk and submitted to the City Council, “YEAS,” Phillips, Salomon, McKerrigan, and Vidlak. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. CLAIMS 308 PLUMBING SOLUTIONS,BLDG MAINT PARK,980; ACCELERATED RECEIVABLES SOLUTIONS, WAGE ATTACHMENT, 183.65; ANDERSON SHAW CONSTRUCTION, INC, CEMETERY OFFICE BUILDING,75708.47;ANDREW KELLEY,PER DIEM FOR FIRE SCHOOL,123;B & H INVESTMENTS, INC,SUPP - WATER,569.69;BENZEL PEST CONTROL,CONTRACTUAL SVC,525;BLACK HILLS GAS DISTRIBUTION LLC,MONTHLY ENERGY BILL,2475.78; CAMACHO RAY,EVID CASH-POL,25.75; CAPITAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC.,EQUIP MAINT ADMIN,625.78;CELLCO 1 Page 6 of 657PARTNERSHIP, CELL PHONES POL, 1717.82; CIPRIANO MIRANDA, DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES-SAN,520; CITY OF CASPER,EVID CASH-POL,40000;CRASH DATA GROUP INC,PS CIP-POL,1500;DAS STATE ACCOUNTING-CENTRAL FINANCE,MONTHLY LONG DISTANCE,55.72;EJS SUPPLY LLC,DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES-SAN,3672;ENERGY LABORATORIES, INCDEPT 6250, SAMPLES, 246; FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, POSTAGE,122.75;FERGUSON SIGNS, INC,CONTRACTUAL,6491;FRIENDS OF THE MIDWEST THEATER,SPECIAL EVENTS-REC,150;GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS, LLC, EQUIP MAINT POL, 16.67; GERING MULITPURPOSE SENIOR CENTER, CONTRACTUAL,1000; GLOWFORGE INC,C. GRNT.,999;GWIN SEAN,PER DIEM FOR FIRE SCHOOL,123;HAWKINS, INC.,CHEMICALS,4392.02;HD SUPPLY INC,DEPT SUP,24.34;HINEBAUCH JARED,PER DIEM FOR FIRE ACADEMY,791;IDEXX LABORATORIES, INC,DEPT SUP,590.59;INFINITY CONSTRUCTION, INC.,28TH & AVE K STORM DRAIN FINAL, 38869.75; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, WITHHOLDINGS, 76928.89;INT'L INST OF MUNC CLKS,MEMBERSHIP K WRIGHT,195;J G ELLIOTT CO INC,NOTARY BOND,40;JOHN DEERE FINANCIAL,DEPT SUP,802.66;JOHN DEERE FINANCIAL,DEPT SUP,2301.76;LAURUHN JESSE,PER DIEM FOR FIRE SCHOOL,123; LEAL NOHEMI,CONSULTING-POL,60; M.C. SCHAFF & ASSOCIATES, INC,SS4A ACTIONPLAN, 38095; MARKETING CONSULTANTS, UNIFORMS & CLOTHING SAN, 108; MENARDS, INC,SUPP - RATCHETX TIE DOWNS, HEM FIR - 10' & 14',1269.58; NE CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER,NE CHILD SUPPORT PYBLE,1664;NE MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL ASSN.,2 MEN ATTEND MOSQUITO WORKSHOP,115;NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT,ELECTRIC,22998.98;NIPPON SANSON MATHERSON INC,RENT MACHINES,52.83;NORTH PLATTE NATURAL RESOURCE DIST,GROUND MAINT PARK,72; NPPD, TEMP SERV CONNECT FEE, 384.73; PANHANDLE CONCRETE PRODUCTS ,INC, 10 DETECTION WARNING PLATES, 1750; PANHANDLE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC, SAMPLES, 240; PANHANDLE HUMANE SOCIETY, CONTRACTUAL,6300.56;PAUL REED CONSTRUCTION & SUPPLY, INC,GROUND MAINT PARK,6942.5;PAUL W. ESSMAN,CONTRACTUAL,23000;PIONEER ANIMAL CLINIC, LLC,K9 DUKE-POL,835.98;PLATTE VALLEY BANK,HEALTH SAVINGS ACCT,18228.12;PODIUM AUTOMOTIVE GROUP,VEH MAINT PARK,3160.38;PT HOSE AND BEARING,EQUIP MAINT,22.57;QUILL CORPORATION,DEPT SUPP ADMIN,219.37; R&RREPAIR,EQUIPMENTMAINTENANCESAN,188.5;REGIONALCAREINC,CLAIMS,397 49.87;REGIONALWESTMEDICALCENTER,CONTRACTUALPOL,105;RELENTLESSLLC, SCHOOLS& CONF-POL,2996;RUSSEL'S AUTOMOTIVE,VEH MAINT-POL, 3146.32 ;SMEC, EMPLOYEE DEDUCTION, 75; SAYLER SCREEN PRINTING, UNIFORMS- POL,127;SCB FIREFIGHTERS UNION LOCAL 1454,FIRE EE DUES,280; SCB IBEW 1597 UNION DUES,SCB IBEW 1597 UNION DUES,406.32; SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY ROADS DEPT,REIMB COUNTY,137500;SCOTTSBLUFF BODY & PAINT,VEH MAINT- POL,2143.9;SCOTTSBLUFF POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION,POLICE EE DUES,975; SIMON CONTRACTORS,CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR,2321.97; SITTNER JOE,PER DIEM FOR FIRE SCHOOL,123; SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS CHRISTENSEN DEAN,EVID CASH-POL,400;STATE HEALTH LAB,SAMPLES,707;STATE OF NE.,CONTRACTUAL- 2 Page 7 of 657POL,525;TECHLINE SPORTS LIGHTING,LACY PARK LIGHTING FINAL,48781.2;THE PEAVEY CORP,INVEST SUPPL-POL,41.38;U AND U TRUCKING LLC,CONTRACTUAL SERVICES SAN, 2354.3; UNION BANK & TRUST, RETIREMENT, 59738.77; US BANK, ELECTRIC POWER,18722.18;WESTERN NE COMMUNITY COLLEGE,SCHOOLS & CONFPOL, 30; WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, LIABILITY INS, 950; WILSON ZECHARIAH, CONTRACTUAL SERVICES-REC,700;WYOMING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT,CHILD SUPPORT,738.08;WYOMING FIRST AID & SAFETY SUPPLY, LLC,FIRST AID KIT SUPP - BANDAGES, COUGH DROPS, ETC.,357.41;ZM LUMBER CO CAPITAL ONE TRADE CREDIT,SUPP - 2 X 6 HEM FIR (4),97.56; REFUNDS; SPIRIT HUGHES, 37.59;HANNAH LIND, 22.06; MAGNET SOLUTION-LODDIEE MER, 67.97; SCHAFER FARMS, 5.88; LARRY WILSON, 8.36 Mayor Vidlak asked those who would be speaking at the public hearings to stand so they could be sworn in. Mayor Vidlak then opened the public hearing concerning the sufficiency or validity of protests or objections to creation of Paving Improvement District No. 315 located in a parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M. at 6:02 p.m. City Clerk Wright informed those in attendance she has not received any protests or objections regarding Paving District No. 315. Legal Counsel Hadenfeldt then explained as part of the process we need to hold a public hearing in case someone would want to speak concerning the creation of the Paving District. No one came forward, so Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:03 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:03 p.m. concerning the sufficiency or validity of protests or objections to creation of Sanitary Sewer District No. 168 to be located in a parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M. No objections were received and no one came forward to speak, so Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. concerning the sufficiency or validity of protests or objections to creation of Water District No. 106 to be located in a parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M. No objections were received and no one came forward, so Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. to consider the Zoning Text Amendment to Chapter 25, Article 4 regarding Fences. Development Services Director Glaubius came forward and explained the Planning Commission, at their April 13, 2026 meeting, made a positive recommendation on the approval of the Ordinance regarding a text change to Chapter 25, Article 4. The text change revises Article 4 which covers fence regulations. Notable changes include replacing the 42” maximum fence height in the front yard to 48”, replacing fence classes with open and closed fences, prohibition of railroad ties, salvage, and sheet metal in residential districts, reorganizing site triangle requirements for streets and alleys into a single section, prohibiting fences in public right-of-way, except for permitted sidewalk cafes, prohibiting fences from obstructing the flow of water, and declaring dilapidated fences as nuisances to provide an enforcement mechanism. The following exhibits were then presented on behalf of City Council and entered into record; 1) Planning Commission Agenda Packet Section which includes the staff report from Development Services 3 Page 8 of 657Director Glaubius; 2) Zoning Text Amendment Ordinance listed later in the agenda. There were no comments from the public. Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. to consider the Ordinance Text Amendment to Chapter 4, Article 1 regarding Standard Codes, and Chapter 25, Article 2 regarding the Definition of Multi-Family Dwellings. Development Services Director Glaubius explained at the April 13, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, they made a positive recommendation on the approval of the Ordinance regarding a text amendment to Chapter 4, Article 1 to add a reference to the 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) and Chapter 25, Article 2 amending the definition of a multi-family dwelling to include three dwelling unit buildings. The following exhibits were then presented on behalf of City Council and entered into record; 1) Planning Commission Agenda Packet Section containing the staff report from Development Services Director Glaubius; 20 Zoning Text Amendment Ordinance listed later in the agenda. There were no comments from the public. Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:08 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:09 p.m. to consider an Amendment to the Municipal code to create the Public Use District within the City’s Zoning Jurisdiction. Development Services Director Glaubius came forward again and explained the Planning Commission gave a positive recommendation at their April 13, 2026 meeting on the amendment to the City Zoning Map rezoning multiple properties to the newly created (P) Public Use District. He added all the properties to be changed are government owned adding up to approximately 865 acres. In addition, this zoning map change was pursued due to the annexation of the UNL Extension Center to alleviate development pressures. The following exhibits were presented on behalf of City Council and entered into record; 1) Planning Commission Agenda Packet Section which contains the Rezone Application and Staff Report by the Development Services Director; 2) Updated Zoning Map; 3) Ordinance and associated Exhibit listed later in the agenda. There were no comments from the public. Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. Mayor Vidlak opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. to receive testimony from interested persons concerning the annexation of two tracts of land situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M, Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska commonly identified as 21st Avenue and County Road K Right-of-Way. No one in the audience came forward to comment so Legal Counsel Hadenfeldt explained the City is pursuing this annexation to maintain 21st Avenue. This includes the Right-of-Way which was previously maintained by the County; however, the Right-of Way is owned by the property owners, subsequently known as the road way. Because this is a City led annexation, last week, we went through the Resolution process and later will have the first reading of the Ordinance. Comprised with the process includes a public hearing for anyone who would want to comment. There were no comments from the public. Mayor Vidlak closed the public hearing at 6:13 p.m. Council introduced the Ordinance to Annex Two Tracts of Land situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and the Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North Range 54 West of the 6th P.m., commonly identified as 21st Avenue and County Road K Right-of Way and was read by title on first reading: AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING TWO TRACTS OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19 IN TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 54 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY, NEBRASKA AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. 4 Page 9 of 657 City Manager Spencer explained this is the section of 21st Avenue that was brought forth during the last public hearing, adding it is truly our goal to bring this into the City to be able to maintain. Council introduced the Ordinance to consider the Zoning Text Amendment to Chapter 25, Article 4 regarding Fences and was read by title on first reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA AMENDING AND REVISING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 4, DEALING WITH FENCES AND WALLS, TO CLARIFY MATERIALS AND SIMPLIFY THE FENCING REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, AND TO REPEAL AND REVISE RELATED CODE SECTIONS AT CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 44 AND 45, SECTION 25, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 12 AND CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 22, SECTION 6 OF THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. Council introduced the Ordinance concerning the Ordinance Text Amendment to chapter 4, Article 1 regarding Standard Codes, and Chapter 25, Article 2 regarding the Definition of Multi-Family Dwellings and was read by title on first reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA AMENDING AND REVISING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 2 DEALING WITH THE ADOPTION OF STANDARD CODES AND UPDATING THE CODE COMPLY WITH STATE STATUTE REGARDING THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE, AS WELL AS CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 2, SECTION 39 REGARDING DEFINITIONS IN THE CODE TO DEFINE MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. Mr. Spencer explained this is a housekeeping item as we are already enforcing the codes and abiding by the definition change of four to three in multi family dwellings. Because of this asked the three readings of the Ordinance be waived. Council Member McKerrigan moved, seconded by Council Member Salomon that the statutory rule regarding the Ordinance Text Amendment to Chapter 4, Article 1 regarding Standard Codes, and Chapter 25, Article 2 regarding the Definition of Multi-Family Dwelling to be read by title on three different days be suspended. “YEAS,” Salomon, McKerrigan, Vidlak, and Phillips. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Council Member McKerrigan moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4374 concerning the Text Amendment to Chapter 4, Article 1 regarding Standard Codes, and Chapter 25, Article 2 regarding the Definition of Multi-Family Dwellings. The motion was seconded by Council Member Phillips, “YEAS,” Vidlak, Salomon, Phillips, and McKerrigan. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Council introduced the Ordinance to consider an amendment to the Municipal code to create the Public Use District within the city’s zoning jurisdiction and was read by title on first reading: AN ORDINANCE DEALING WITH ZONING AMENDING SECTION 25-1-4 BY UPDATING THE OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT MAP TO SET FORTH VARIOUS PARCELS, LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE ZONING JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF WHICH ARE NOW DESIGNATED IN THE NEW PUBLIC USE DISTRICT, THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED INVARIOUS ZONING DISTIRCTS, A COPY OF THE VARIOUS PROPERTIES ALONG WITH THEIR SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY ASSESSOR IDENTIFICATION NUMBER, ADDRESS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS ATTACHED TO THIS ORDINANCE MARKED AS EXHIBIT “A” AND INCORPORATED IN THIS ORDINANCE BY REFERENCE, ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ON EXHIBIT “A” WILL NOW BE INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC USE DISTRICT (P) AND THE ZONING MAP SHALL BE AMENDED, REPEALING PRIOR 5 Page 10 of 657SECTION 25-1-4, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. Council then introduced the Ordinance to Annex a tract of land situated in the East half of Section 10, Township 22 North, Range 55 west of the 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, commonly identified as 4500 and 4502 Avenue I and was read by title on second reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF NEBRASKA, ANNEXING UNPLATTED REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 55 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY NEBRASKA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, AND THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT 2008-1629, THENCE NORTHERLY ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, PIEPER FAMILY SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN INSTRUMENT 2025-1364, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 1, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10, THENCE NORTHERLY ON SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 12, FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 147 PAGE 493, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ENTERPRISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT CANAL, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AND THEN SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AND ON SAID CANAL RIGHT OF WAY LINE, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AS REQUIRED IN DEED BOOK 202, PAGE 582, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 1, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AND ON SAID CANAL RIGHT OF WAY LINE, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT AS PLATTED IN FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT, TO THE MOST SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF BLUE JAY COURT, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 2, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 202, PAGE 582, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 2, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION AND ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ENTERPRISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT CANAL, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.71, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 183, PAGE 745, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 121, PAGE 448, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, THENCE SOUTHERLY 6 Page 11 of 657TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A TRACT OF LAND AS ALSO DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT AND ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AMENDING SECTION 25-1-3.1 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. Council introduced the Ordinance to amend Chapter 2, Article 4 to provide for additional actions required for dangerous dogs, including a relocation procedure and was read by title on third reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA AMENDING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 3 TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR DANGEROULS DOGS, INCLUDING A RELOCATION PROCEDURE, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. Mr. Spencer explained this is in addition to our existing dangerous dog Ordinance, however it addresses relocation of a dog leaving or coming into the community that has been deemed dangerous. Council Member Phillips moved, seconded by Council Member Salomon to adopt Ordinance No. 4375 amending Chapter 2, Article 4 to provide for additional actions required for dangerous dogs, including a relocation procedure, “YEAS,” McKerrigan, Phillips, Vidlak, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Regarding the Resolution adopting a vison zero policy and affirming the city’s commitment to reducing fatal and serious injury crashes, Mr. Spencer stated this is part of the Safe Streets for All Plan. Ms. Katherine Reisig with M.C. Schaff also come forward and explained this is a good faith showing of a commitment from the City to the Vision Zero Goal which is a goal of zero fatalities or serious injuries on Scottsbluff’s roadways. The goal is to aim for zero crashes within 2036 and a 50% reduction by 2031. Council Member McKerrigan made a motion, seconded by Council Member Phillips to approve Resolution No. 26-05-02 adopting a vision zero policy and affirming the city’s commitment to reducing fatal and serious injury crashes, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Resolution, “YEAS,” Vidlak, Phillips, McKerrigan, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. RESOLUTION NO. 26-05-02 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A VISION ZERO POLICY AND AFFIRMING THE CITY’S COMMITMENT TO REDUCING FATAL AND SERIOUS INJURY CRASHES WHEREAS, the life and health of all persons living and traveling within the City of Scottsbluff are our utmost priority, and no one should die or be seriously injured while traveling on our city streets; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero is the concept that traffic deaths and serious injuries on our roadways are unacceptable; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero is a data-driven collaborative approach aimed at eliminating all traffic fatalities and severe injuries suffered by all road users while supporting safe, accessible, and equitable mobility for all users of the transportation system; and 7 Page 12 of 657 WHEREAS, thirteen people lost their lives to traffic crashes within the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff between 2014-2025, and traffic crashes remain a leading cause of death nationwide; and WHEREAS, improving safety for all users — including people walking, bicycling, driving, and using transit supports public health, economic vitality, and overall quality of life; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero resolutions have been adopted by many jurisdictions across the United States to guide coordinated safety efforts and investments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Scottsbluff, State of Nebraska, that: The City of Scottsbluff hereby adopts a Vision Zero goal that no loss of life or serious injury is acceptable on its transportation system. The City establishes a target to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 50 percent by 2031 and to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 2036 on its transportation system. The City commits to implementing a Safe System approach, emphasizing safer speeds, safer streets, safer people, safer vehicles, and post-crash care. The City will utilize data-driven decision-making, interdepartmental coordination, and community engagement to prioritize and implement safety improvements. The City supports the implementation of the Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan and will pursue funding, partnerships, and policies necessary to achieve these goals. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, which shall take effect immediately upon passage. PASSED AND APPROVED ON May 4, 2026 ATTEST: ______________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor ____________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Mr. Spencer then presented the Petition for Annexation from Sanitary Improvement District No. 8 to the City of Scottsbluff. He explained he and staff have been working on this for several months and it started with a meeting of Scottsbluff Country Club residents, a Board Member of the S.I.D., and HOA Board Member, where they discussed the Annexation. Staff put together a presentation and had a town hall meeting at the Country Club where they received good support. They are currently researching Statutes and are gathering information from Roosevelt Public Power and Nebraska Public Power since the electrical grid will be purchased by the City. In addition, Mr. Spencer informed there are 101 homes and three empty lots that are utilizing city services now and they have around 90% support. 8 Page 13 of 657 Council Member Phillips moved to approve the Petition for Annexation from Sanitary Improvement District No. 8 to the City of Scottsbluff. Council Member McKerrigan seconded the motion, “YEAS,” Phillips, Salomon, McKerrigan, and Vidlak. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Mr. Jay Sturdevant, Superintendent of Agate Fossil Beds National Monument and Scotts Bluff National Monument came forward to introduce himself to Council. He informed those in attendance that Scotts Bluff National Monument is the oldest National Park Service Unit in the State of Nebraska, established in 1919. It is also one of the oldest in this region and in the National Parks Service. He invited Council Members to come out to the park and view what is going on to see how they can connect better with the City. Ms. Delanie Bruce, President of NEXT Young Professionals, came forward to receive approval on a Special Designated Liquor License for the Beer and Wine Fest to be held at the 18th Street Plaza on June 6, 2026 from 3:00-10:00 p.m. She explained this will be their 15th year and every year they donate the proceeds to a different local organization; this year the proceeds will be donated to the Team Ashtyn Foundation. Regarding their policy, no one under the age of 21 will be able to enter and they will check ID’s at the east and west gates implementing wristbands. They will also have guards situated at the north and south entrances at the alley to guide them to the other entrances. City Clerk Wright informed there was an error on the agenda statement where it stated the event will be from 3-6 p.m. It should have read 3-10 p.m. Council Member Salomon moved, seconded by Council Member Phillips to approve the Special Designated Liquor License for NEXT Young Professionals to serve beer, wine, and distilled sprits during the Beer and Wine Fest at the 18th Street Plaza on June 6, 2026 from 3:00-10:00 p.m., “YEAS,” Vidlak, Salomon, Phillips, and McKerrigan. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Mr. Ben Rodríguez, representing BR Entertainment d/b/a Hight’s Tavern approached to receive approval on ten (10) Special Designated Liquor Licenses to serve beer, wine, and distilled spirits at the Bands on Broadway Community Concert and Beer Garden Event at the 18th Street Plaza. He stated they will ID and wristband and will also have two security personnel at the gates. Council Member McKerrigan made a motion, seconded by Council Member Salomon to approve ten (10) Special Designated Liquor Licenses for BR Entertainment d/b/a Hight’s Tavern to serve beer, wine, and distilled spirits at the Bands on Broadway Community Concert and Beer Garden Event at the 18th Street Plaza from 5:00-9:30 p.m. on 6/4/26; 6/11/26; 6/18/26; 6/25/26; 7/2/26; 7/9/26; 7/16/26; 7/23/26; 7/30/26 & 8/6/26. “YEAS,” McKerrigan, Phillips, Vidlak, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Mr. Evan Lerma, representing Rosita’s Restaurant, came forward to also receive approval on ten (10) Special Designated Liquor Licenses for the Bands on Broadway Community Concert and Beer Garden Event. He explained they too, will ID, wristband and also implement gate monitors while selling margaritas during the event. Council Member Phillips moved to approve the ten (10) Special Designated Liquor Licenses for P.R.E.S., Inc., d/b/a Rosita’s Restaurant to serve distilled spirits aa the Bands on Broadway Community Concert and Beer Garden Event at the 18th Street Plaza from 5:00-9:00 p.m. on 6/4/26; 6/11/26; 6/18/26; 6/25/26; 7/2/26; 7/9/26; 7/16/26; 7/23/26; 7/30/26 & 8/6/26. The motion was seconded by Council Member McKerrigan, “YEAS,” Phillips, Salomon, McKerrigan, and Vidlak. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Ms. Niki Egan, with Flyover Brewing Company, approached to present a Community Festival Permit for BDS3C, LLC d/b/a Flyover Brewing Company on June 12, 2026 for the Robidoux Rendezvous Registration Party and Street Dance. She explained they expect to see 400-600 riders this year due to the event being cancelled last year. In addition, they will do what they have done in years past 9 Page 14 of 657regarding the street closure by getting cattle panels from Murdochs. Furthermore, the event will be free and they will move the band closer to the alley due to the sun. They also plan to have two food trucks within the perimeter and the beer truck outside as well. Council Member McKerrigan moved, seconded by Council Member Phillips to approve the Community Festival Permit for BDS3C, LLC d/b/a Flyover Brewing Company on June 12, 2026 from 4:00-9:00 p.m. for the Robidoux Rendezvous Registration Pary and Street Dance to include vendor, noise permit, and street closure of 19th Street from Broadway to alley from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., “YEAS,” Vidlak, Phillips, McKerrigan, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Regarding the Special Designated Liquor License for the above event, Ms. Egan explained this will allow them to serve alcohol outside; they will card at the front gate and the gate inside the brewery implementing wrist bands. All staff is trained with TIPS and they know how to check ID’s properly. Council Member McKerrigan made a motion, seconded by Council Member Phillips to approve the Special Designated Liquor License for BDS3C, LLC d/b/a Flyover Brewing Company to serve beer, wine, and distilled spirits at the Robidoux Rendezvous registration packet pickup, street dance and concert at 1824 Broadway on June 12, 2026 from 3:00-11:00 p.m., “YEAS,” Salomon, McKerrigan, Vidlak, and Phillips. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Mayor Vidlak read the Proclamation naming May 10-16, 2026 as “Police Week” and May 14, 2026 as “Police Officers’ Memorial Day” in the City of Scottsbluff. After the reading Police Chief Krisa Brass explained there will be a memorial ceremony held in Gering on Friday, May 15th at 11:00 a.m. Mr. Glaubius came forward to present an application for the creation of an Agriculture Estate Dwelling Site from Doug Shuey for property located at 181081 Hwy 92. He explained the Planning Commission met on April 13, 2026 and made a positive recommendation on the AEDS application. The AEDS will be sold while the reserved land will be retained by Mr. Shuey. In addition, the reserved land does not meet the minimum requirement, however the Planning Commission determined the AEDS met the intent of code. Council Member McKerrigan moved, seconded by Council Member Salomon to approve the application for the creation of an Agriculture Estate Dwelling Site from Doug Shuey for property located at 181081 Highway 92, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Certificate, “YEAS,” McKerrigan, Phillips, Vidlak, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Concerning the application for the expansion of an existing Agriculture Estate Dwelling site from Doug Shuey for property located at 181015 Hwy 92, Mr. Glaubius explained this is for property just west of the above approved AEDS. Mr. Shuey would like to sell part of the reserved land to Michael Wallinger, owner of the existing AEDS. In addition, the reserved land, like the one before, does not meet the minimum area requirement, however, the Planning Commission determined it still meets the intent of code and gave it a positive recommendation at their April meeting. Council Member Phillips moved to approve the Expansion of an Existing Agriculture Estate Dwelling Site from Doug Shuey for property located at 181015 Highway 92, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Certificate. The motion was seconded by Council Member McKerrigan, “YEAS,” Vidlak, Salomon, Phillips, and McKerrigan. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Mr. Patrick Becker, representing the Pharoahs of Western Nebraska came forward regarding a KENO funding request for the 308 Rod Run event on May 16th. He explained the organization, which has been in existence since 1948, is asking for $2,000 ($20.00) per car for the three-day event bringing in drivers from all over to showcase the area. Scottsbluff will serve as the hub of the event cumulating a 300-mile designated driving course starting and ending in the City. In addition, all profits will be donated to the Veterans and Military Families Emergency Relief Organization headed by Ms. Chris Wolf. Ms. Wolf came forward and explained they are a non-profit organization that was formed over 20 years ago 10 Page 15 of 657helping veterans and military families in the Panhandle with emergency situations by being able to react in a short amount of time. Furthermore, all proceeds are donated; no funding comes from the government. Council Member Phillips moved, seconded by Council Member Salomon to approve the KENO funding request from the Pharoahs of Western Nebraska for the 308 Rod Run Project in the amount of $2,000, “YEAS” Phillips, Salomon, McKerrigan, and Vidlak. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. Council then viewed Gering High School’s Behind the Scenes 2026 Safe Driving Ad. Council Member Salomon introduced the Ad by explaining they have done Safe driving ads since 2015. Every year they try to come up with something different and this year the students picked drunk driving, explaining two years ago, Gering student, J.T. Jackson was killed by an impaired driver. The students were led to this topic feeling it was the right thing to do. Under Council Reports, City Manager Spencer informed everyone this is tourism week and today Mayor Vidlak read a Proclamation honoring that at the Preston Mill. Council Member Salomon attended Cinco de Mayo at the Guadalupe Center where he presented Maria Salazar with a Key to the City. City Manager Spencer added he will leave next Thursday for a Crime Commission meeting in Lincoln and stated there will be an LB840 meeting on May 12th. Council Member McKerrigan moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:06 p.m. The motion was seconded by Council Member Phillips, “YEAS,” McKerrigan, Phillips, Vidlak, and Salomon. “NAYS,” None. Absent: Stricker. ______________________________________ Mayor Attest: ________________________________ City Clerk 11 Page 16 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 7.b Council to excuse the absence of Council Member Stricker from the May 4, 2026 Regular Meeting. Staff Contact: City Council Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 b) Page 17 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 7.c Council to approve the appointment of Krista Baird, to the Business Improvement Board, to fill an unexpired term ending September 30, 2029. Staff Contact: Kevin E Spencer Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 c) Page 18 of 657 2525 Circle Drive Scottsbluff, NE 69361 Phone (308) 632-4136 Fax (308) 630-6294 APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO A CITY BOARD The City of Scottsbluff establishes local advisory boards, committees and commissions by ordinance or resolution. These advisory bodies are responsible for making recommendations to the City Council for consideration and final determination. Each board candidate must complete an application form. Interested residents should submit applications to the City Manager’s office. The applicants are appointed by the City Manager, with the council's approval. Personal Information Name: Address: Phone: -Mail: Experience (Attach additional documents if needed) Are you a registered voter of the City? Yes No Civic Activities (including, not limited to, other board/commissions): Please list skill sets and experience that would benefit the board/committee: Please indicate which boards you are interested in serving on: Community Redevelopment Authority Civil Service Commission Planning Commission Business Improvement District Board Plumbers Examining Board Board of Adjustment Liquor License Holders Investigatory Board LB840 Application Review Library Board Park, Cemetery, & Tree Board LB840 Citizen Review Have you previously served on a City Board or Committee? Yes No If yes, list boards and years of service: Information submitted on this application is public information. I verify that the information provided is true and complete. I understand that false or misleading statements may be cause for elimination from consideration. Applicant Signature: Date: Page 19 of 657Krista Baird Executive Director, Midwest Theater P.O. Box 276 Scottsbluff, NE 69363 308.632.4311 krista@midwesttheater.com May 13, 2026 City of Scottsbluff Attn: Kevin Spencer 2525 Circle Dr. Scottsbluff, NE 69361 Dear Mr. Spencer, I am writing to express my interest in serving on the Scottsbluff Business Improvement District Board. Although I reside in Gering, my professional life is fully centered in downtown Scottsbluff. As the Executive Director of the historic Midwest Theater located in the heart of the BID I work every day within the district and have a direct, vested interest in its vitality, economic health, and long‑term success. The Midwest Theater is one of downtown’s most significant cultural and economic anchors. Through year‑round programming, events, and community partnerships, we bring thousands of residents and visitors into the district annually. This work gives me firsthand insight into foot‑traffic patterns, visitor needs, business challenges, and the opportunities that exist to strengthen the downtown experience. I see daily what draws people to the area, what barriers they encounter, and what improvements would meaningfully support the businesses and organizations that operate here. I understand that the BID is currently focused primarily on off‑street parking management. However, I also know there is a shared hope within the community and the City of Scottsbluff to restructure the BID into a more traditional Business Improvement District one that supports economic vitality, beautification, business engagement, and the overall health of downtown. I would like to be part of that evolution. My role at the Midwest Theater places me in the center of downtown every day, giving me a unique perspective on the needs, challenges, and opportunities within the district. I believe this Page 20 of 657on‑the‑ground experience, combined with my leadership in a major cultural and economic anchor institution, makes me an excellent candidate to help guide the BID toward a stronger, more comprehensive future. My background combines nonprofit leadership, community development, and strategic communication, skills that align closely with the mission of the BID. I manage budgets, staff, volunteers, and long‑term planning for a major downtown institution. I collaborate regularly with local businesses, civic groups, donors, and city partners. I also lead initiatives that activate public spaces, celebrate our community’s history, and foster a welcoming, vibrant downtown environment. These experiences have prepared me to contribute thoughtfully and constructively to BID discussions and decisions. I believe strongly in the importance of a thriving, connected, and forward‑looking downtown. Serving on the BID Board would allow me to bring my on‑the‑ground perspective, collaborative approach, and commitment to our community to a broader effort that benefits the entire district. I would be honored to support the City of Scottsbluff in this capacity. Thank you for considering my application. I would welcome the opportunity to contribute to the continued growth and success of downtown Scottsbluff. Sincerely, Krista Baird Executive Director, Midwest Theater Page 21 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 7.d Council to consider and take action on claims of the City. Staff Contact: Lane Kizzire Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 d) Page 22 of 657 Expense Approval Report City of Scottsbluff, NE By Vendor Name Post Dates 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 10744 - 308 PLUMBING SOLUTIONS Fund: 111 - GENERAL BLDG MAINT PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE 100.00 BLDG MAINT PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE 675.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 775.00 Vendor 10744 - 308 PLUMBING SOLUTIONS Total: 775.00 Vendor: 00460 - ACCELERATED RECEIVABLES SOLUTIONS Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL WAGE ATTACHMENT WAGE ATTACHMENT EE PAY 183.65 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 183.65 Vendor 00460 - ACCELERATED RECEIVABLES SOLUTIONS Total: 183.65 Vendor: 05887 - ALLO COMMUNICATIONS,LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 599.49 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 64.93 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 34.93 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 187.00 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 73.07 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 410.01 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 1,144.41 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 384.83 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 142.72 LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 30.78 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,072.17 Fund: 212 - STREETS LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 731.73 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 731.73 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 78.38 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 78.38 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 218.52 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 218.52 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 438.12 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 438.12 Fund: 641 - WATER LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 318.38 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 318.38 Fund: 721 - GIS SERVICES LOCAL TELEPHONE CHARGES PHONE & INTERNET 196.00 Fund 721 - GIS SERVICES Total: 196.00 Vendor 05887 - ALLO COMMUNICATIONS,LLC Total: 5,053.30 Vendor: 10586 - ANNA GAMBOA Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 980.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 1 of 23 Page 23 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,100.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,480.00 Vendor 10586 - ANNA GAMBOA Total: 3,480.00 Vendor: 05044 - ASSOCIATED SUPPLY CO, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 2,723.19 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 2,723.19 Vendor 05044 - ASSOCIATED SUPPLY CO, INC Total: 2,723.19 Vendor: 04575 - AUTOZONE STORES, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL SHOP SUPPLIES - HEADLIGHT … DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 65.32 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 65.32 Fund: 641 - WATER EQUIP MAINT WTR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 476.39 EQUIP MAINT WTR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -476.39 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 0.00 Vendor 04575 - AUTOZONE STORES, INC Total: 65.32 Vendor: 00295 - B & H INVESTMENTS, INC Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Contractual Services-SAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 22.86 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 19.50 Contractual Services-SAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 22.00 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 64.36 Vendor 00295 - B & H INVESTMENTS, INC Total: 64.36 Vendor: 00271 - B&C STEEL CORPORATION Fund: 212 - STREETS FLAT BAR FOR SIGN SHOP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 13.28 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 13.28 Vendor 00271 - B&C STEEL CORPORATION Total: 13.28 Vendor: 01176 - BEELINE SERVICE INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.00 TOW SERVICE-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 125.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,815.00 Vendor 01176 - BEELINE SERVICE INC Total: 1,815.00 Vendor: 10623 - BENCHMARK GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL SCHOOLS & CONF-POL SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 357.70 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 357.70 Vendor 10623 - BENCHMARK GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS LLC Total: 357.70 Vendor: 00405 - BLUFFS FACILITY SOLUTIONS Fund: 111 - GENERAL JANITORIAL SUPP PARK JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 111.04 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 2 of 23 Page 24 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 227.98 Jan. Sup. JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 327.00 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 84.99 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 84.99 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 106.61 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 106.61 JANIT SUPPL-POL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 31.00 JANIT SUPPL-POL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 31.00 JANITORIAL SUPP PARK JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 215.49 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,326.71 Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - HAND CLEANER, PULL … DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 501.30 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 501.30 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 263.93 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 263.93 Vendor 00405 - BLUFFS FACILITY SOLUTIONS Total: 2,091.94 Vendor: 04893 - BROWN'S SHOE FIT, CO. Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Uniforms & Clothing-SAN UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 112.00 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 112.00 Vendor 04893 - BROWN'S SHOE FIT, CO. Total: 112.00 Vendor: 00735 - CAPITAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 141.55 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 141.55 Fund: 212 - STREETS COPY MACHINE SERVICE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 46.35 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 46.35 Vendor 00735 - CAPITAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. Total: 187.90 Vendor: 07911 - CELLCO PARTNERSHIP Fund: 111 - GENERAL TABLETS, CELL PHONES, IPADS,…PHONE & INTERNET 30.06 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 30.06 Fund: 212 - STREETS TABLETS, CELL PHONES, IPADS,…PHONE & INTERNET 663.55 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 663.55 Fund: 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TABLETS, CELL PHONES, IPADS,…PHONE & INTERNET 30.41 Fund 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Total: 30.41 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CELL PHONE/CONTRACTUAL S… CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 22.51 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 22.51 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CELL PHONE/CONTRACTUAL S… CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 142.54 CELL PHONE/CONTRACTUAL S… CELLULAR PHONE 39.92 TABLETS, CELL PHONES, IPADS,…PHONE & INTERNET 30.06 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 212.52 Fund: 641 - WATER CELL PHONE/CONTRACTUAL S… CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.22 CELL PHONE/CONTRACTUAL S… CELLULAR PHONE 39.92 TABLETS, CELL PHONES, IPADS,…PHONE & INTERNET 20.04 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 190.18 Vendor 07911 - CELLCO PARTNERSHIP Total: 1,149.23 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 3 of 23 Page 25 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 10245 - CEM SALES & SERVICE Fund: 111 - GENERAL Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5,040.73 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 5,040.73 Vendor 10245 - CEM SALES & SERVICE Total: 5,040.73 Vendor: 00484 - CITY OF GERING Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 13.00 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 13.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 26.00 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Disposal Fees-SAN DISPOSAL FEES 42,907.75 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 42,907.75 Vendor 00484 - CITY OF GERING Total: 42,933.75 Vendor: 00367 - CITY OF SCB Fund: 641 - WATER PETTY CASH DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 32.07 PETTY CASH LICENSE/PERMITS 60.00 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 92.07 Vendor 00367 - CITY OF SCB Total: 92.07 Vendor: 10535 - COLUMN SOFTWARE PBC Fund: 111 - GENERAL LEGAL PUBLISHING LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 40.91 LEGAL PUBLISHING LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 2,447.64 LEGAL PUBLISHING LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 69.12 LEGAL PUBLISHING LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 14.18 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 2,571.85 Fund: 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LEGAL PUBLISHING PUBLICATIONS 10.91 Fund 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Total: 10.91 Vendor 10535 - COLUMN SOFTWARE PBC Total: 2,582.76 Vendor: 00706 - COMPUTER CONNECTION INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 44.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 44.00 Vendor 00706 - COMPUTER CONNECTION INC Total: 44.00 Vendor: 00267 - CONTRACTORS MATERIALS INC. Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 23.52 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 23.52 Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - WOOD STAKES DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 33.32 SUPP - AIR HOSE CLAMP, FITT… DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 21.46 ADA PANELS STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 490.00 SUPP - MARKERS AND BRUSH… DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 22.73 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 567.51 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 53.90 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 53.90 Vendor 00267 - CONTRACTORS MATERIALS INC. Total: 644.93 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 4 of 23 Page 26 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 05709 - CREDIT BUREAU OF COUNCIL BLUFFS Fund: 111 - GENERAL MONTHLY MEMBERSHIP - APR…CONSULTING SERVICES 65.75 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 65.75 Vendor 05709 - CREDIT BUREAU OF COUNCIL BLUFFS Total: 65.75 Vendor: 00406 - CRESCENT ELECT. SUPPLY COMP INC Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - 12/2 WIRE DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 128.51 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 128.51 Vendor 00406 - CRESCENT ELECT. SUPPLY COMP INC Total: 128.51 Vendor: 09767 - CROELL INC Fund: 641 - WATER DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 422.65 DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 422.65 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 845.30 Vendor 09767 - CROELL INC Total: 845.30 Vendor: 00290 - DEEDS, RICK Fund: 223 - KENO CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 37.98 Fund 223 - KENO Total: 37.98 Vendor 00290 - DEEDS, RICK Total: 37.98 Vendor: 00308 - DELBERT CRINER Fund: 641 - WATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 331.00 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 331.00 Vendor 00308 - DELBERT CRINER Total: 331.00 Vendor: 08687 - DELGADO LUPE Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONSULTING-POL CONSULTING SERVICES 35.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 35.00 Vendor 08687 - DELGADO LUPE Total: 35.00 Vendor: 10581 - DINGES FIRE COMPANY Fund: 111 - GENERAL STATION BOOTS - SIZE 12M UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 320.00 STATION BOOTS - SIZE 12M UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 320.00 STATION BOOTS - SIZE 10M UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 320.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 960.00 Fund: 225 - MUTUAL FIRE TURNOUT COATS AND PANTS -…DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 14,309.85 Fund 225 - MUTUAL FIRE Total: 14,309.85 Vendor 10581 - DINGES FIRE COMPANY Total: 15,269.85 Vendor: 10279 - EAKES INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Dep. Sup. DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 134.97 DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 18.92 DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 17.45 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 134.40 DEPT/JANIT SUPPL-POL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 20.12 Dep. Sup. DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 25.18 INVEST SUPPL-POL INVESTIGATIVE EXPENSES 78.36 DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 35.69 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 465.09 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 5 of 23 Page 27 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Fund: 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS ARPA GRANT EXPENSE 20,177.66 Fund 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS Total: 20,177.66 Vendor 10279 - EAKES INC Total: 20,642.75 Vendor: 07574 - FAT BOYS TIRE AND AUTO Fund: 111 - GENERAL EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 11.00 VEH MAINT PARK VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 166.18 EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 13.00 VEH MAINT PARK VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,569.36 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,759.54 Vendor 07574 - FAT BOYS TIRE AND AUTO Total: 1,759.54 Vendor: 00548 - FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION Fund: 641 - WATER POSTAGE POSTAGE 58.58 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 58.58 Vendor 00548 - FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION Total: 58.58 Vendor: 05600 - GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS, LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL UNIFORMS-POL UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 340.99 UNIFORMS-POL UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 87.75 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 428.74 Vendor 05600 - GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS, LLC Total: 428.74 Vendor: 10721 - GR TREE LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Street Tree Removal-DS Code … CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,550.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 2,550.00 Vendor 10721 - GR TREE LLC Total: 2,550.00 Vendor: 04371 - HAWKINS, INC. Fund: 641 - WATER CHEMICALS CHEMICALS 4,488.13 CHEMICALS CHEMICALS 2,883.85 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 7,371.98 Vendor 04371 - HAWKINS, INC. Total: 7,371.98 Vendor: 09305 - HONEY WAGON EXPRESS Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PARK CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 PUMP SEPTIC TANK CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 450.00 Vendor 09305 - HONEY WAGON EXPRESS Total: 450.00 Vendor: 00299 - HULLINGER GLASS & LOCKS INC. Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 17.60 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 17.60 Vendor 00299 - HULLINGER GLASS & LOCKS INC. Total: 17.60 Vendor: 00525 - IDEAL LAUNDRY AND CLEANERS, INC. Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 93.54 Jan. Sup. JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 133.64 DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 93.54 Jan. Sup. JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 133.64 DEPT SUPP ADM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 96.79 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 551.15 Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - MATS, TOWELS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 76.96 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 6 of 23 Page 28 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount SUPP - MATS, TOWELS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 76.96 SUPP - MATS, TOWELS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 76.96 SUPP - MATS, TOWELS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 76.96 SUPP - MATS, TOWELS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 79.63 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 387.47 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 111.14 CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 42.76 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 111.14 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 265.04 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 35.02 CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 42.75 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 77.77 Fund: 641 - WATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 35.02 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 35.02 Vendor 00525 - IDEAL LAUNDRY AND CLEANERS, INC. Total: 1,316.45 Vendor: 00937 - INDEPENDENT PLUMBING AND HEATING, INC Fund: 213 - CEMETERY DEPT SUPP CEM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 21.85 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 21.85 Vendor 00937 - INDEPENDENT PLUMBING AND HEATING, INC Total: 21.85 Vendor: 09291 - INGRAM LIBRARY SERVICES INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Coll. COLLECTIONS 1,752.47 Coll. COLLECTIONS 431.83 Coll. COLLECTIONS 121.58 Coll. COLLECTIONS 20.39 Coll. COLLECTIONS -1.74 Coll. COLLECTIONS 341.66 Coll. COLLECTIONS 35.20 Coll. COLLECTIONS 688.88 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,390.27 Vendor 09291 - INGRAM LIBRARY SERVICES INC Total: 3,390.27 Vendor: 00733 - INLAND TRUCK PARTS & SERVICE Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 6.02 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 6.02 Vendor 00733 - INLAND TRUCK PARTS & SERVICE Total: 6.02 Vendor: 08154 - INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL WITHHOLDINGS MEDICARE W/H EE PAYABLE 5,211.16 WITHHOLDINGS MEDICARE W/H EE PAYABLE 5,211.16 WITHHOLDINGS FICA W/H EE PAYABLE 19,318.51 WITHHOLDINGS FICA W/H EE PAYABLE 19,318.51 WITHHOLDINGS FED W/H EE PAYABLE 29,549.26 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 78,608.60 Vendor 08154 - INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Total: 78,608.60 Vendor: 05696 - INVENTIVE WIRELESS OF NE, LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL INTERNET CAMPGROUND PHONE & INTERNET 75.01 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 75.01 Vendor 05696 - INVENTIVE WIRELESS OF NE, LLC Total: 75.01 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 7 of 23 Page 29 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 00857 - JOHNSON CASHWAY LUMBER CO Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,007.44 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,007.44 Vendor 00857 - JOHNSON CASHWAY LUMBER CO Total: 1,007.44 Vendor: 09747 - KNOW HOW LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 6.12 EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 165.76 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 38.68 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 210.56 Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - DIESEL EXHAUST FLUID …DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 194.85 BATTERY CABLES FOR PICKUP VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 79.20 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 274.05 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY DEPT SUPP CEM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 21.75 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 21.75 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Department Supplioes-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 96.79 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 23.46 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 9.55 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 249.60 EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 62.57 EQUIP MAINT WW EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -24.66 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 417.31 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 25.98 VEHICLE MAINT VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 451.32 VEHICLE MAINT VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 147.86 VEHICLE MAINT VEHICLE MAINTENANCE -67.00 VEHICLE MAINT VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 47.27 EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 62.57 EQUIP MAINT WW EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -24.66 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 643.34 Fund: 641 - WATER DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 145.47 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 145.47 Vendor 09747 - KNOW HOW LLC Total: 1,712.48 Vendor: 03941 - LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 479.48 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 479.48 Vendor 03941 - LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC Total: 479.48 Vendor: 09746 - LEAL NOHEMI Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONSULTING-POL CONSULTING SERVICES 35.00 CONSULTING-POL CONSULTING SERVICES 35.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 70.00 Vendor 09746 - LEAL NOHEMI Total: 70.00 Vendor: 10542 - LEGACY COOPERATIVE Fund: 111 - GENERAL Fuel-DS Gary GASOLINE 58.56 Fuel-DS Logan GASOLINE 49.55 APRIL DIESEL FUEL OTHER FUEL 1,251.41 APRIL GASOLINE GASOLINE 708.99 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 8 of 23 Page 30 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount FUEL CEDIT GASOLINE -111.64 GASOLINE-POL GASOLINE 6,391.87 FUEL GASOLINE 2,395.81 FUEL OTHER FUEL 987.58 APRIL FUEL CREDIT GASOLINE -91.24 Fuel CM-Tax DS GASOLINE -5.27 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 11,635.62 Fund: 212 - STREETS UNLEADED GASOLINE GASOLINE 1,627.10 UNLEADED GASOLINE OTHER FUEL 3,611.34 FED TAX CREDIT ON GASOLINE GASOLINE -99.98 FED TAX CREDIT ON GASOLINE OTHER FUEL -169.11 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 4,969.35 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY FUEL GASOLINE 1,001.91 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 1,001.91 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FUEL OTHER FUEL 1,592.50 Diesel Fuel-SAN GASOLINE 306.26 Diesel Fuel-SAN OTHER FUEL 9,392.22 Diesel Fuel-SAN OTHER FUEL 126.58 Diesel Fuel-SAN OTHER FUEL -497.84 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 10,919.72 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER FUEL GASOLINE 776.98 FUEL OTHER FUEL 1,592.50 FUEL OTHER FUEL 1,057.32 FUEL HEATING FUEL 234.01 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 3,660.81 Fund: 641 - WATER FUEL GASOLINE 1,310.70 FUEL OTHER FUEL 463.00 FUEL HEATING FUEL 234.02 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 2,007.72 Vendor 10542 - LEGACY COOPERATIVE Total: 34,195.13 Vendor: 09590 - LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MANAGEMENT Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONSULTING-POL CONSULTING SERVICES 212.18 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 212.18 Vendor 09590 - LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA MANAGEMENT Total: 212.18 Vendor: 00627 - LOGAN CONTRACTORS SUPPLY INC Fund: 212 - STREETS 16,800 LBS. MASTIC JOINT FIL… STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 14,730.00 16,800 LBS. MASTIC JOINT SE… STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 14,730.00 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 29,460.00 Vendor 00627 - LOGAN CONTRACTORS SUPPLY INC Total: 29,460.00 Vendor: 00242 - M.C. SCHAFF & ASSOCIATES, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL PROF SERV - APRIL 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,626.37 PROF SERV - APRIL 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 916.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,542.37 Fund: 511 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND CEMETERY BUILDING STRUCTURES 3,728.00 Fund 511 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Total: 3,728.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 9 of 23 Page 31 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PROF SERV - APRIL 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 458.00 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 458.00 Vendor 00242 - M.C. SCHAFF & ASSOCIATES, INC Total: 7,728.37 Vendor: 09760 - MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL BREATHING AIR COMPRESSOR…DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 63.81 TORQUE ROD AND TORQUE R… VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 3,900.12 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,963.93 Vendor 09760 - MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC Total: 3,963.93 Vendor: 08190 - MADISON NATIONAL LIFE Fund: 111 - GENERAL INSURANCE DISABILITY INSURANCE 822.25 INSURANCE DISABILITY INSURANCE 845.68 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,667.93 Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL INSURANCE LIFE INS EE PAYABLE 991.05 INSURANCE DIS INC INS EE PAYABLE 530.02 INSURANCE LIFE INS ER PAYABLE 1,507.42 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 3,028.49 Vendor 08190 - MADISON NATIONAL LIFE Total: 4,696.42 Vendor: 10748 - MARCHINGTON KEVIN Fund: 111 - GENERAL EVID CASH-POL MISCELLANEOUS 340.40 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 340.40 Vendor 10748 - MARCHINGTON KEVIN Total: 340.40 Vendor: 10582 - MARQUEE BROADCASTING WEST INC Fund: 661 - STORMWATER Tricity SW PSA-April 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 900.00 Fund 661 - STORMWATER Total: 900.00 Vendor 10582 - MARQUEE BROADCASTING WEST INC Total: 900.00 Vendor: 07628 - MENARDS, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 11.26 STATION SUPPLIES - 40W LIG… DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 6.99 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 14.05 Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 9.65 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 71.57 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 104.22 Dept. Supplies-DS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 68.00 Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 35.94 SPARK PLUG - TOWER 1 SAW DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5.98 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 59.95 Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 99.99 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 17.98 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 23.98 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 299.16 Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 25.46 Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 145.37 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 999.55 Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - FLAT BLACK SPRAY PAI… DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 38.82 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 38.82 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY DEPT SUPP CEM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 64.95 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 64.95 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 10 of 23 Page 32 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 47.94 DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5.02 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 178.74 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 231.70 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 47.94 DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5.01 DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 42.78 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 95.73 Fund: 641 - WATER DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 137.84 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 137.84 Vendor 07628 - MENARDS, INC Total: 1,568.59 Vendor: 10747 - N HARRIS COMPUTER CORPORATION Fund: 111 - GENERAL EQUIP MAINT-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 3,000.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 3,000.00 Vendor 10747 - N HARRIS COMPUTER CORPORATION Total: 3,000.00 Vendor: 10719 - NATIONAL SIGN COMPANY LLC Fund: 212 - STREETS SUPP - ROAD MARKERS, CHA… DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,913.50 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 1,913.50 Vendor 10719 - NATIONAL SIGN COMPANY LLC Total: 1,913.50 Vendor: 04082 - NE CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL NE CHILD SUPPORT PYBLE CHILD SUPPORT EE PAY 1,664.00 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 1,664.00 Vendor 04082 - NE CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER Total: 1,664.00 Vendor: 04460 - NEBRASKA INTERACTIVE, LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DRIVERS LIC REQ CONSULTING SERVICES 15.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 15.00 Vendor 04460 - NEBRASKA INTERACTIVE, LLC Total: 15.00 Vendor: 00402 - NEBRASKA MACHINERY CO Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 149.73 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 149.73 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 149.72 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 149.72 Vendor 00402 - NEBRASKA MACHINERY CO Total: 299.45 Vendor: 00578 - NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT Fund: 111 - GENERAL Electric ELECTRICITY 491.10 Electric ELECTRICITY 739.87 Electric ELECTRICITY 109.80 Electric ELECTRICITY 739.87 Electric ELECTRICITY 264.32 Electric ELECTRICITY 2,154.33 Electric ELECTRICITY 560.19 Electric ELECTRICITY 3,150.94 Electric ELECTRICITY 92.11 Electric STREET LIGHTS 100.40 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 8,402.93 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 11 of 23 Page 33 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Fund: 212 - STREETS Electric ELECTRICITY 675.17 Electric ELECTRIC POWER 1,869.00 Electric STREET LIGHTS 31,308.22 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 33,852.39 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY Electric ELECTRICITY 499.95 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 499.95 Fund: 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Electric STREET LIGHTS 85.42 Fund 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Total: 85.42 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Electric ELECTRICITY 661.36 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 661.36 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER Electric ELECTRICITY 998.77 Electric ELECTRIC POWER 306.04 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 1,304.81 Fund: 641 - WATER Electric ELECTRICITY 273.16 Electric ELECTRIC POWER 390.68 Electric ELECTRIC POWER 231.36 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 895.20 Vendor 00578 - NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT Total: 45,702.06 Vendor: 00632 - NEBRASKA RURAL RADIO ASSOCIATION Fund: 661 - STORMWATER Tricity SW PSA-April 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 Fund 661 - STORMWATER Total: 500.00 Vendor 00632 - NEBRASKA RURAL RADIO ASSOCIATION Total: 500.00 Vendor: 04198 - NEBRASKALAND TIRE, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 25.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 25.00 Fund: 641 - WATER EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 479.57 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 479.57 Vendor 04198 - NEBRASKALAND TIRE, INC Total: 504.57 Vendor: 09509 - NEMNICH AUTOMOTIVE Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 923.48 VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 182.60 VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 872.84 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,978.92 Vendor 09509 - NEMNICH AUTOMOTIVE Total: 1,978.92 Vendor: 08317 - NIPPON SANSON MATHERSON INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 23.00 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 23.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 46.00 Vendor 08317 - NIPPON SANSON MATHERSON INC Total: 46.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 12 of 23 Page 34 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 10300 - NMC GROUP INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 193.39 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 193.39 Vendor 10300 - NMC GROUP INC Total: 193.39 Vendor: 00139 - NORTHWEST PIPE FITTINGS, INC. OF SCOTTSBLUFF Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 11.88 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 30.82 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 16.77 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 138.95 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 101.60 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 46.39 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 26.78 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 14.70 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 160.55 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 183.78 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 158.73 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 58.44 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 100.46 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 77.60 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,127.45 Vendor 00139 - NORTHWEST PIPE FITTINGS, INC. OF SCOTTSBLUFF Total: 1,127.45 Vendor: 08840 - ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INC Fund: 212 - STREETS CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.85 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 70.85 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.85 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 70.85 Fund: 641 - WATER CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.85 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 70.85 Vendor 08840 - ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INC Total: 212.55 Vendor: 09172 - O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES, LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEH MAINT PARK VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 66.48 VEH MAINT PARK VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 27.16 VEH MAINT PARK VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 251.96 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 345.60 Vendor 09172 - O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES, LLC Total: 345.60 Vendor: 03282 - ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION Fund: 111 - GENERAL ALIGNMENT, BELT TENSIONER,…VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 2,705.20 INSTALL TORQUE ARMS - TO… VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 170.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 2,875.20 Vendor 03282 - ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION Total: 2,875.20 Vendor: 10173 - PAIGE MANNING Fund: 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Parking Lot/Garden Maint-Apri…CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,430.00 Fund 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Total: 3,430.00 Fund: 641 - WATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 517.50 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 517.50 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 13 of 23 Page 35 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Fund: 661 - STORMWATER Parking Lot/Garden Maint- Apr…CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,467.50 Fund 661 - STORMWATER Total: 3,467.50 Vendor 10173 - PAIGE MANNING Total: 7,415.00 Vendor: 10483 - PANHANDLE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP LLC Fund: 213 - CEMETERY EQUIP MAINT CEM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 53.15 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 53.15 Vendor 10483 - PANHANDLE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP LLC Total: 53.15 Vendor: 00487 - PANHANDLE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 187.00 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 187.00 Fund: 641 - WATER SAMPLES SAMPLES 120.00 SAMPLES SAMPLES 90.00 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 210.00 Vendor 00487 - PANHANDLE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC Total: 397.00 Vendor: 00314 - PANHANDLE GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL INC Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,240.00 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 2,240.00 Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,240.00 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 2,240.00 Vendor 00314 - PANHANDLE GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL INC Total: 4,480.00 Vendor: 10259 - PARADISE PUMPERS LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PARK SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 775.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 775.00 Vendor 10259 - PARADISE PUMPERS LLC Total: 775.00 Vendor: 04494 - PAUL REED CONSTRUCTION & SUPPLY, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 166.16 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 166.16 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY DEPT SUPP CEM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 651.21 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 651.21 Vendor 04494 - PAUL REED CONSTRUCTION & SUPPLY, INC Total: 817.37 Vendor: 01276 - PLATTE VALLEY BANK Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL HEALTH SAVINGS HSA EE PAYABLE 11,135.43 HEALTH SAVINGS HSA ER PAYABLE 6,885.00 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 18,020.43 Vendor 01276 - PLATTE VALLEY BANK Total: 18,020.43 Vendor: 10597 - PODIUM AUTOMOTIVE GROUP Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEHICLE REPAIR - BRUSH 1 TU… VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 8,103.83 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 8,103.83 Vendor 10597 - PODIUM AUTOMOTIVE GROUP Total: 8,103.83 Vendor: 10341 - POMPS TIRE SERVICE INC Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Vehicle Maintenance-SAN VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,175.80 Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 619.39 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 14 of 23 Page 36 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Department Supplies-SAN DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 538.40 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 2,333.59 Vendor 10341 - POMPS TIRE SERVICE INC Total: 2,333.59 Vendor: 09744 - PT HOSE AND BEARING Fund: 212 - STREETS ADHESIVE, FITTING FOR TAR K… EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 5.24 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 5.24 Vendor 09744 - PT HOSE AND BEARING Total: 5.24 Vendor: 10045 - QA BALANCE SERVICES INC Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER CONTRACTUAL SVC CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 120.00 Vendor 10045 - QA BALANCE SERVICES INC Total: 120.00 Vendor: 07838 - QUADIENT LEASING USA INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Cont. Srvcs. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 429.35 EQUIP MAINT ADM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 597.39 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,026.74 Vendor 07838 - QUADIENT LEASING USA INC Total: 1,026.74 Vendor: 00266 - QUILL CORPORATION Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPPL-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 81.17 DEPT SUPPL-POL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 17.59 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 98.76 Vendor 00266 - QUILL CORPORATION Total: 98.76 Vendor: 00202 - RECREATION SUPPLY CO., INC. Fund: 111 - GENERAL Department Supplies-REC DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,095.75 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,095.75 Vendor 00202 - RECREATION SUPPLY CO., INC. Total: 1,095.75 Vendor: 04089 - REGIONAL CARE INC Fund: 812 - HEALTH INSURANCE CLAIMS CLAIMS EXPENSE 7,965.72 FLEX FUNDING FLEXIBLE BENFT EXPENSES 168.52 MAY 2026 HEALTH PREMIUM PREMIUM EXPENSE 54,516.38 Fund 812 - HEALTH INSURANCE Total: 62,650.62 Vendor 04089 - REGIONAL CARE INC Total: 62,650.62 Vendor: 00364 - REGIONAL WEST MEDICAL CENTER Fund: 111 - GENERAL CONSULTING-POL CONSULTING SERVICES 30.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 30.00 Vendor 00364 - REGIONAL WEST MEDICAL CENTER Total: 30.00 Vendor: 08425 - RICHARD PARKER Fund: 223 - KENO CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 47.50 Fund 223 - KENO Total: 47.50 Vendor 08425 - RICHARD PARKER Total: 47.50 Vendor: 10152 - ROUTEWARE INC Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Contractual Services-SAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,238.28 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 10,238.28 Vendor 10152 - ROUTEWARE INC Total: 10,238.28 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 15 of 23 Page 37 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 10235 - RUSSEL'S AUTOMOTIVE Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,618.39 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 1,618.39 Vendor 10235 - RUSSEL'S AUTOMOTIVE Total: 1,618.39 Vendor: 00026 - S M E C Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL EMPLOYEE DEDUCTION SMEC EE PAYABLE 75.50 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 75.50 Vendor 00026 - S M E C Total: 75.50 Vendor: 00257 - SANDBERG IMPLEMENT, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 140.80 EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1,981.47 EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 68.36 EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 468.71 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 2,659.34 Fund: 212 - STREETS 2 NEW STIHL WEED TRIMERS DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,072.64 AIR FILTERS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 96.80 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 1,169.44 Vendor 00257 - SANDBERG IMPLEMENT, INC Total: 3,828.78 Vendor: 02531 - SCB FIREFIGHTERS UNION LOCAL 1454 Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL FIRE EE DUES FIRE UNION DUES EE PAY 280.00 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 280.00 Vendor 02531 - SCB FIREFIGHTERS UNION LOCAL 1454 Total: 280.00 Vendor: 10167 - SCB IBEW 1597 UNION DUES Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL SCB IBEW 1597 UNION DUES IBEW UNION DUES EE PAY 400.35 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 400.35 Vendor 10167 - SCB IBEW 1597 UNION DUES Total: 400.35 Vendor: 00852 - SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY COURT Fund: 111 - GENERAL LEGAL FEES-POL LEGAL FEES 517.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 517.00 Vendor 00852 - SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY COURT Total: 517.00 Vendor: 00704 - SCOTTSBLUFF MOTOR CO, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL Vehicle Maintenance-DS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 93.98 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 93.98 Vendor 00704 - SCOTTSBLUFF MOTOR CO, INC Total: 93.98 Vendor: 00273 - SCOTTSBLUFF POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL POLICE EE DUES POL UNION DUES EE PAY 975.00 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 975.00 Vendor 00273 - SCOTTSBLUFF POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Total: 975.00 Vendor: 10711 - SET YOUR SITES INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL CAMP REFUND FROM CAMPS… CAMPGROUND FEES 175.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 175.00 Vendor 10711 - SET YOUR SITES INC Total: 175.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 16 of 23 Page 38 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 10434 - SHAGGY BUFFALO CARWASH LLC Fund: 111 - GENERAL VEH MAINT-POL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 250.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 250.00 Vendor 10434 - SHAGGY BUFFALO CARWASH LLC Total: 250.00 Vendor: 00684 - SHERIFF'S OFFICE Fund: 111 - GENERAL LEGAL FEES-POL LEGAL FEES 31.14 LEGAL FEES-POL LEGAL FEES 23.52 LEGAL FEES-POL LEGAL FEES 10.38 LEGAL FEES-POL LEGAL FEES 35.52 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 100.56 Vendor 00684 - SHERIFF'S OFFICE Total: 100.56 Vendor: 00786 - SHERWIN WILLIAMS Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 78.44 DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 110.59 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 189.03 Fund: 212 - STREETS 5 GALS. WHITE THERMOPLAST…STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 450.00 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 450.00 Vendor 00786 - SHERWIN WILLIAMS Total: 639.03 Vendor: 00021 - SIMMONS OLSEN LAW FIRM, P.C. Fund: 111 - GENERAL SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 542.50 CONTRACTUAL-POL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,750.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,270.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 13,682.50 Fund: 212 - STREETS CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 310.50 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 310.50 Fund: 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ECON DEV ASSIST CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,026.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,213.02 Fund 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Total: 2,539.02 Fund: 321 - CRA CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 210.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 210.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.00 CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.00 Fund 321 - CRA Total: 1,020.00 Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CONTRACTUAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,633.50 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 1,633.50 Vendor 00021 - SIMMONS OLSEN LAW FIRM, P.C. Total: 19,185.52 Vendor: 01031 - SIMON CONTRACTORS Fund: 212 - STREETS CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 1,207.51 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 2,973.00 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 1,717.51 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 17 of 23 Page 39 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 1,660.50 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 3,006.88 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 175.00 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 910.00 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 1,705.38 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 852.75 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 942.50 CONCRETE FOR STREET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 776.26 CONCRETE FOR STEET REPAIR STREET MAINTENANCE 91.00 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 16,018.29 Fund: 213 - CEMETERY DEPT SUPP CEM DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 207.70 Fund 213 - CEMETERY Total: 207.70 Fund: 641 - WATER DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 63.26 Fund 641 - WATER Total: 63.26 Vendor 01031 - SIMON CONTRACTORS Total: 16,289.25 Vendor: 09879 - STERKEL JONATHAN W Fund: 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS TREE GRANT GRANT EXPENSE 9,100.00 Fund 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS Total: 9,100.00 Vendor 09879 - STERKEL JONATHAN W Total: 9,100.00 Vendor: 10628 - STREICHER'S INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL UNIFORMS-POL UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 59.99 UNIFORMS-POL UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 114.98 UNIFORMS-POL UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 200.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 374.97 Vendor 10628 - STREICHER'S INC Total: 374.97 Vendor: 09343 - SUNSET LAW ENFORCEMENT, LTD Fund: 111 - GENERAL FIREARMS SUPPL-POL FIREARMS SUPPLIES 9,251.40 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 9,251.40 Vendor 09343 - SUNSET LAW ENFORCEMENT, LTD Total: 9,251.40 Vendor: 01325 - THE PEAVEY CORP Fund: 111 - GENERAL INVEST SUPPL-POL INVESTIGATIVE EXPENSES 173.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 173.00 Vendor 01325 - THE PEAVEY CORP Total: 173.00 Vendor: 05431 - THE WESTERN SUGAR COOPERATIVE Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPP PARK DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 328.05 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 328.05 Vendor 05431 - THE WESTERN SUGAR COOPERATIVE Total: 328.05 Vendor: 10139 - TITAN MACHINERY, INC. E00618566 Fund: 111 - GENERAL EQUIP MAINT PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 728.54 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 728.54 Vendor 10139 - TITAN MACHINERY, INC. E00618566 Total: 728.54 Vendor: 09865 - UNION BANK & TRUST Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL RETIREMENT REGULAR RETIRE EE PAY 11,356.89 RETIREMENT REGULAR RETIRE EE PAY 10,609.59 RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMP EE PAY 950.00 RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMP EE PAY 1,959.76 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 18 of 23 Page 40 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMP EE PAY 485.71 RETIREMENT RETIRE FIRE EE PAYABLE 7,064.89 RETIREMENT RETIRE FIRE EE PAYABLE 5,646.51 RETIREMENT RETIRE POLICE EE PAY 10,448.24 RETIREMENT RETIRE POLICE EE PAY 9,855.36 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 58,376.95 Vendor 09865 - UNION BANK & TRUST Total: 58,376.95 Vendor: 09840 - UNITED STATES WELDING Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Contractual Services-SAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 144.17 Contractual Services-SAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 33.19 Fund 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Total: 177.36 Vendor 09840 - UNITED STATES WELDING Total: 177.36 Vendor: 10504 - VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC Fund: 212 - STREETS GPS SERVICE DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 127.60 Fund 212 - STREETS Total: 127.60 Vendor 10504 - VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC Total: 127.60 Vendor: 10104 - WEBER TYLER Fund: 111 - GENERAL INVEST SUPPL-POL INVESTIGATIVE EXPENSES 10.69 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 10.69 Vendor 10104 - WEBER TYLER Total: 10.69 Vendor: 00268 - WESTERN COOPERATIVE COMPANY Fund: 111 - GENERAL GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 450.00 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 271.80 GROUND MAINT PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 3,693.40 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 4,415.20 Vendor 00268 - WESTERN COOPERATIVE COMPANY Total: 4,415.20 Vendor: 06089 - WESTERN COOPERATIVE COMPANY Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER EQUIP MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 88.25 DEPT SUP DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 272.60 Fund 631 - WASTEWATER Total: 360.85 Vendor 06089 - WESTERN COOPERATIVE COMPANY Total: 360.85 Vendor: 00344 - WESTERN PATHOLOGY CONSULTANTS, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DRUG TESTING/DOT CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 126.00 Vendor 00344 - WESTERN PATHOLOGY CONSULTANTS, INC Total: 126.00 Vendor: 03709 - WYOMING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL CHILD SUPPORT CHILD SUPPORT EE PAY 738.08 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 738.08 Vendor 03709 - WYOMING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT Total: 738.08 Vendor: 02057 - YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NE Fund: 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL YMCA YMCA PAY EE 1,264.00 Fund 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL Total: 1,264.00 Vendor 02057 - YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NE Total: 1,264.00 Grand Total: 597,222.31 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 19 of 23 Page 41 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Report Summary Fund Summary Fund Expense Amount Payment Amount 111 - GENERAL 120,369.79 1,667.93 212 - STREETS 91,699.73 0.00 213 - CEMETERY 2,600.85 0.00 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS 29,277.66 0.00 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT 3,515.42 0.00 223 - KENO 85.48 0.00 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2,580.34 0.00 225 - MUTUAL FIRE 14,309.85 0.00 321 - CRA 1,020.00 0.00 511 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 3,728.00 0.00 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 73,374.58 0.00 631 - WASTEWATER 9,561.52 0.00 641 - WATER 13,769.92 0.00 661 - STORMWATER 4,867.50 0.00 713 - CASH & INVESTMENT POOL 163,615.05 163,615.05 721 - GIS SERVICES 196.00 0.00 812 - HEALTH INSURANCE 62,650.62 62,650.62 Grand Total: 597,222.31 227,933.60 Account Summary Account Number Account Name Expense Amount Payment Amount 111-42201-171 CAMPGROUND FEES 175.00 0.00 111-51281-141 DISABILITY INSURANCE 822.25 822.25 111-51281-142 DISABILITY INSURANCE 845.68 845.68 111-52111-111 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 583.91 0.00 111-52111-116 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 3,000.00 0.00 111-52111-121 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 68.00 0.00 111-52111-141 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 227.09 0.00 111-52111-142 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 318.15 0.00 111-52111-151 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 160.15 0.00 111-52111-171 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 2,672.49 0.00 111-52111-172 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 9,176.08 0.00 111-52121-141 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137.61 0.00 111-52121-142 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 157.73 0.00 111-52121-151 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 594.28 0.00 111-52121-171 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 326.53 0.00 111-52162-142 FIREARMS SUPPLIES 9,251.40 0.00 111-52163-142 INVESTIGATIVE EXPENSES 262.05 0.00 111-52181-141 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 960.00 0.00 111-52181-142 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 803.71 0.00 111-52222-151 COLLECTIONS 3,390.27 0.00 111-52511-121 GASOLINE 102.84 0.00 111-52511-141 GASOLINE 617.75 0.00 111-52511-142 GASOLINE 6,391.87 0.00 111-52511-171 GASOLINE 2,284.17 0.00 111-52521-141 OTHER FUEL 1,251.41 0.00 111-52521-171 OTHER FUEL 987.58 0.00 111-52999-142 MISCELLANEOUS 340.40 0.00 111-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,606.37 0.00 111-53111-112 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 0.00 111-53111-114 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,390.00 0.00 111-53111-121 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,008.50 0.00 111-53111-141 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 0.00 111-53111-142 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,450.55 0.00 111-53111-151 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,529.35 0.00 111-53111-171 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 0.00 111-53121-112 CONSULTING SERVICES 80.75 0.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 20 of 23 Page 42 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Account Summary Account Number Account Name Expense Amount Payment Amount 111-53121-142 CONSULTING SERVICES 347.18 0.00 111-53161-112 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 40.91 0.00 111-53161-115 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 2,447.64 0.00 111-53161-121 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 69.12 0.00 111-53161-151 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 14.18 0.00 111-53211-142 LEGAL FEES 617.56 0.00 111-53421-171 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 775.00 0.00 111-53441-111 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 597.39 0.00 111-53441-171 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 3,436.84 0.00 111-53451-121 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 93.98 0.00 111-53451-141 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 14,879.15 0.00 111-53451-142 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 3,872.31 0.00 111-53451-171 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 2,081.14 0.00 111-53471-171 GROUNDS MAINTENAN… 6,134.60 0.00 111-53511-111 ELECTRICITY 491.10 0.00 111-53511-141 ELECTRICITY 739.87 0.00 111-53511-142 ELECTRICITY 849.67 0.00 111-53511-143 ELECTRICITY 264.32 0.00 111-53511-151 ELECTRICITY 2,154.33 0.00 111-53511-171 ELECTRICITY 3,711.13 0.00 111-53511-172 ELECTRICITY 92.11 0.00 111-53551-171 STREET LIGHTS 100.40 0.00 111-53561-111 PHONE & INTERNET 599.49 0.00 111-53561-112 PHONE & INTERNET 64.93 0.00 111-53561-114 PHONE & INTERNET 34.93 0.00 111-53561-116 PHONE & INTERNET 187.00 0.00 111-53561-121 PHONE & INTERNET 103.13 0.00 111-53561-141 PHONE & INTERNET 410.01 0.00 111-53561-142 PHONE & INTERNET 1,144.41 0.00 111-53561-151 PHONE & INTERNET 384.83 0.00 111-53561-171 PHONE & INTERNET 217.73 0.00 111-53561-172 PHONE & INTERNET 30.78 0.00 111-53711-142 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 357.70 0.00 111-53711-171 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 775.00 0.00 212-52111-212 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 4,455.48 0.00 212-52171-212 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 30,400.00 0.00 212-52511-212 GASOLINE 1,527.12 0.00 212-52521-212 OTHER FUEL 3,442.23 0.00 212-53111-212 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 427.70 0.00 212-53441-212 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 102.04 0.00 212-53451-212 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 79.20 0.00 212-53491-212 STREET MAINTENANCE 16,018.29 0.00 212-53511-212 ELECTRICITY 675.17 0.00 212-53531-212 ELECTRIC POWER 1,869.00 0.00 212-53551-212 STREET LIGHTS 31,308.22 0.00 212-53561-212 PHONE & INTERNET 1,395.28 0.00 213-52111-213 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 967.46 0.00 213-52511-213 GASOLINE 1,001.91 0.00 213-53441-213 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 53.15 0.00 213-53511-213 ELECTRICITY 499.95 0.00 213-53561-213 PHONE & INTERNET 78.38 0.00 215-54991-113 GRANT EXPENSE 20,177.66 0.00 215-54991-213 GRANT EXPENSE 9,100.00 0.00 216-53111-171 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,430.00 0.00 216-53551-000 STREET LIGHTS 85.42 0.00 223-53111-113 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 85.48 0.00 224-52211-114 PUBLICATIONS 10.91 0.00 224-53111-113 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,026.00 0.00 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 21 of 23 Page 43 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Account Summary Account Number Account Name Expense Amount Payment Amount 224-53111-114 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,513.02 0.00 224-53561-113 PHONE & INTERNET 30.41 0.00 225-52111-141 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 14,309.85 0.00 321-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,020.00 0.00 511-54311-213 STRUCTURES 3,728.00 0.00 621-52111-621 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 2,286.58 0.00 621-52181-621 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 112.00 0.00 621-52511-621 GASOLINE 306.26 0.00 621-52521-621 OTHER FUEL 10,613.46 0.00 621-53111-621 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 14,857.27 0.00 621-53193-621 DISPOSAL FEES 42,907.75 0.00 621-53441-621 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 235.58 0.00 621-53451-621 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,175.80 0.00 621-53511-621 ELECTRICITY 661.36 0.00 621-53561-621 PHONE & INTERNET 218.52 0.00 631-52111-631 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 320.39 0.00 631-52511-631 GASOLINE 776.98 0.00 631-52521-631 OTHER FUEL 2,649.82 0.00 631-53111-631 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,838.16 0.00 631-53441-631 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 349.80 0.00 631-53451-631 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 579.45 0.00 631-53511-631 ELECTRICITY 998.77 0.00 631-53521-631 HEATING FUEL 234.01 0.00 631-53531-631 ELECTRIC POWER 306.04 0.00 631-53561-631 PHONE & INTERNET 468.18 0.00 631-53571-631 CELLULAR PHONE 39.92 0.00 641-52111-641 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,223.94 0.00 641-52117-641 SAMPLES 210.00 0.00 641-52411-641 POSTAGE 58.58 0.00 641-52511-641 GASOLINE 1,310.70 0.00 641-52521-641 OTHER FUEL 463.00 0.00 641-52611-641 CHEMICALS 7,371.98 0.00 641-53111-641 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,084.59 0.00 641-53441-641 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 479.57 0.00 641-53511-641 ELECTRICITY 273.16 0.00 641-53521-641 HEATING FUEL 234.02 0.00 641-53531-641 ELECTRIC POWER 622.04 0.00 641-53561-641 PHONE & INTERNET 338.42 0.00 641-53571-641 CELLULAR PHONE 39.92 0.00 641-59211-641 LICENSE/PERMITS 60.00 0.00 661-53111-661 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,867.50 0.00 713-21512 MEDICARE W/H EE PAY… 10,422.32 10,422.32 713-21513 FICA W/H EE PAYABLE 38,637.02 38,637.02 713-21514 FED W/H EE PAYABLE 29,549.26 29,549.26 713-21517 POL UNION DUES EE PAY 975.00 975.00 713-21518 FIRE UNION DUES EE PAY 280.00 280.00 713-21519 IBEW UNION DUES EE P… 400.35 400.35 713-21523 LIFE INS EE PAYABLE 991.05 991.05 713-21524 SMEC EE PAYABLE 75.50 75.50 713-21527 WAGE ATTACHMENT EE … 183.65 183.65 713-21528 REGULAR RETIRE EE PAY 21,966.48 21,966.48 713-21529 DEFERRED COMP EE PAY 3,395.47 3,395.47 713-21531 RETIRE FIRE EE PAYABLE 12,711.40 12,711.40 713-21533 RETIRE POLICE EE PAY 20,303.60 20,303.60 713-21534 DIS INC INS EE PAYABLE 530.02 530.02 713-21539 CHILD SUPPORT EE PAY 2,402.08 2,402.08 713-21540 YMCA PAY EE 1,264.00 1,264.00 713-21541 HSA EE PAYABLE 11,135.43 11,135.43 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 22 of 23 Page 44 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Account Summary Account Number Account Name Expense Amount Payment Amount 713-21723 LIFE INS ER PAYABLE 1,507.42 1,507.42 713-21741 HSA ER PAYABLE 6,885.00 6,885.00 721-53561-721 PHONE & INTERNET 196.00 0.00 812-53861-112 PREMIUM EXPENSE 54,516.38 54,516.38 812-53862-112 CLAIMS EXPENSE 7,965.72 7,965.72 812-53863-112 FLEXIBLE BENFT EXPENS… 168.52 168.52 Grand Total: 597,222.31 227,933.60 Project Account Summary Project Account Key Expense Amount Payment Amount **None** 576,704.25 227,933.60 1420152999142 340.40 0.00 5001054991 20,177.66 0.00 Grand Total: 597,222.31 227,933.60 5/14/2026 7:25:01 AM Page 23 of 23 Page 45 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, NE Pay Code Report Pay Code Summary 4/20/2026 - 5/18/2026 Payroll Set: 01-City of Scottsbluff Pay Code Description # of Payments Units Pay Amount 100 - REGULAR HOURLY REGULAR HOURLY 193 14,119.75 417,891.83 101 - FIRE HOURLY FIRE HOURLY 28 3,136.00 75,980.80 110 - REGULAR SALARIED REGULAR SALARIED 48 0.00 171,004.24 120 - REGULAR ELECTED REGULAR ELECTED 10 0.00 1,507.68 130 - PART-TIME HOURLY PART-TIME HOURLY 31 1,101.50 18,209.07 200 - OVERTIME (1.5) OVERTIME (1.5) 63 521.05 26,848.78 205 - OVERTIME (1.5) FIREOVERTIME (1.5) FIRE 11 177.00 5,822.07 210 - OVERTIME (1.0) OVERTIME (1.0) 7 13.50 369.09 215 - OVERTIME (1.0) FIREOVERTIME (1.0) FIRE 1 0.50 13.54 225 - OVERTIME (2.0) FIREOVERTIME (2.0) FIRE 6 15.50 654.19 240 - FIRE SHIFT PAY FIRE SHIFT PAY 27 81.00 1,953.96 245 - ON-CALL INVESTIGATORON-CALL INVESTIGATOR 4 16.00 653.60 246 - ON-CALL IBEW ON-CALL IBEW 11 41.00 1,142.63 247 - K-9 CARE K-9 CARE 2 16.00 622.40 303 - VACATION LEAVE USEDVACATION LEAVE USED 88 874.36 19,418.30 308 - VACATION LEAVE USED-FIREVACATION LEAVE USED-FIRE 5 160.00 0.00 309 - SICK LEAVE USED-FIRESICK LEAVE USED-FIRE 1 24.00 0.00 313 - SICK LEAVE USED SICK LEAVE USED 56 423.04 9,742.38 318 - SICK LEAVE USED - POLICESICK LEAVE USED - POLICE 15 117.50 4,246.41 333 - PERSONAL LEAVE USEDPERSONAL LEAVE USED 24 160.25 4,415.54 334 - PERSONAL LEAVE USEDPERSONAL FIRE LEAVE USED FIRE 1 24.00 0.00 342 - COMP TIME EARNED COMPPOLICE TIME (1.5) EARNED POLICE (1.5) 10 86.64 0.00 343 - COMP TIME EARNED COMPPOLICE TIME (2.0) EARNED POLICE (2.0) 1 4.00 0.00 344 - COMP TIME USED-POLICECOMP TIME USED-POLICE 3 53.50 2,405.44 347 - COMP TIME EARNED COMPFIRE (1.5) TIME EARNED FIRE (1.5) 2 3.75 0.00 348 - COMP TIME EARNED COMPFIRE (2.0) TIME EARNED FIRE (2.0) 1 3.00 0.00 368 - TRAINING-FIRE TRAINING-FIRE 2 96.00 0.00 370 - TRAINING TRAINING 2 40.00 219.44 372 - JOB INJURY LEAVE JOB INJURY LEAVE 1 3.00 116.70 373 - NATIONAL GUARD NATIONAL GUARD 2 16.00 343.84 374 - WORK COMP - ADJUSTMENTWORK COMP - ADJUSTMENT 1 -1.00 -779.75 375 - FUNERAL-OTHER FUNERAL-OTHER 2 4.00 98.30 380 - EXCUSED ABSENCE WITHEXCUSED PAY ABSENCE WITH PAY 1 15.46 286.94 385 - JURY DUTY JURY DUTY 1 6.00 0.00 390 - NO PAY NO PAY 1 61.14 0.00 410 - POLICE LONGEVITY PAYPOLICE - 10 YEARSLONGEVITY PAY - 10 YEARS 1 0.00 500.00 430 - OUT OF CLASS PAY (5%)OUT OF CLASS PAY (5%) 2 160.00 258.48 431 - OUT OF CLASS PAY (FLATOUT AMOUNT)OF CLASS PAY (FLAT AMOUNT) 6 166.50 343.03 510 - CAR ALLOWANCE CAR ALLOWANCE 2 0.00 323.08 5/7/2026 8:11:58 AM Page 19 of 20 Page 46 of 657Payroll Set: 01-City of Scottsbluff Pay Code Description # of Payments Units Pay Amount 520 - CELL PHONE REIMBURSEMENTCELL PHONE REIMBURSEMENT 14 0.00 420.00 521 - REIMBURSEMENT - TAXABLEREIMBURSEMENT - TAXABLE 1 0.00 67.70 599 - FITNESS POLICE - ER PAIDFITNESS POLICE - ER PAID 1 0.00 45.00 600 - YMCA - ER PAID YMCA - ER PAID 6 0.00 264.00 601 - YMCA - FIRE YMCA - FIRE 8 0.00 360.00 603 - SICK LEAVE TO VACATIONSICK LEAVEUSED TO VACATION USED 1 8.00 0.00 900 - RETRO PAY RETRO PAY 3 103.25 130.28 901 - RETRO OVERTIME RETRO OVERTIME 1 25.50 59.67 Report Total: 21,876.69 765,958.66 5/7/2026 8:11:58 AM Page 20 of 20 Page 47 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 8.a Council to consider and take action on the claim to Intralinks in the amount of $10,097.10. Staff Contact: Lane Kizzire Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 48 of 657 Expense Approval Report City of Scottsbluff, NE By Vendor Name Post Dates 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Description (Payable) Account Name Amount Vendor: 08525 - INTRALINKS, INC Fund: 111 - GENERAL DEPT SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1.10 PROF SERV - MAY 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,858.00 DATTO ALTO - LIBR MAY 2026 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 238.00 Fund 111 - GENERAL Total: 10,097.10 Vendor 08525 - INTRALINKS, INC Total: 10,097.10 Grand Total: 10,097.10 5/14/2026 7:17:54 AM Page 1 of 2 Page 49 of 657Expense Approval Report Post Dates: 5/7/2026 - 5/18/2026 Report Summary Fund Summary Fund Expense Amount Payment Amount 111 - GENERAL 10,097.10 0.00 Grand Total: 10,097.10 0.00 Account Summary Account Number Account Name Expense Amount Payment Amount 111-52111-116 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1.10 0.00 111-53111-116 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,096.00 0.00 Grand Total: 10,097.10 0.00 Project Account Summary Project Account Key Expense Amount Payment Amount **None** 10,097.10 0.00 Grand Total: 10,097.10 0.00 5/14/2026 7:17:54 AM Page 2 of 2 Page 50 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 9.a Council to receive the April 2026 Financial Report. Staff Contact: Lane Kizzire Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 51 of 657 City of Scottsbluff FUND EQUITY IN CASH - YEAR TO DATE FOR THE MONTH ENDED April 2025 and 2026 OCTOBER 1, 2024 OCTOBER 1, 2025 April 30, 2025 April 30, 2026 Fund Fund # NET CHANGE IN CASH NET CHANGE IN CASH General 111 751,695.40 $ (596,870.25) Transfer to Cemetery Regional Library 211 534.86 $ 204.33 Transportation 212 2,836,882.64 $ 703,630.09 Cemetery 213 15,866.57 $ 237,095.28 Cemetery Perp Care 214 (121,484.04) $ 32,322.15 Special Projects 215 (1,587,602.12) $ (708,826.48) ARPA/Grants Expense Business Improvement 216 19,272.42 $ 14,270.65 Public Safety 218 41,998.82 $ (245,168.05) CEP/CIP Scb Industrial Sites 219 1,660.66 $ 1,055.69 Keno 223 39,102.69 $ (19,055.93) Economic Development 224 950,045.61 $ 513,573.15 Mutual Fire Organization 225 30,168.52 $ 59,466.39 Debt Service 311 (2,835,337.32) $ (702,188.86) Bond Payments TIF 321 (224,553.91) $ (152,748.58) CDBG 411 71,169.92 $ 9,157.80 Leasing Corporation 412 (100.17) $ - Capital Projects 511 238,894.39 $ (287,449.03) Environmental Services 621 728,385.71 $ 69,416.29 Wastewater 631 312,728.75 $ (314,557.46) Capital Equipment Purchases - Compost Facility Water 641 (199,481.61) $ 246,953.80 Electric 651 75,971.06 $ 331,429.40 Stormwater 661 50,101.94 $ 31,387.82 GIS 721 (12,891.67) $ 67,541.31 Central Garage 725 (0.24) $ - Unemployment Comp 811 3,474.07 $ 2,078.65 Health Insurance 812 1,835,254.70 $ 3,194,703.23 TOTAL $ 3,021,757.65 $ 2,487,421.39 ` Page 52 of 657 City of Scottsbluff Fund Equity in Cash April 30, 2026 2 YRS PRIOR PRIOR YEAR PRIOR MONTH CURRENT MONTH MONTHLY CHANGE Fund Fund # April 30, 2024 April 30, 2025 March 31, 2026 April 30, 2026 IN CASH General 111 $ 9,172,973.58 $ 10,432,029.51 $ 9,952,288.56 $ 10,062,965.22 $ 110,676.66 Regional Library 211 14,671.68 15,143.53 15,347.86 15,347.86 $ - Transportation 212 4,994,530.91 4,985,192.65 5,603,793.90 5,556,949.97 $ (46,843.93) Cemetery 213 161,279.39 225,186.25 550,565.00 537,918.10 $ (12,646.90) Cemetery Perp Care 214 275,160.20 26,916.78 105,901.30 110,349.63 $ 4,448.33 Special Projects 215 4,101,430.88 2,501,689.40 1,118,282.97 1,080,678.67 $ (37,604.30) Business Improvement 216 322,616.74 371,541.44 417,088.96 416,934.52 $ (154.44) Public Safety 218 174,386.19 290,791.68 (73,853.65) (50,168.66) $ 23,684.99 Scb Industrial Sites 219 35,137.55 37,094.36 38,480.14 38,583.75 $ 103.61 Keno 223 285,152.13 364,152.95 360,010.18 371,396.07 $ 11,385.89 Economic Development 224 2,416,924.73 3,788,120.68 5,097,547.48 5,003,185.18 $ (94,362.30) Mutual Fire Organization 225 323,947.23 389,400.84 434,325.04 486,770.24 $ 52,445.20 Debt Service 311 4,169,029.50 1,619,664.00 996,551.47 946,942.45 $ (49,609.02) TIF 321 212,164.33 217,546.12 236,868.22 229,109.33 $ (7,758.89) CDBG 411 (46,352.63) 24,817.29 30,297.52 30,379.10 $ 81.58 Leasing Corporation 412 99.87 (0.41) - - $ - Capital Projects 511 1,320,473.70 2,267,899.37 2,767,999.84 2,441,616.64 $ (326,383.20) Lacy Park Light Project Environmental Services 621 3,559,666.33 4,753,509.05 4,994,700.15 5,103,687.75 $ 108,987.60 Wastewater 631 3,162,022.33 3,812,451.18 3,599,338.22 3,700,353.16 $ 101,014.94 Water 641 5,584,973.16 6,064,199.40 6,927,160.54 6,916,637.54 $ (10,523.00) Electric 651 1,513,662.70 1,611,297.80 1,956,298.60 1,961,566.30 $ 5,267.70 Stormwater 661 555,848.74 706,395.40 908,509.51 806,785.71 $ (101,723.80) 28th & Ave K Project GIS 721 25,928.57 31,232.86 104,352.86 97,631.46 $ (6,721.40) Central Garage 725 0.34 - - - $ - Unemployment Comp 811 69,089.81 73,136.88 75,866.36 76,070.64 $ 204.28 Health Insurance 812 4,693,970.88 5,631,856.02 4,612,817.49 7,111,837.04 $ 2,499,019.55 TOTAL $ 47,098,788.84 $ 50,241,265.03 $ 50,830,538.52 $ 53,053,527.67 $ 2,222,989.15 Page 53 of 657 Budget to Actual Comparisons April 2026 EXPENDITURES FUND General Reg. Lib. Streets Cemetery CPCF Spe. Pro. BID Pub. Saf. Scb Ind. Keno Econ Dev. MFO FUND # 111 211 212 213 214 215 216 218 219 223 224 225 EXPENDITURES 7,373,331 1,676,197 151,947 - 992,744 5,664 391,032 - 76,359 532,393 4,272 BUDGETED EXP. 15,118,549 - 5,128,890 414,580 - 3,424,110 32,317 859,000 32,317 100,000 4,351,255 147,000 REMAINING 7,745,218 49% - 3,452,693 33% 262,633 37% - 2,431,366 29% 26,653 18% 467,968 46% 32,317 0% 23,641 76% 3,818,862 12% 142,728 3% FUND Debt Ser. TIF CDGB Cap. Pro. Env. Servs. Wastewater Water Electric Stormwater GIS Unem. Health Ins FUND # 311 321 411 511 621 631 641 651 661 721 811 812 EXPENDITURES 915,939 71,140 - 660,876 2,237,743 1,796,589 1,286,451 1,615,556 154,582 53,750 - 1,184,396 BUDGETED EXP. 2,129,489 840,000 300,000 942,000 8,066,649 4,121,487 3,566,960 4,265,839 688,130 116,377 60,000 3,825,850 REMAINING 1,213,550 43% 768,860 8% 300,000 281,124 70% 5,828,906 28% 2,324,898 44% 2,280,509 36% 2,650,283 38% 533,548 22% 62,627 46% 60,000 0% 2,641,454 31% REVENUES FUND General Reg. Lib. Streets Cemetery CPCF Spe. Pro. BID Pub. Saf. Scb Ind. Keno Econ Dev. MFO FUND # 111 211 212 213 214 215 216 218 219 223 224 225 BUDGETED REV. 11,997,719 - 3,806,225 444,000 81,100 1,571,110 59,870 514,400 1,000 67,000 1,843,126 110,000 REVENUE 6,842,613 - 2,424,487 407,076 30,451 714,669 18,321 169,623 657 53,763 1,049,476 60,413 REMAINING (5,155,106) 57% - 0% (1,381,738) 64% (36,924) 92% (50,649) 38% (856,441) 45% (41,549) 31% (344,777) 33% (343) 66% (13,237) 80% (793,650) 57% (49,587) 55% FUND Debt Ser. TIF CDGB Cap. Pro. Env. Servs. Wastewater Water Electric Stormwater GIS Unem. Health Ins FUND # 311 321 411 511 621 631 641 651 661 721 811 812 BUDGETED REV. 111,305 808,500 301,500 1,022,434 3,703,564 3,027,497 2,515,035 3,600,839 260,916 120,200 200 3,120,000 REVENUE 155,802 75,302 421 370,892 2,288,252 1,903,790 1,512,269 1,929,719 183,303 120,931 1,295 2,083,055 REMAINING 44,497 140% (733,198) 9% (301,079) (651,542) 36% (1,415,312) 62% (1,123,707) 63% (1,002,766) 60% (1,671,120) 54% (77,613) 70% 731 101% 1,095 648% (1,036,945) 67% 58% of the fiscal year *Numbers above reflect non-audited numbers Page 54 of 657 Revenues vs. Expenditures April 2026 FUND General Reg. Lib. Streets Cemetery CPCF Spe. Pro. BID Pub. Saf. Scb Ind. Keno Econ Dev. MFO FUND # 111 211 212 213 214 215 216 218 219 223 224 225 EXPENDITURES 7,373,331 - 1,676,197 151,947 - 992,744 5,664 391,032 - 76,359 532,393 4,272 REVENUE 6,842,613 - 2,424,487 407,076 30,451 714,669 18,321 169,623 657 53,763 1,049,476 60,413 FUND TOTAL (530,718) - 748,290 255,129 30,451 (278,075) 12,657 (221,409) 657 (22,596) 517,083 56,141 FUND Debt Ser. TIF CDGB Cap. Pro. Env. Servs. Wastewater Water Electric Stormwater GIS Unem. Health Ins FUND # 311 321 411 511 621 631 641 651 661 721 811 812 EXPENDITURES 915,939 71,140 - 660,876 2,237,743 1,796,589 1,286,451 1,615,556 154,582 53,750 - 1,184,396 REVENUE 155,802 75,302 421 370,892 2,288,252 1,903,790 1,512,269 1,929,719 183,303 120,931 1,295 2,083,055 FUND TOTAL (760,137) 4,162 421 (289,984) 50,510 107,202 225,818 314,164 28,721 67,181 1,295 898,659 58% of the fiscal year *Numbers above reflect non-audited numbers Page 55 of 657 Budget Report City of Scottsbluff, NE Account Summary For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Fund: 111 - GENERAL Department: 000 - NULL Category: 400 - Taxes 111-41111-000 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 325,000.00 325,000.00 12,525.11 81,224.61 -243,775.39 75.01 % 111-41112-000 CITY SALES TAX 6,208,874.00 6,208,874.00 465,563.27 3,621,343.82 -2,587,530.18 41.67 % 111-41115-000 FRANCHISE TAX 425,000.00 425,000.00 8,120.74 257,511.06 -167,488.94 39.41 % 111-41116-000 OTHER OCCUPATION TAX 27,000.00 27,000.00 7,175.00 18,525.00 -8,475.00 31.39 % 111-41117-000 HOTEL OCCUPATION TAX 350,000.00 350,000.00 23,123.11 196,548.95 -153,451.05 43.84 % 111-41118-000 HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION 45,000.00 45,000.00 18,560.23 37,120.46 -7,879.54 17.51 % 111-41119-000 PRORATE MTR VEH TAX 4,200.00 4,200.00 3,881.89 6,205.37 2,005.37 147.75 % 111-41130-000 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 12,000.00 12,000.00 0.00 11,544.62 -455.38 3.79 % 111-41131-000 IN LIEU OF TAXES 65,000.00 65,000.00 120,953.38 121,902.30 56,902.30 187.54 % 111-41141-000 MOTOR VEHICLE TAX 22,000.00 22,000.00 3,954.87 27,059.97 5,059.97 123.00 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 7,484,074.00 7,484,074.00 663,857.60 4,378,986.16 -3,105,087.84 41.49 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 111-41120-000 MUNI EQUALIZATION PMT 198,056.00 198,056.00 0.00 67,401.96 -130,654.04 65.97 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 198,056.00 198,056.00 0.00 67,401.96 -130,654.04 65.97 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42301-000 FILING FEES 0.00 0.00 0.00 72.00 72.00 0.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 72.00 72.00 0.00 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 111-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 50,000.00 50,000.00 26,888.91 172,447.25 122,447.25 344.89 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 50,000.00 50,000.00 26,888.91 172,447.25 122,447.25 244.89 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-49111-000 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 50.45 4.15 4.15 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 50.45 4.15 4.15 0.00 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses 111-45909-000 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,615,555.58 -1,975,283.42 55.01 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses Total: 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,615,555.58 -1,975,283.42 55.01 % Department: 000 - NULL Total: 11,322,969.00 11,322,969.00 950,825.86 6,234,467.10 -5,088,501.90 44.94 % Department: 111 - FINANCE Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-49111-111 MISCELLANEOUS 120,000.00 120,000.00 279.30 42,699.04 -77,300.96 64.42 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 120,000.00 120,000.00 279.30 42,699.04 -77,300.96 64.42 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-111 REGULAR SALARIES 66,190.00 66,190.00 5,075.97 37,989.28 28,200.72 42.61 % 111-51121-111 OVERTIME SALARIES 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % 111-51211-111 SOCIAL SECURITY 5,063.00 5,063.00 357.16 2,683.00 2,380.00 47.01 % 111-51221-111 RETIREMENT 2,741.00 2,741.00 273.62 2,047.08 693.92 25.32 % 111-51231-111 HEALTH INSURANCE 19,154.00 19,154.00 2,028.02 14,178.98 4,975.02 25.97 % 111-51241-111 LIFE INSURANCE 94.00 94.00 9.14 59.24 34.76 36.98 % 111-51261-111 WORKERS COMPENSATION 300.00 300.00 0.00 1,116.99 -816.99 -272.33 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 93,742.00 93,742.00 7,743.91 58,074.57 35,667.43 38.05 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-111 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 16,000.00 16,000.00 643.31 5,134.71 10,865.29 67.91 % 111-52311-111 MEMBERSHIPS 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 1,500.00 100.00 % 111-52411-111 POSTAGE 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 60.00 % 111-52511-111 GASOLINE 150.00 150.00 11.90 44.05 105.95 70.63 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 22,650.00 22,650.00 655.21 7,178.76 15,471.24 68.31 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 1 of 12 Page 56 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 32,000.00 32,000.00 980.00 10,960.00 21,040.00 65.75 % 111-53161-111 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 250.00 250.00 0.00 36.00 214.00 85.60 % 111-53311-111 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 10,143.60 17,643.60 2,356.40 11.78 % 111-53421-111 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 10,000.00 10,000.00 1,960.00 2,825.91 7,174.09 71.74 % 111-53441-111 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 3,257.04 -257.04 -8.57 % 111-53451-111 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,000.00 1,000.00 43.82 119.43 880.57 88.06 % 111-53471-111 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 100.00 % 111-53511-111 ELECTRICITY 6,300.00 6,300.00 430.13 3,027.27 3,272.73 51.95 % 111-53521-111 HEATING FUEL 3,600.00 3,600.00 458.82 2,765.47 834.53 23.18 % 111-53561-111 PHONE & INTERNET 6,000.00 6,000.00 602.86 3,617.40 2,382.60 39.71 % 111-53631-111 RENT-MACHINES 300.00 300.00 50.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 % 111-53711-111 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 6,000.00 6,000.00 305.14 4,467.06 1,532.94 25.55 % 111-53811-111 BONDING 2,800.00 2,800.00 0.00 1,750.00 1,050.00 37.50 % 111-53821-111 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 12,696.00 12,696.00 0.00 11,831.27 864.73 6.81 % 111-53831-111 LIABILITY INSURANCE 23,730.00 23,730.00 0.00 22,349.81 1,380.19 5.82 % 111-53841-111 VEHICLE INSURANCE 750.00 750.00 0.00 1,304.66 -554.66 -73.95 % 111-59611-111 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 139,426.00 139,426.00 14,974.37 86,254.92 53,171.08 38.14 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 111-54311-111 STRUCTURES 400,000.00 400,000.00 0.00 16,349.34 383,650.66 95.91 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 400,000.00 400,000.00 0.00 16,349.34 383,650.66 95.91 % Department: 111 - FINANCE Surplus (Deficit): -535,818.00 -535,818.00 -23,094.19 -125,158.55 410,659.45 76.64 % Department: 112 - PERSONNEL Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-112 REGULAR SALARIES 16,293.00 16,293.00 1,238.88 9,354.60 6,938.40 42.59 % 111-51211-112 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,246.00 1,246.00 91.60 692.84 553.16 44.39 % 111-51221-112 RETIREMENT 931.00 931.00 74.32 561.18 369.82 39.72 % 111-51231-112 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 299.70 2,105.40 1,274.60 37.71 % 111-51241-112 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.37 8.89 8.11 47.71 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 21,867.00 21,867.00 1,705.87 12,722.91 9,144.09 41.82 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-112 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 2,000.00 2,000.00 67.75 733.30 1,266.70 63.34 % 111-52211-112 PUBLICATIONS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 111-52225-112 SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,000.00 1,000.00 42.99 227.14 772.86 77.29 % 111-52311-112 MEMBERSHIPS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 349.00 651.00 65.10 % 111-52411-112 POSTAGE 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 111-52999-112 MISCELLANEOUS 7,500.00 7,500.00 0.00 0.00 7,500.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 12,600.00 12,600.00 110.74 1,309.44 11,290.56 89.61 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-112 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50,000.00 50,000.00 1,180.00 16,365.98 33,634.02 67.27 % 111-53121-112 CONSULTING SERVICES 2,000.00 2,000.00 80.75 969.50 1,030.50 51.53 % 111-53161-112 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 650.00 650.00 0.00 165.81 484.19 74.49 % 111-53561-112 PHONE & INTERNET 1,200.00 1,200.00 66.40 396.64 803.36 66.95 % 111-53711-112 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 6,500.00 6,500.00 1,068.39 4,903.29 1,596.71 24.56 % 111-53741-112 TUITION SUPPORT 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 350.00 3,650.00 91.25 % 111-53913-112 RECRUITMENT 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 118.03 14,881.97 99.21 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 79,350.00 79,350.00 2,395.54 23,269.25 56,080.75 70.68 % Department: 112 - PERSONNEL Total: 113,817.00 113,817.00 4,212.15 37,301.60 76,515.40 67.23 % Department: 113 - COUNCIL Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51131-113 PART-TIME SALARIES 19,600.00 19,600.00 1,507.68 11,307.60 8,292.40 42.31 % 111-51211-113 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,500.00 1,500.00 115.32 864.90 635.10 42.34 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 21,100.00 21,100.00 1,623.00 12,172.50 8,927.50 42.31 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-113 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,000.00 1,000.00 13.50 13.50 986.50 98.65 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 2 of 12 Page 57 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 111-52311-113 MEMBERSHIPS 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 1,955.00 545.00 21.80 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 3,500.00 3,500.00 13.50 1,968.50 1,531.50 43.76 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53711-113 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 3,500.00 3,500.00 245.50 2,114.50 1,385.50 39.59 % 111-53811-113 BONDING 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 100.00 1,400.00 93.33 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 245.50 2,214.50 2,785.50 55.71 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 111-58111-113 CONTINGENCY 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 40,050.00 309,950.00 88.56 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 40,050.00 309,950.00 88.56 % Department: 113 - COUNCIL Total: 379,600.00 379,600.00 1,882.00 56,405.50 323,194.50 85.14 % Department: 114 - CITY MANAGER Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-114 REGULAR SALARIES 18,594.00 18,594.00 1,384.74 10,135.95 8,458.05 45.49 % 111-51211-114 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,422.00 1,422.00 101.62 744.23 677.77 47.66 % 111-51221-114 RETIREMENT 2,417.00 2,417.00 138.48 1,013.67 1,403.33 58.06 % 111-51231-114 HEALTH INSURANCE 2,253.00 2,253.00 209.80 1,478.63 774.37 34.37 % 111-51241-114 LIFE INSURANCE 11.00 11.00 0.91 5.92 5.08 46.18 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 24,697.00 24,697.00 1,835.55 13,378.40 11,318.60 45.83 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-114 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 40.97 959.03 95.90 % 111-52311-114 MEMBERSHIPS 135,000.00 135,000.00 6,852.00 25,454.28 109,545.72 81.14 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 136,000.00 136,000.00 6,852.00 25,495.25 110,504.75 81.25 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-114 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110,000.00 110,000.00 7,462.50 44,687.50 65,312.50 59.38 % 111-53211-114 LEGAL FEES 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.00 -57.00 0.00 % 111-53561-114 PHONE & INTERNET 750.00 750.00 35.45 212.82 537.18 71.62 % 111-53711-114 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 5,000.00 5,000.00 253.45 3,621.33 1,378.67 27.57 % 111-53752-114 COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING 100,000.00 100,000.00 14,000.00 14,000.00 86,000.00 86.00 % 111-53811-114 BONDING 900.00 900.00 0.00 0.00 900.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 216,650.00 216,650.00 21,751.40 62,578.65 154,071.35 71.12 % Department: 114 - CITY MANAGER Total: 377,347.00 377,347.00 30,438.95 101,452.30 275,894.70 73.11 % Department: 115 - CITY CLERK Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-49121-115 REFUND MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 65.00 294.98 294.98 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 65.00 294.98 294.98 0.00 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-115 REGULAR SALARIES 14,609.00 14,609.00 1,070.18 8,056.36 6,552.64 44.85 % 111-51211-115 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,068.00 1,068.00 76.60 577.94 490.06 45.89 % 111-51221-115 RETIREMENT 880.00 880.00 64.20 483.32 396.68 45.08 % 111-51231-115 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 299.70 2,105.40 1,274.60 37.71 % 111-51241-115 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.37 8.89 8.11 47.71 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 19,954.00 19,954.00 1,512.05 11,231.91 8,722.09 43.71 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-115 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 519.18 1,480.82 74.04 % 111-52311-115 MEMBERSHIPS 850.00 850.00 0.00 200.00 650.00 76.47 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 2,850.00 2,850.00 0.00 719.18 2,130.82 74.77 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-115 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 14,000.00 14,000.00 114.98 2,521.90 11,478.10 81.99 % 111-53161-115 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 7,500.00 7,500.00 515.40 3,017.67 4,482.33 59.76 % 111-53561-115 PHONE & INTERNET 750.00 750.00 0.47 2.82 747.18 99.62 % 111-53711-115 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 3,000.00 3,000.00 585.91 878.91 2,121.09 70.70 % 111-53811-115 BONDING 1,500.00 1,500.00 875.00 875.00 625.00 41.67 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 26,750.00 26,750.00 2,091.76 7,296.30 19,453.70 72.72 % Department: 115 - CITY CLERK Surplus (Deficit): -49,554.00 -49,554.00 -3,538.81 -18,952.41 30,601.59 61.75 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 3 of 12 Page 58 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Department: 116 - IT Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-116 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 62,000.00 62,000.00 2,546.35 4,897.39 57,102.61 92.10 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 62,000.00 62,000.00 2,546.35 4,897.39 57,102.61 92.10 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-116 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 145,000.00 145,000.00 10,140.99 100,697.23 44,302.77 30.55 % 111-53561-116 PHONE & INTERNET 2,000.00 2,000.00 187.00 1,050.00 950.00 47.50 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 147,000.00 147,000.00 10,327.99 101,747.23 45,252.77 30.78 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 111-54411-116 EQUIPMENT 22,000.00 22,000.00 0.00 0.00 22,000.00 100.00 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 22,000.00 22,000.00 0.00 0.00 22,000.00 100.00 % Department: 116 - IT Total: 231,000.00 231,000.00 12,874.34 106,644.62 124,355.38 53.83 % Department: 121 - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42301-121 FILING FEES 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 500.00 -2,000.00 80.00 % 111-42302-121 PERMITS 95,000.00 95,000.00 3,395.00 73,846.55 -21,153.45 22.27 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 97,500.00 97,500.00 3,395.00 74,346.55 -23,153.45 23.75 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-121 REGULAR SALARIES 265,367.00 265,367.00 19,086.48 143,172.57 122,194.43 46.05 % 111-51211-121 SOCIAL SECURITY 20,301.00 20,301.00 1,331.82 10,072.36 10,228.64 50.38 % 111-51221-121 RETIREMENT 12,332.00 12,332.00 1,027.48 7,898.42 4,433.58 35.95 % 111-51231-121 HEALTH INSURANCE 80,850.00 80,850.00 7,147.90 50,181.40 30,668.60 37.93 % 111-51241-121 LIFE INSURANCE 446.00 446.00 26.90 176.65 269.35 60.39 % 111-51261-121 WORKERS COMPENSATION 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 2,845.34 -345.34 -13.81 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 381,796.00 381,796.00 28,620.58 214,346.74 167,449.26 43.86 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-121 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 7,500.00 7,500.00 104.74 1,146.32 6,353.68 84.72 % 111-52222-121 BOOKS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 69.99 930.01 93.00 % 111-52311-121 MEMBERSHIPS 1,800.00 1,800.00 0.00 0.00 1,800.00 100.00 % 111-52511-121 GASOLINE 1,500.00 1,500.00 152.51 427.73 1,072.27 71.48 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 11,800.00 11,800.00 257.25 1,644.04 10,155.96 86.07 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-121 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60,000.00 60,000.00 3,025.08 32,781.33 27,218.67 45.36 % 111-53161-121 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1,700.00 1,700.00 429.57 875.73 824.27 48.49 % 111-53211-121 LEGAL FEES 700.00 700.00 104.00 345.84 354.16 50.59 % 111-53441-121 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 111-53451-121 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 716.79 283.21 28.32 % 111-53561-121 PHONE & INTERNET 2,500.00 2,500.00 105.55 669.19 1,830.81 73.23 % 111-53711-121 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 5,000.00 5,000.00 141.00 2,149.08 2,850.92 57.02 % 111-53831-121 LIABILITY INSURANCE 30,382.00 30,382.00 0.00 22,595.50 7,786.50 25.63 % 111-53841-121 VEHICLE INSURANCE 1,869.00 1,869.00 0.00 2,071.23 -202.23 -10.82 % 111-54991-121 GRANT EXPENSE 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 0.00 60,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 164,151.00 164,151.00 3,805.20 62,204.69 101,946.31 62.11 % Department: 121 - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Surplus (Deficit): -460,247.00 -460,247.00 -29,288.03 -203,848.92 256,398.08 55.71 % Department: 141 - FIRE Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42501-141 FIRE INSPECTIONS 1,500.00 1,500.00 240.00 845.00 -655.00 43.67 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 1,500.00 1,500.00 240.00 845.00 -655.00 43.67 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-46131-141 SALE OF ASSETS 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,046.40 10,046.40 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,046.40 10,046.40 0.00 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-141 REGULAR SALARIES 1,431,391.00 1,431,391.00 96,983.52 728,042.18 703,348.82 49.14 % 111-51121-141 OVERTIME SALARIES 100,000.00 100,000.00 2,700.16 41,402.69 58,597.31 58.60 % 111-51211-141 SOCIAL SECURITY 24,913.00 24,913.00 1,679.02 12,902.83 12,010.17 48.21 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 4 of 12 Page 59 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 111-51221-141 RETIREMENT 194,253.00 194,253.00 13,541.26 103,873.50 90,379.50 46.53 % 111-51231-141 HEALTH INSURANCE 383,087.00 383,087.00 33,866.00 227,502.00 155,585.00 40.61 % 111-51241-141 LIFE INSURANCE 1,870.00 1,870.00 154.70 964.60 905.40 48.42 % 111-51261-141 WORKERS COMPENSATION 46,981.00 46,981.00 0.00 35,215.07 11,765.93 25.04 % 111-51281-141 DISABILITY INSURANCE 15,000.00 15,000.00 557.56 3,521.66 11,478.34 76.52 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 2,197,495.00 2,197,495.00 149,482.22 1,153,424.53 1,044,070.47 47.51 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-141 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 32,000.00 32,000.00 1,401.07 11,960.30 20,039.70 62.62 % 111-52121-141 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,100.00 1,100.00 125.58 420.37 679.63 61.78 % 111-52181-141 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 9,000.00 9,000.00 624.90 3,267.59 5,732.41 63.69 % 111-52211-141 PUBLICATIONS 250.00 250.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 100.00 % 111-52311-141 MEMBERSHIPS 2,000.00 2,000.00 173.00 348.00 1,652.00 82.60 % 111-52411-141 POSTAGE 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % 111-52511-141 GASOLINE 4,000.00 4,000.00 376.50 1,741.58 2,258.42 56.46 % 111-52521-141 OTHER FUEL 18,000.00 18,000.00 1,394.73 6,178.94 11,821.06 65.67 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 66,550.00 66,550.00 4,095.78 23,916.78 42,633.22 64.06 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-141 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80,000.00 80,000.00 700.00 16,917.48 63,082.52 78.85 % 111-53161-141 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 111-53211-141 LEGAL FEES 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 111-53421-141 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 7,500.00 7,500.00 1,651.50 4,698.56 2,801.44 37.35 % 111-53441-141 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 4,249.94 5,750.06 57.50 % 111-53451-141 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 55,000.00 55,000.00 11,168.05 52,248.06 2,751.94 5.00 % 111-53511-141 ELECTRICITY 10,000.00 10,000.00 702.84 5,286.59 4,713.41 47.13 % 111-53521-141 HEATING FUEL 2,000.00 2,000.00 256.72 1,624.36 375.64 18.78 % 111-53561-141 PHONE & INTERNET 4,100.00 4,100.00 414.18 2,425.86 1,674.14 40.83 % 111-53571-141 CELLULAR PHONE 3,600.00 3,600.00 160.18 961.44 2,638.56 73.29 % 111-53711-141 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 25,000.00 25,000.00 3,657.58 8,381.99 16,618.01 66.47 % 111-53821-141 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 7,730.00 7,730.00 0.00 8,725.19 -995.19 -12.87 % 111-53831-141 LIABILITY INSURANCE 28,750.00 28,750.00 0.00 15,416.21 13,333.79 46.38 % 111-53841-141 VEHICLE INSURANCE 29,045.00 29,045.00 0.00 23,981.51 5,063.49 17.43 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 262,925.00 262,925.00 18,711.05 144,917.19 118,007.81 44.88 % Department: 141 - FIRE Surplus (Deficit): -2,525,470.00 -2,525,470.00 -172,049.05 -1,311,367.10 1,214,102.90 48.07 % Department: 142 - POLICE Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 111-43148-142 WING 0.00 0.00 694.45 694.45 694.45 0.00 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 0.00 0.00 694.45 694.45 694.45 0.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42111-142 PHOTOCOPIES 3,000.00 3,000.00 205.00 1,476.00 -1,524.00 50.80 % 111-42147-142 SECURITY 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 -1,000.00 100.00 % 111-42401-142 VEHICLE IMPOUNDING FEES 20,000.00 20,000.00 310.00 10,222.00 -9,778.00 48.89 % 111-42403-142 FINGER PRINTS 500.00 500.00 30.00 160.00 -340.00 68.00 % 111-42404-142 HANDGUN PERMITS 1,000.00 1,000.00 125.00 550.00 -450.00 45.00 % 111-42405-142 ALCOHOL TESTS 4,000.00 4,000.00 1,409.00 3,984.00 -16.00 0.40 % 111-42406-142 ALARMS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 650.00 -350.00 35.00 % 111-42407-142 WITNESS FEES 250.00 250.00 0.00 20.00 -230.00 92.00 % 111-42410-142 POLICE SERV-TERRYTOWN 137,500.00 137,500.00 11,461.67 80,231.69 -57,268.31 41.65 % 111-42412-142 ATV PERMITS 200.00 200.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 150.00 % 111-43153-142 SCHOOL SRO MATCH 120,000.00 120,000.00 29,091.55 77,378.94 -42,621.06 35.52 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 288,450.00 288,450.00 42,732.22 174,972.63 -113,477.37 39.34 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-46131-142 SALE OF ASSETS 0.00 0.00 3,923.72 36,164.37 36,164.37 0.00 % 111-49111-142 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 42,878.73 55,924.60 55,924.60 0.00 % 111-49224-142 REIMBURSEMENT-SCHOOL 0.00 0.00 4,689.00 12,247.50 12,247.50 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 51,491.45 104,336.47 104,336.47 0.00 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 5 of 12 Page 60 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-142 REGULAR SALARIES 3,374,088.00 3,374,088.00 211,049.80 1,560,862.11 1,813,225.89 53.74 % 111-51121-142 OVERTIME SALARIES 300,000.00 300,000.00 27,633.23 192,595.66 107,404.34 35.80 % 111-51131-142 PART-TIME SALARIES 45,000.00 45,000.00 3,078.00 25,218.00 19,782.00 43.96 % 111-51211-142 SOCIAL SECURITY 256,971.00 256,971.00 17,210.24 127,759.93 129,211.07 50.28 % 111-51221-142 RETIREMENT 293,113.00 293,113.00 20,230.33 148,852.20 144,260.80 49.22 % 111-51231-142 HEALTH INSURANCE 833,778.00 833,778.00 72,358.00 489,980.00 343,798.00 41.23 % 111-51241-142 LIFE INSURANCE 4,070.00 4,070.00 327.60 2,046.59 2,023.41 49.72 % 111-51261-142 WORKERS COMPENSATION 155,000.00 155,000.00 0.00 116,063.00 38,937.00 25.12 % 111-51281-142 DISABILITY INSURANCE 6,750.00 6,750.00 430.46 3,886.74 2,863.26 42.42 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 5,268,770.00 5,268,770.00 352,317.66 2,667,264.23 2,601,505.77 49.38 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-142 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 18,000.00 18,000.00 2,207.79 8,798.70 9,201.30 51.12 % 111-52121-142 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,200.00 1,200.00 125.57 420.31 779.69 64.97 % 111-52161-142 FIREARMS RANGE SUPPLIES 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 0.00 2,500.00 100.00 % 111-52162-142 FIREARMS SUPPLIES 10,000.00 10,000.00 718.00 718.00 9,282.00 92.82 % 111-52163-142 INVESTIGATIVE EXPENSES 10,000.00 10,000.00 1,053.52 3,694.36 6,305.64 63.06 % 111-52181-142 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 17,500.00 17,500.00 59.98 8,080.42 9,419.58 53.83 % 111-52211-142 PUBLICATIONS 650.00 650.00 0.00 596.38 53.62 8.25 % 111-52311-142 MEMBERSHIPS 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 798.00 702.00 46.80 % 111-52411-142 POSTAGE 6,000.00 6,000.00 296.87 3,337.39 2,662.61 44.38 % 111-52511-142 GASOLINE 70,000.00 70,000.00 7,419.17 28,770.05 41,229.95 58.90 % 111-52999-142 MISCELLANEOUS 10,000.00 10,000.00 2,223.00 5,520.71 4,479.29 44.79 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 147,350.00 147,350.00 14,103.90 60,734.32 86,615.68 58.78 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-142 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 197,604.00 197,604.00 16,714.69 115,402.53 82,201.47 41.60 % 111-53121-142 CONSULTING SERVICES 2,250.00 2,250.00 645.07 2,544.54 -294.54 -13.09 % 111-53161-142 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1,000.00 1,000.00 82.49 365.26 634.74 63.47 % 111-53211-142 LEGAL FEES 7,500.00 7,500.00 1,167.04 4,973.11 2,526.89 33.69 % 111-53421-142 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 8,000.00 8,000.00 1,883.51 6,395.47 1,604.53 20.06 % 111-53441-142 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 16,000.00 16,000.00 378.76 3,715.93 12,284.07 76.78 % 111-53451-142 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 85,000.00 85,000.00 267.48 23,200.69 61,799.31 72.71 % 111-53511-142 ELECTRICITY 12,000.00 12,000.00 775.70 5,746.96 6,253.04 52.11 % 111-53521-142 HEATING FUEL 5,000.00 5,000.00 359.47 2,199.88 2,800.12 56.00 % 111-53561-142 PHONE & INTERNET 35,000.00 35,000.00 2,574.44 15,493.80 19,506.20 55.73 % 111-53631-142 RENT-MACHINES 1,100.00 1,100.00 15.00 624.06 475.94 43.27 % 111-53711-142 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 35,000.00 35,000.00 1,202.90 25,657.35 9,342.65 26.69 % 111-53811-142 BONDING 850.00 850.00 72.50 72.50 777.50 91.47 % 111-53821-142 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 13,885.00 13,885.00 0.00 15,136.03 -1,251.03 -9.01 % 111-53831-142 LIABILITY INSURANCE 72,404.00 72,404.00 0.00 71,332.80 1,071.20 1.48 % 111-53841-142 VEHICLE INSURANCE 18,462.00 18,462.00 0.00 21,596.62 -3,134.62 -16.98 % 111-59611-142 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 250.00 250.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 511,305.00 511,305.00 26,139.05 314,457.53 196,847.47 38.50 % Department: 142 - POLICE Surplus (Deficit): -5,638,975.00 -5,638,975.00 -297,642.49 -2,762,452.53 2,876,522.47 51.01 % Department: 143 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-143 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-143 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 73,603.00 73,603.00 0.00 21,369.91 52,233.09 70.97 % 111-53511-143 ELECTRICITY 3,000.00 3,000.00 264.45 1,701.70 1,298.30 43.28 % 111-53821-143 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 76,703.00 76,703.00 264.45 23,071.61 53,631.39 69.92 % Department: 143 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Total: 81,703.00 81,703.00 264.45 23,071.61 58,631.39 71.76 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 6 of 12 Page 61 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Department: 151 - LIBRARY Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 111-43105-151 GRANT 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42111-151 PHOTOCOPIES 7,000.00 7,000.00 1,115.63 5,280.70 -1,719.30 24.56 % 111-42112-151 LOST BOOKS & FINES 2,300.00 2,300.00 112.89 831.60 -1,468.40 63.84 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 9,300.00 9,300.00 1,228.52 6,112.30 -3,187.70 34.28 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-49111-151 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 13.31 344.48 344.48 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 13.31 344.48 344.48 0.00 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-151 REGULAR SALARIES 455,498.00 455,498.00 26,525.94 212,014.88 243,483.12 53.45 % 111-51131-151 PART-TIME SALARIES 96,000.00 96,000.00 9,053.92 59,291.65 36,708.35 38.24 % 111-51211-151 SOCIAL SECURITY 34,846.00 34,846.00 2,632.40 20,119.10 14,726.90 42.26 % 111-51221-151 RETIREMENT 22,987.00 22,987.00 984.19 7,754.92 15,232.08 66.26 % 111-51231-151 HEALTH INSURANCE 162,249.00 162,249.00 13,326.00 93,262.00 68,987.00 42.52 % 111-51241-151 LIFE INSURANCE 770.00 770.00 63.70 414.05 355.95 46.23 % 111-51261-151 WORKERS COMPENSATION 630.00 630.00 0.00 499.30 130.70 20.75 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 772,980.00 772,980.00 52,586.15 393,355.90 379,624.10 49.11 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-151 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 16,000.00 16,000.00 964.94 4,321.52 11,678.48 72.99 % 111-52121-151 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 8,000.00 8,000.00 536.26 3,404.78 4,595.22 57.44 % 111-52221-151 AUDIOVISUAL SUPPLIES 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 152.94 1,347.06 89.80 % 111-52222-151 COLLECTIONS 44,000.00 44,000.00 1,808.52 17,263.31 26,736.69 60.77 % 111-52223-151 PROGRAMMING 13,000.00 13,000.00 96.49 3,264.39 9,735.61 74.89 % 111-52225-151 SUBSCRIPTIONS 18,000.00 18,000.00 0.00 2,450.19 15,549.81 86.39 % 111-52311-151 MEMBERSHIPS 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 100.00 % 111-52411-151 POSTAGE 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 60.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 106,000.00 106,000.00 3,406.21 32,857.13 73,142.87 69.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-151 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 81,600.00 81,600.00 2,197.89 24,942.17 56,657.83 69.43 % 111-53161-151 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 300.00 300.00 15.82 78.55 221.45 73.82 % 111-53421-151 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 30,000.00 30,000.00 602.82 8,858.12 21,141.88 70.47 % 111-53441-151 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 20,000.00 20,000.00 155.00 207.00 19,793.00 98.97 % 111-53511-151 ELECTRICITY 34,000.00 34,000.00 2,346.92 15,678.62 18,321.38 53.89 % 111-53521-151 HEATING FUEL 5,500.00 5,500.00 443.74 2,720.25 2,779.75 50.54 % 111-53561-151 PHONE & INTERNET 6,000.00 6,000.00 383.93 2,277.94 3,722.06 62.03 % 111-53711-151 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 367.85 4,632.15 92.64 % 111-53721-151 BUSINESS TRAVEL 3,500.00 3,500.00 0.00 1,217.49 2,282.51 65.21 % 111-53821-151 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 41,394.00 41,394.00 0.00 40,291.35 1,102.65 2.66 % 111-53831-151 LIABILITY INSURANCE 9,370.00 9,370.00 0.00 8,866.95 503.05 5.37 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 236,664.00 236,664.00 6,146.12 105,506.29 131,157.71 55.42 % Department: 151 - LIBRARY Surplus (Deficit): -1,106,344.00 -1,106,344.00 -60,896.65 -515,262.54 591,081.46 53.43 % Department: 171 - PARKS Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42201-171 CAMPGROUND FEES 60,000.00 60,000.00 2,749.50 6,626.50 -53,373.50 88.96 % 111-42206-171 PARK RENTAL FEES 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 -3,000.00 100.00 % 111-49231-171 BALLFIELD LEASE REVENUE 23,000.00 23,000.00 0.00 0.00 -23,000.00 100.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 86,000.00 86,000.00 2,749.50 6,626.50 -79,373.50 92.29 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-46112-171 LEASE PAYMENTS 12,000.00 12,000.00 1,054.67 8,781.90 -3,218.10 26.82 % 111-49111-171 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,878.43 4,878.43 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 12,000.00 12,000.00 1,054.67 13,660.33 1,660.33 13.84 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 7 of 12 Page 62 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-171 REGULAR SALARIES 802,919.00 802,919.00 57,132.01 429,509.89 373,409.11 46.51 % 111-51121-171 OVERTIME SALARIES 2,000.00 2,000.00 236.21 735.76 1,264.24 63.21 % 111-51131-171 PART-TIME SALARIES 105,300.00 105,300.00 2,598.75 15,658.50 89,641.50 85.13 % 111-51211-171 SOCIAL SECURITY 61,303.00 61,303.00 4,305.88 32,119.55 29,183.45 47.61 % 111-51221-171 RETIREMENT 31,120.00 31,120.00 2,862.31 21,288.26 9,831.74 31.59 % 111-51231-171 HEALTH INSURANCE 259,147.00 259,147.00 24,795.04 171,867.45 87,279.55 33.68 % 111-51241-171 LIFE INSURANCE 1,265.00 1,265.00 113.76 723.11 541.89 42.84 % 111-51261-171 WORKERS COMPENSATION 17,725.00 17,725.00 0.00 13,236.56 4,488.44 25.32 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 1,280,779.00 1,280,779.00 92,043.96 685,139.08 595,639.92 46.51 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-171 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 67,000.00 67,000.00 2,977.14 16,379.57 50,620.43 75.55 % 111-52121-171 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 6,000.00 6,000.00 596.92 1,332.65 4,667.35 77.79 % 111-52181-171 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 4,741.96 258.04 5.16 % 111-52311-171 MEMBERSHIPS 300.00 300.00 0.00 97.00 203.00 67.67 % 111-52411-171 POSTAGE 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % 111-52511-171 GASOLINE 25,000.00 25,000.00 1,565.97 8,858.75 16,141.25 64.57 % 111-52521-171 OTHER FUEL 30,000.00 30,000.00 37.19 2,886.47 27,113.53 90.38 % 111-52999-171 MISCELLANEOUS 350.00 350.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 133,850.00 133,850.00 5,177.22 34,296.40 99,553.60 74.38 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-171 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 37,000.00 37,000.00 775.00 24,018.53 12,981.47 35.09 % 111-53161-171 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1,500.00 1,500.00 65.94 163.25 1,336.75 89.12 % 111-53211-171 LEGAL FEES 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 0.00 2,500.00 100.00 % 111-53421-171 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 28,000.00 28,000.00 1,876.95 7,614.41 20,385.59 72.81 % 111-53431-171 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 36,000.00 36,000.00 1,995.47 6,439.47 29,560.53 82.11 % 111-53441-171 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 67,000.00 67,000.00 223.29 29,656.31 37,343.69 55.74 % 111-53451-171 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 30,000.00 30,000.00 959.63 8,339.30 21,660.70 72.20 % 111-53471-171 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 115,000.00 115,000.00 8,843.17 48,088.96 66,911.04 58.18 % 111-53511-171 ELECTRICITY 55,000.00 55,000.00 3,441.32 23,863.57 31,136.43 56.61 % 111-53521-171 HEATING FUEL 5,000.00 5,000.00 688.82 4,264.22 735.78 14.72 % 111-53551-171 STREET LIGHTS 2,000.00 2,000.00 100.40 702.80 1,297.20 64.86 % 111-53561-171 PHONE & INTERNET 4,000.00 4,000.00 171.19 1,067.68 2,932.32 73.31 % 111-53571-171 CELLULAR PHONE 600.00 600.00 39.94 199.70 400.30 66.72 % 111-53631-171 RENT-MACHINES 0.00 0.00 50.00 300.00 -300.00 0.00 % 111-53711-171 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 285.00 1,715.00 85.75 % 111-53821-171 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 79,072.00 79,072.00 0.00 79,294.48 -222.48 -0.28 % 111-53831-171 LIABILITY INSURANCE 11,276.00 11,276.00 0.00 10,841.60 434.40 3.85 % 111-53841-171 VEHICLE INSURANCE 9,672.00 9,672.00 0.00 10,284.56 -612.56 -6.33 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 485,620.00 485,620.00 19,231.12 255,423.84 230,196.16 47.40 % Department: 171 - PARKS Surplus (Deficit): -1,802,249.00 -1,802,249.00 -112,648.13 -954,572.49 847,676.51 47.03 % Department: 172 - RECREATION Category: 420 - Charges for Services 111-42202-172 RECREATION FEES 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 1,080.00 -1,420.00 56.80 % 111-42203-172 POOL REVENUES 45,000.00 45,000.00 0.00 0.00 -45,000.00 100.00 % 111-42205-172 POOL PASSES 3,500.00 3,500.00 0.00 125.00 -3,375.00 96.43 % 111-42207-172 CONCESSION STAND SALES 9,000.00 9,000.00 0.00 492.80 -8,507.20 94.52 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 1,697.80 -58,302.20 97.17 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 111-46131-172 SALE OF ASSETS 0.00 0.00 0.00 154,894.18 154,894.18 0.00 % 111-49111-172 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 2,885.00 6,575.00 6,575.00 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 2,885.00 161,469.18 161,469.18 0.00 % Category: 500 - Personnel 111-51111-172 REGULAR SALARIES 67,571.00 67,571.00 5,323.92 38,980.96 28,590.04 42.31 % 111-51131-172 PART-TIME SALARIES 115,000.00 115,000.00 0.00 0.00 115,000.00 100.00 % 111-51211-172 SOCIAL SECURITY 14,282.00 14,282.00 407.28 2,982.01 11,299.99 79.12 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 8 of 12 Page 63 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 111-51221-172 RETIREMENT 1,930.00 1,930.00 159.72 1,169.48 760.52 39.41 % 111-51231-172 HEALTH INSURANCE 22,535.00 22,535.00 1,878.00 13,146.00 9,389.00 41.66 % 111-51241-172 LIFE INSURANCE 110.00 110.00 9.10 59.15 50.85 46.23 % 111-51261-172 WORKERS COMPENSATION 3,747.00 3,747.00 0.00 2,772.27 974.73 26.01 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 225,175.00 225,175.00 7,778.02 59,109.87 166,065.13 73.75 % Category: 503 - Supplies 111-52111-172 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 30,000.00 30,000.00 2,645.06 4,419.49 25,580.51 85.27 % 111-52114-172 CONCESSION SUPPLIES 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 -92.50 10,092.50 100.93 % 111-52134-172 SPECIAL EVENTS 6,500.00 6,500.00 771.92 12,011.55 -5,511.55 -84.79 % 111-52181-172 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 100.00 % 111-52311-172 MEMBERSHIPS 300.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 50,800.00 50,800.00 3,416.98 16,338.54 34,461.46 67.84 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 111-53111-172 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450,000.00 450,000.00 89,786.01 271,671.45 178,328.55 39.63 % 111-53411-172 JANITORIAL SERVICE 12,000.00 12,000.00 0.00 0.00 12,000.00 100.00 % 111-53421-172 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50,000.00 50,000.00 36.38 36.38 49,963.62 99.93 % 111-53441-172 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 0.00 15,000.00 100.00 % 111-53511-172 ELECTRICITY 15,000.00 15,000.00 85.73 1,374.11 13,625.89 90.84 % 111-53521-172 HEATING FUEL 16,000.00 16,000.00 182.45 1,075.26 14,924.74 93.28 % 111-53561-172 PHONE & INTERNET 2,500.00 2,500.00 33.18 293.11 2,206.89 88.28 % 111-53711-172 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 20.00 1,480.00 98.67 % 111-53821-172 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 8,000.00 8,000.00 0.00 7,500.00 500.00 6.25 % 111-53831-172 LIABILITY INSURANCE 4,700.00 4,700.00 0.00 4,350.67 349.33 7.43 % 111-59211-172 LICENSE/PERMITS 1,000.00 1,000.00 80.00 80.00 920.00 92.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 575,700.00 575,700.00 90,203.75 286,400.98 289,299.02 50.25 % Department: 172 - RECREATION Surplus (Deficit): -791,675.00 -791,675.00 -98,513.75 -198,682.41 592,992.59 74.90 % Department: 213 - CEMETERY Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 111-55201-213 TRANSFER TO CEMETERY 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Department: 213 - CEMETERY Total: 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Fund: 111 - GENERAL Surplus (Deficit): -3,120,830.00 -3,120,830.00 103,482.87 -530,705.48 2,590,124.52 82.99 % Report Surplus (Deficit): -3,120,830.00 -3,120,830.00 103,482.87 -530,705.48 2,590,124.52 82.99 % 5/7/2026 8:06:39 AM Page 9 of 12 Page 64 of 657 Budget Report City of Scottsbluff, NE Account Summary For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Fund: 212 - STREETS Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 212-41111-000 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 560,000.00 560,000.00 23,644.40 145,673.53 -414,326.47 73.99 % 212-41112-000 CITY SALES TAX 520,000.00 520,000.00 42,591.04 297,555.14 -222,444.86 42.78 % 212-41130-000 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 19,892.27 -107.73 0.54 % 212-41141-000 MOTOR VEHICLE TAX 65,000.00 65,000.00 6,814.54 46,626.42 -18,373.58 28.27 % 212-41142-212 MOTOR VEHICLE FEES 135,000.00 135,000.00 0.00 0.00 -135,000.00 100.00 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 1,300,000.00 1,300,000.00 73,049.98 509,747.36 -790,252.64 60.79 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 212-41122-212 HIGHWAY USER TAX 2,104,266.00 2,104,266.00 198,988.31 1,321,950.39 -782,315.61 37.18 % 212-43105-000 GRANT 348,667.00 348,667.00 0.00 486,166.70 137,499.70 139.44 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 2,452,933.00 2,452,933.00 198,988.31 1,808,117.09 -644,815.91 26.29 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services 212-43149-212 REIMBURSEMENT-STATE 36,792.00 36,792.00 0.00 0.00 -36,792.00 100.00 % 212-46111-000 SALES & SERVICE 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 4,050.95 2,550.95 270.06 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 38,292.00 38,292.00 0.00 4,050.95 -34,241.05 89.42 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 212-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 15,000.00 15,000.00 14,964.17 102,202.64 87,202.64 681.35 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 15,000.00 15,000.00 14,964.17 102,202.64 87,202.64 581.35 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 212-49111-212 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 71.00 368.80 368.80 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 71.00 368.80 368.80 0.00 % Revenue Total: 3,806,225.00 3,806,225.00 287,073.46 2,424,486.84 -1,381,738.16 36.30 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 212-51111-111 REGULAR SALARIES 22,400.00 22,400.00 1,712.17 12,796.91 9,603.09 42.87 % 212-51111-112 REGULAR SALARIES 10,880.00 10,880.00 825.92 6,236.40 4,643.60 42.68 % 212-51111-114 REGULAR SALARIES 18,610.00 18,610.00 1,384.74 10,135.95 8,474.05 45.53 % 212-51111-115 REGULAR SALARIES 9,296.00 9,296.00 713.46 5,370.95 3,925.05 42.22 % 212-51111-121 REGULAR SALARIES 13,708.00 13,708.00 1,070.18 7,797.03 5,910.97 43.12 % 212-51111-212 REGULAR SALARIES 896,416.00 896,416.00 61,101.15 449,255.53 447,160.47 49.88 % 212-51121-212 OVERTIME SALARIES 18,155.00 18,155.00 43.97 2,617.41 15,537.59 85.58 % 212-51211-111 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,914.00 1,914.00 118.78 894.64 1,019.36 53.26 % 212-51211-112 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,035.00 1,035.00 61.08 461.99 573.01 55.36 % 212-51211-114 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,422.00 1,422.00 101.62 744.23 677.77 47.66 % 212-51211-115 SOCIAL SECURITY 711.00 711.00 51.06 385.29 325.71 45.81 % 212-51211-121 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,049.00 1,049.00 65.52 483.23 565.77 53.93 % 212-51211-212 SOCIAL SECURITY 68,430.00 68,430.00 4,212.32 31,502.23 36,927.77 53.96 % 212-51221-111 RETIREMENT 1,171.00 1,171.00 102.84 768.16 402.84 34.40 % 212-51221-112 RETIREMENT 621.00 621.00 49.56 374.22 246.78 39.74 % 212-51221-114 RETIREMENT 2,417.00 2,417.00 138.48 1,013.67 1,403.33 58.06 % 212-51221-115 RETIREMENT 587.00 587.00 42.80 322.20 264.80 45.11 % 212-51221-121 RETIREMENT 822.00 822.00 32.10 279.78 542.22 65.96 % 212-51221-212 RETIREMENT 44,996.00 44,996.00 3,016.68 22,229.91 22,766.09 50.60 % 212-51231-111 HEALTH INSURANCE 4,507.00 4,507.00 619.42 4,335.96 171.04 3.79 % 212-51231-112 HEALTH INSURANCE 2,253.00 2,253.00 199.80 1,403.60 849.40 37.70 % 212-51231-114 HEALTH INSURANCE 2,253.00 2,253.00 209.80 1,478.63 774.37 34.37 % 212-51231-115 HEALTH INSURANCE 2,253.00 2,253.00 199.80 1,403.62 849.38 37.70 % 212-51231-121 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 314.70 2,217.53 1,162.47 34.39 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 1 of 23 Page 65 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 212-51231-212 HEALTH INSURANCE 313,230.00 313,230.00 26,538.50 178,891.56 134,338.44 42.89 % 212-51241-111 LIFE INSURANCE 22.00 22.00 2.74 17.74 4.26 19.36 % 212-51241-112 LIFE INSURANCE 11.00 11.00 0.91 5.92 5.08 46.18 % 212-51241-114 LIFE INSURANCE 11.00 11.00 0.91 5.92 5.08 46.18 % 212-51241-115 LIFE INSURANCE 11.00 11.00 0.91 5.92 5.08 46.18 % 212-51241-121 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.37 8.89 8.11 47.71 % 212-51241-212 LIFE INSURANCE 1,529.00 1,529.00 120.58 759.19 769.81 50.35 % 212-51261-212 WORKERS COMPENSATION 30,000.00 30,000.00 0.00 19,293.02 10,706.98 35.69 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 1,474,117.00 1,474,117.00 103,053.87 763,497.23 710,619.77 48.21 % Category: 503 - Supplies 212-52111-212 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 120,000.00 120,000.00 10,796.98 27,718.53 92,281.47 76.90 % 212-52171-212 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 190,000.00 190,000.00 28,306.36 65,427.91 124,572.09 65.56 % 212-52181-212 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 6,000.00 6,000.00 0.00 4,511.92 1,488.08 24.80 % 212-52211-212 PUBLICATIONS 300.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 100.00 % 212-52311-212 MEMBERSHIPS 400.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 400.00 100.00 % 212-52411-212 POSTAGE 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 212-52511-212 GASOLINE 18,000.00 18,000.00 920.95 6,054.62 11,945.38 66.36 % 212-52521-212 OTHER FUEL 60,000.00 60,000.00 3,317.15 14,351.08 45,648.92 76.08 % 212-52531-212 OIL & ANTIFREEZE 6,000.00 6,000.00 1,156.10 1,222.04 4,777.96 79.63 % 212-52999-212 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 300.00 0.00 62.00 238.00 79.33 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 401,100.00 401,100.00 44,497.54 119,348.10 281,751.90 70.24 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 212-53111-212 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 45,000.00 45,000.00 573.67 27,905.09 17,094.91 37.99 % 212-53121-212 CONSULTING SERVICES 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 212-53152-212 BOND ISSUANCE COSTS 38,000.00 38,000.00 0.00 0.00 38,000.00 100.00 % 212-53161-212 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 500.00 500.00 0.00 126.04 373.96 74.79 % 212-53195-212 ADMIN COSTS & FEES 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 500.00 500.00 50.00 % 212-53311-212 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 11,496.08 19,996.08 3.92 0.02 % 212-53421-212 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 3,431.24 11,568.76 77.13 % 212-53431-212 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 80,000.00 80,000.00 1,040.18 29,169.78 50,830.22 63.54 % 212-53441-212 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 60,000.00 60,000.00 898.61 15,728.49 44,271.51 73.79 % 212-53451-212 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 45,000.00 45,000.00 144.08 1,356.62 43,643.38 96.99 % 212-53491-212 STREET MAINTENANCE 200,000.00 200,000.00 14,790.40 30,257.54 169,742.46 84.87 % 212-53511-212 ELECTRICITY 10,000.00 10,000.00 830.85 5,429.56 4,570.44 45.70 % 212-53521-212 HEATING FUEL 17,000.00 17,000.00 1,364.29 7,965.75 9,034.25 53.14 % 212-53531-212 ELECTRIC POWER 28,000.00 28,000.00 1,870.16 12,447.30 15,552.70 55.55 % 212-53551-212 STREET LIGHTS 355,000.00 355,000.00 31,290.76 207,165.77 147,834.23 41.64 % 212-53561-212 PHONE & INTERNET 15,000.00 15,000.00 1,392.26 8,858.56 6,141.44 40.94 % 212-53611-212 RENT-LAND 400.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 400.00 100.00 % 212-53711-212 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 2,235.58 1,764.42 44.11 % 212-53721-212 BUSINESS TRAVEL 480.00 480.00 0.00 0.00 480.00 100.00 % 212-53821-212 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 37,400.00 37,400.00 0.00 47,513.52 -10,113.52 -27.04 % 212-53831-212 LIABILITY INSURANCE 19,253.00 19,253.00 0.00 19,383.86 -130.86 -0.68 % 212-53841-212 VEHICLE INSURANCE 31,640.00 31,640.00 0.00 24,444.09 7,195.91 22.74 % 212-59611-212 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 0.00 4,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 1,028,673.00 1,028,673.00 65,691.34 463,914.87 564,758.13 54.90 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 212-54212-212 ENGINEERING/DESIGN 90,000.00 90,000.00 0.00 25,546.50 64,453.50 71.62 % 212-54333-212 CHIP SEAL 950,000.00 950,000.00 0.00 0.00 950,000.00 100.00 % 212-54411-212 EQUIPMENT 555,000.00 555,000.00 120,674.64 273,890.64 281,109.36 50.65 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 1,595,000.00 1,595,000.00 120,674.64 299,437.14 1,295,562.86 81.23 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 212-55600-212 TRANSFER TO GIS 30,000.00 30,000.00 0.00 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 2 of 23 Page 66 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 212-58111-212 CONTINGENCY 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 630,000.00 630,000.00 0.00 30,000.00 600,000.00 95.24 % Expense Total: 5,128,890.00 5,128,890.00 333,917.39 1,676,197.34 3,452,692.66 67.32 % Fund: 212 - STREETS Surplus (Deficit): -1,322,665.00 -1,322,665.00 -46,843.93 748,289.50 2,070,954.50 156.57 % Fund: 213 - CEMETERY Revenue Category: 420 - Charges for Services 213-42302-213 PERMITS 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 1,700.00 -2,300.00 57.50 % 213-42601-213 RECORDINGS 2,000.00 2,000.00 100.00 1,300.00 -700.00 35.00 % 213-42602-213 OPENINGS 40,000.00 40,000.00 3,750.00 20,800.00 -19,200.00 48.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 46,000.00 46,000.00 3,850.00 23,800.00 -22,200.00 48.26 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 213-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 2,500.00 2,500.00 1,444.56 6,475.86 3,975.86 259.03 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 2,500.00 2,500.00 1,444.56 6,475.86 3,975.86 159.03 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 213-42603-213 FOUNDATION FEE 5,500.00 5,500.00 600.00 2,700.00 -2,800.00 50.91 % 213-46131-213 SALE OF PLOTS 40,000.00 40,000.00 2,200.00 24,100.00 -15,900.00 39.75 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 45,500.00 45,500.00 2,800.00 26,800.00 -18,700.00 41.10 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses 213-45904-213 TRANSFER IN 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses Total: 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Revenue Total: 444,000.00 444,000.00 8,094.56 407,075.86 -36,924.14 8.32 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 213-51111-213 REGULAR SALARIES 166,567.00 166,567.00 8,681.60 66,202.71 100,364.29 60.25 % 213-51121-213 OVERTIME SALARIES 1,500.00 1,500.00 74.25 302.78 1,197.22 79.81 % 213-51131-213 PART-TIME SALARIES 25,000.00 25,000.00 2,640.00 9,064.50 15,935.50 63.74 % 213-51211-213 SOCIAL SECURITY 14,775.00 14,775.00 847.60 5,611.83 9,163.17 62.02 % 213-51221-213 RETIREMENT 7,642.00 7,642.00 520.92 3,986.04 3,655.96 47.84 % 213-51231-213 HEALTH INSURANCE 67,604.00 67,604.00 3,776.00 26,432.00 41,172.00 60.90 % 213-51241-213 LIFE INSURANCE 330.00 330.00 18.20 118.30 211.70 64.15 % 213-51261-213 WORKERS COMPENSATION 7,600.00 7,600.00 0.00 5,422.61 2,177.39 28.65 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 291,018.00 291,018.00 16,558.57 117,140.77 173,877.23 59.75 % Category: 503 - Supplies 213-52111-213 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 35,000.00 35,000.00 3,227.65 10,909.70 24,090.30 68.83 % 213-52121-213 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 300.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 100.00 % 213-52181-213 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 900.00 900.00 0.00 0.00 900.00 100.00 % 213-52225-213 SUBSCRIPTIONS 400.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 400.00 100.00 % 213-52311-213 MEMBERSHIPS 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % 213-52411-213 POSTAGE 50.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 100.00 % 213-52511-213 GASOLINE 2,500.00 2,500.00 0.00 310.80 2,189.20 87.57 % 213-52521-213 OTHER FUEL 7,500.00 7,500.00 0.00 436.25 7,063.75 94.18 % 213-52999-213 MISCELLANEOUS 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 48,850.00 48,850.00 3,227.65 11,656.75 37,193.25 76.14 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 213-53111-213 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,000.00 4,000.00 50.00 3,375.99 624.01 15.60 % 213-53161-213 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 213-53211-213 LEGAL FEES 600.00 600.00 50.00 210.00 390.00 65.00 % 213-53421-213 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 100.00 % 213-53431-213 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 213-53441-213 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 6,500.00 6,500.00 221.61 1,273.17 5,226.83 80.41 % 213-53451-213 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 816.36 183.64 18.36 % 213-53511-213 ELECTRICITY 9,000.00 9,000.00 515.21 3,831.42 5,168.58 57.43 % 213-53561-213 PHONE & INTERNET 2,500.00 2,500.00 118.42 937.62 1,562.38 62.50 % 213-53711-213 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 600.00 600.00 0.00 0.00 600.00 100.00 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 3 of 23 Page 67 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 213-53821-213 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 8,000.00 8,000.00 0.00 7,873.14 126.86 1.59 % 213-53831-213 LIABILITY INSURANCE 2,820.00 2,820.00 0.00 2,563.51 256.49 9.10 % 213-53841-213 VEHICLE INSURANCE 2,592.00 2,592.00 0.00 2,268.11 323.89 12.50 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 44,712.00 44,712.00 955.24 23,149.32 21,562.68 48.23 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 213-54411-213 EQUIPMENT 30,000.00 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 100.00 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 30,000.00 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 414,580.00 414,580.00 20,741.46 151,946.84 262,633.16 63.35 % Fund: 213 - CEMETERY Surplus (Deficit): 29,420.00 29,420.00 -12,646.90 255,129.02 225,709.02 -767.20 % Fund: 214 - CEMETERY PERPETUAL CARE Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 214-41111-000 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 50,000.00 50,000.00 2,143.55 13,053.69 -36,946.31 73.89 % 214-41130-000 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 1,776.10 -2,223.90 55.60 % 214-41141-000 MOTOR VEHICLE TAX 5,600.00 5,600.00 608.44 4,163.08 -1,436.92 25.66 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 59,600.00 59,600.00 2,751.99 18,992.87 -40,607.13 68.13 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services 214-42604-213 PERPETUAL CARE CHARGES 20,000.00 20,000.00 1,400.00 9,800.00 -10,200.00 51.00 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 20,000.00 20,000.00 1,400.00 9,800.00 -10,200.00 51.00 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 214-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 1,500.00 1,500.00 296.34 1,657.80 157.80 110.52 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 1,500.00 1,500.00 296.34 1,657.80 157.80 10.52 % Revenue Total: 81,100.00 81,100.00 4,448.33 30,450.67 -50,649.33 62.45 % Fund: 214 - CEMETERY PERPETUAL CARE Total: 81,100.00 81,100.00 4,448.33 30,450.67 -50,649.33 62.45 % Fund: 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 215-41500-000 RETAIL BUSINESS OCC TAX 550,000.00 550,000.00 63,225.94 390,963.54 -159,036.46 28.92 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 550,000.00 550,000.00 63,225.94 390,963.54 -159,036.46 28.92 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 215-43105-113 GRANT 240,000.00 240,000.00 0.00 106,400.00 -133,600.00 55.67 % 215-43105-142 GRANT 35,000.00 35,000.00 3,761.81 73,322.08 38,322.08 209.49 % 215-43105-171 GRANT 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,355.00 1,355.00 0.00 % 215-43105-213 GRANT 225,110.00 225,110.00 0.00 55,134.97 -169,975.03 75.51 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 500,110.00 500,110.00 3,761.81 236,212.05 -263,897.95 52.77 % Category: 450 - Contributions & Donations 215-44413-141 DONATIONS/GIFTS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 24,000.00 2,500.00 % 215-44413-142 DONATIONS/GIFTS 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 5,493.00 493.00 109.86 % Category: 450 - Contributions & Donations Total: 6,000.00 6,000.00 0.00 30,493.00 24,493.00 408.22 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 215-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 15,000.00 15,000.00 2,902.12 23,455.30 8,455.30 156.37 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 15,000.00 15,000.00 2,902.12 23,455.30 8,455.30 56.37 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 215-49111-000 MISCELLANEOUS 500,000.00 500,000.00 1,798.39 1,798.39 -498,201.61 99.64 % 215-49119-111 INSURANCE CLAIMS 0.00 0.00 1,493.48 31,746.81 31,746.81 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 500,000.00 500,000.00 3,291.87 33,545.20 -466,454.80 93.29 % Revenue Total: 1,571,110.00 1,571,110.00 73,181.74 714,669.09 -856,440.91 54.51 % Expense Category: 503 - Supplies 215-52111-142 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 4,000.00 4,000.00 214.41 1,663.81 2,336.19 58.40 % 215-52931-111 INSURED REPAIRS/REPLACE 600,000.00 600,000.00 1,493.48 60,619.33 539,380.67 89.90 % 215-52999-000 MISCELLANEOUS 500,000.00 500,000.00 0.00 0.00 500,000.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 1,104,000.00 1,104,000.00 1,707.89 62,283.14 1,041,716.86 94.36 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 4 of 23 Page 68 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 504 - Contract Services 215-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550,000.00 550,000.00 93,030.66 311,350.72 238,649.28 43.39 % 215-53111-171 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 0.00 0.00 -45,718.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 215-53711-142 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 108.47 -108.47 0.00 % 215-54991-111 GRANT EXPENSE 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 99,000.00 201,000.00 67.00 % 215-54991-113 GRANT EXPENSE 1,245,000.00 1,245,000.00 61,765.49 464,866.80 780,133.20 62.66 % 215-54991-213 GRANT EXPENSE 225,110.00 225,110.00 0.00 55,134.97 169,975.03 75.51 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 2,320,110.00 2,320,110.00 109,078.15 930,460.96 1,389,649.04 59.90 % Expense Total: 3,424,110.00 3,424,110.00 110,786.04 992,744.10 2,431,365.90 71.01 % Fund: 215 - SPECIAL PROJECTS Surplus (Deficit): -1,853,000.00 -1,853,000.00 -37,604.30 -278,075.01 1,574,924.99 84.99 % Fund: 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 216-41111-000 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 54,100.00 54,100.00 1,274.49 9,878.99 -44,221.01 81.74 % 216-41119-000 PRORATE MTR VEH TAX 70.00 70.00 5.09 51.45 -18.55 26.50 % 216-41130-000 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 1,700.00 1,700.00 94.24 1,295.16 -404.84 23.81 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 55,870.00 55,870.00 1,373.82 11,225.60 -44,644.40 79.91 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 216-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 4,000.00 4,000.00 1,119.66 7,095.09 3,095.09 177.38 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 4,000.00 4,000.00 1,119.66 7,095.09 3,095.09 77.38 % Revenue Total: 59,870.00 59,870.00 2,493.48 18,320.69 -41,549.31 69.40 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 216-51111-171 REGULAR SALARIES 8,000.00 8,000.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 100.00 % 216-51111-212 REGULAR SALARIES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 318.35 4,681.65 93.63 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 13,000.00 13,000.00 0.00 318.35 12,681.65 97.55 % Category: 503 - Supplies 216-52111-121 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.45 -47.45 0.00 % 216-52111-171 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 47.45 9,952.55 99.53 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 216-53111-171 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 54,000.00 54,000.00 2,562.50 3,927.50 50,072.50 92.73 % 216-53111-212 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,000.00 9,000.00 0.00 772.33 8,227.67 91.42 % 216-53551-000 STREET LIGHTS 1,500.00 1,500.00 85.42 597.94 902.06 60.14 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 64,500.00 64,500.00 2,647.92 5,297.77 59,202.23 91.79 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 216-54311-121 STRUCTURES 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 237,500.00 237,500.00 2,647.92 5,663.57 231,836.43 97.62 % Fund: 216 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT Surplus (Deficit): -177,630.00 -177,630.00 -154.44 12,657.12 190,287.12 107.13 % Fund: 218 - PUBLIC SAFETY Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 218-41111-000 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 450,000.00 450,000.00 18,582.02 116,013.48 -333,986.52 74.22 % 218-41130-000 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 14,000.00 14,000.00 0.00 15,984.86 1,984.86 114.18 % 218-41141-000 MOTOR VEHICLE TAX 45,400.00 45,400.00 5,475.97 37,467.65 -7,932.35 17.47 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 509,400.00 509,400.00 24,057.99 169,465.99 -339,934.01 66.73 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 218-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 157.20 -4,842.80 96.86 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 157.20 -4,842.80 96.86 % Revenue Total: 514,400.00 514,400.00 24,057.99 169,623.19 -344,776.81 67.03 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 5 of 23 Page 69 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Expense Category: 503 - Supplies 218-52111-141 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 0.00 20,000.00 100.00 % 218-52111-142 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 278,000.00 278,000.00 0.00 102,899.11 175,100.89 62.99 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 298,000.00 298,000.00 0.00 102,899.11 195,100.89 65.47 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 218-53111-141 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 85,000.00 85,000.00 0.00 42,027.21 42,972.79 50.56 % 218-53111-142 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 90,000.00 90,000.00 0.00 63,668.65 26,331.35 29.26 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 175,000.00 175,000.00 0.00 105,695.86 69,304.14 39.60 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 218-54411-141 EQUIPMENT 64,000.00 64,000.00 0.00 54,052.74 9,947.26 15.54 % 218-54411-142 EQUIPMENT 148,000.00 148,000.00 373.00 128,384.53 19,615.47 13.25 % 218-54411-143 EQUIPMENT 24,000.00 24,000.00 0.00 0.00 24,000.00 100.00 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 236,000.00 236,000.00 373.00 182,437.27 53,562.73 22.70 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 218-58111-142 CONTINGENCY 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 859,000.00 859,000.00 373.00 391,032.24 467,967.76 54.48 % Fund: 218 - PUBLIC SAFETY Surplus (Deficit): -344,600.00 -344,600.00 23,684.99 -221,409.05 123,190.95 35.75 % Fund: 219 - INDUSTRIAL SITES Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 219-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 1,000.00 1,000.00 103.61 656.98 -343.02 34.30 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 1,000.00 1,000.00 103.61 656.98 -343.02 34.30 % Revenue Total: 1,000.00 1,000.00 103.61 656.98 -343.02 34.30 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 219-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 100.00 % 219-53111-116 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 100.00 % 219-59112-116 DEVELOPMENT 31,317.00 31,317.00 0.00 0.00 31,317.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 32,317.00 32,317.00 0.00 0.00 32,317.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 32,317.00 32,317.00 0.00 0.00 32,317.00 100.00 % Fund: 219 - INDUSTRIAL SITES Surplus (Deficit): -31,317.00 -31,317.00 103.61 656.98 31,973.98 102.10 % Fund: 223 - KENO Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 223-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 2,000.00 2,000.00 997.37 6,379.17 4,379.17 318.96 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 2,000.00 2,000.00 997.37 6,379.17 4,379.17 218.96 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 223-49115-000 KENO PROCEEDS 65,000.00 65,000.00 13,688.52 47,383.87 -17,616.13 27.10 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 65,000.00 65,000.00 13,688.52 47,383.87 -17,616.13 27.10 % Revenue Total: 67,000.00 67,000.00 14,685.89 53,763.04 -13,236.96 19.76 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 223-53752-113 COMMUNITY BETTERMENT 100,000.00 100,000.00 3,300.00 76,358.89 23,641.11 23.64 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 100,000.00 100,000.00 3,300.00 76,358.89 23,641.11 23.64 % Expense Total: 100,000.00 100,000.00 3,300.00 76,358.89 23,641.11 23.64 % Fund: 223 - KENO Surplus (Deficit): -33,000.00 -33,000.00 11,385.89 -22,595.85 10,404.15 31.53 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 6 of 23 Page 70 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Fund: 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 224-41112-000 CITY SALES TAX 1,315,126.00 1,315,126.00 101,582.08 783,403.58 -531,722.42 40.43 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 1,315,126.00 1,315,126.00 101,582.08 783,403.58 -531,722.42 40.43 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 224-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 28,000.00 28,000.00 13,435.84 84,766.50 56,766.50 302.74 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 28,000.00 28,000.00 13,435.84 84,766.50 56,766.50 202.74 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 224-48217-000 LOAN REPAYMENT-LB840 500,000.00 500,000.00 26,376.66 181,306.16 -318,693.84 63.74 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 500,000.00 500,000.00 26,376.66 181,306.16 -318,693.84 63.74 % Revenue Total: 1,843,126.00 1,843,126.00 141,394.58 1,049,476.24 -793,649.76 43.06 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 224-51111-113 REGULAR SALARIES 116,300.00 116,300.00 8,788.04 57,718.31 58,581.69 50.37 % 224-51211-113 SOCIAL SECURITY 8,890.00 8,890.00 595.45 3,874.27 5,015.73 56.42 % 224-51221-113 RETIREMENT 4,932.00 4,932.00 554.98 3,665.83 1,266.17 25.67 % 224-51231-113 HEALTH INSURANCE 27,041.00 27,041.00 2,517.59 16,679.16 10,361.84 38.32 % 224-51241-113 LIFE INSURANCE 132.00 132.00 10.92 62.80 69.20 52.42 % 224-51261-113 WORKERS COMPENSATION 210.00 210.00 0.00 126.79 83.21 39.62 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 157,505.00 157,505.00 12,466.98 82,127.16 75,377.84 47.86 % Category: 503 - Supplies 224-52111-113 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5,000.00 5,000.00 229.98 310.72 4,689.28 93.79 % 224-52211-114 PUBLICATIONS 500.00 500.00 283.06 337.05 162.95 32.59 % 224-52311-114 MEMBERSHIPS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 35.00 965.00 96.50 % 224-52511-113 GASOLINE 250.00 250.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 6,750.00 6,750.00 513.04 682.77 6,067.23 89.88 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 224-53111-113 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 1,260.00 3,740.00 74.80 % 224-53111-114 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150,000.00 150,000.00 1,950.00 8,292.20 141,707.80 94.47 % 224-53311-111 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 11,496.08 19,996.08 3.92 0.02 % 224-53561-113 PHONE & INTERNET 2,000.00 2,000.00 32.86 35.21 1,964.79 98.24 % 224-53711-113 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 100.00 % 224-59111-114 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 200,000.00 420,000.00 3,580,000.00 89.50 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 4,187,000.00 4,187,000.00 213,478.94 449,583.49 3,737,416.51 89.26 % Expense Total: 4,351,255.00 4,351,255.00 226,458.96 532,393.42 3,818,861.58 87.76 % Fund: 224 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Surplus (Deficit): -2,508,129.00 -2,508,129.00 -85,064.38 517,082.82 3,025,211.82 120.62 % Fund: 225 - MUTUAL FIRE Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 225-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 5,000.00 5,000.00 1,307.20 7,564.98 2,564.98 151.30 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 1,307.20 7,564.98 2,564.98 51.30 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 225-49111-141 MISCELLANEOUS 105,000.00 105,000.00 52,848.00 52,848.00 -52,152.00 49.67 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 105,000.00 105,000.00 52,848.00 52,848.00 -52,152.00 49.67 % Revenue Total: 110,000.00 110,000.00 54,155.20 60,412.98 -49,587.02 45.08 % Expense Category: 503 - Supplies 225-52111-141 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 36,000.00 36,000.00 1,710.00 4,271.86 31,728.14 88.13 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 36,000.00 36,000.00 1,710.00 4,271.86 31,728.14 88.13 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 225-53111-000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11,000.00 11,000.00 0.00 0.00 11,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 11,000.00 11,000.00 0.00 0.00 11,000.00 100.00 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 7 of 23 Page 71 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 225-58111-141 CONTINGENCY 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 0.00 100,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 0.00 100,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 147,000.00 147,000.00 1,710.00 4,271.86 142,728.14 97.09 % Fund: 225 - MUTUAL FIRE Surplus (Deficit): -37,000.00 -37,000.00 52,445.20 56,141.12 93,141.12 251.73 % Fund: 311 - DEBT SERVICE Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 311-41111-111 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 0.00 0.00 4.35 10.18 10.18 0.00 % 311-41131-111 IN LIEU OF TAXES 0.00 0.00 637.41 637.41 637.41 0.00 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 0.00 0.00 641.76 647.59 647.59 0.00 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 311-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 3,000.00 3,000.00 2,542.97 18,202.94 15,202.94 606.76 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 3,000.00 3,000.00 2,542.97 18,202.94 15,202.94 506.76 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 311-48311-000 SPEC ASSESS-PRINCIPAL 76,305.00 76,305.00 0.00 85,087.95 8,782.95 111.51 % 311-48313-000 SPEC ASSESS-INTEREST 32,000.00 32,000.00 0.00 51,863.62 19,863.62 162.07 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 108,305.00 108,305.00 0.00 136,951.57 28,646.57 26.45 % Revenue Total: 111,305.00 111,305.00 3,184.73 155,802.10 44,497.10 39.98 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 311-53152-111 BOND ISSUANCE COSTS 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 0.00 20,000.00 100.00 % 311-53195-111 ADMIN COSTS & FEES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 0.00 25,000.00 100.00 % Category: 560 - Debt Service 311-57110-111 DEBT SERVICE-PRINCIPAL 800,000.00 800,000.00 0.00 800,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 311-57115-111 DEBT SERVICE-INTEREST 104,489.00 104,489.00 52,793.75 115,938.75 -11,449.75 -10.96 % Category: 560 - Debt Service Total: 904,489.00 904,489.00 52,793.75 915,938.75 -11,449.75 -1.27 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 311-58111-111 CONTINGENCY 1,200,000.00 1,200,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,200,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 1,200,000.00 1,200,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,200,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 2,129,489.00 2,129,489.00 52,793.75 915,938.75 1,213,550.25 56.99 % Fund: 311 - DEBT SERVICE Surplus (Deficit): -2,018,184.00 -2,018,184.00 -49,609.02 -760,136.65 1,258,047.35 62.34 % Fund: 321 - CRA Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 321-41111-111 TIF PROPERTY TAX 650,000.00 650,000.00 0.00 71,209.95 -578,790.05 89.04 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 650,000.00 650,000.00 0.00 71,209.95 -578,790.05 89.04 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 321-47111-111 INTEREST EARNINGS 1,000.00 1,000.00 615.26 4,042.40 3,042.40 404.24 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 1,000.00 1,000.00 615.26 4,042.40 3,042.40 304.24 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 321-48215-111 PROGRAM INCOME 7,500.00 7,500.00 0.00 50.00 -7,450.00 99.33 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 7,500.00 7,500.00 0.00 50.00 -7,450.00 99.33 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses 321-49302-000 LOAN/BOND PROCEEDS 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 -150,000.00 100.00 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses Total: 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 -150,000.00 100.00 % Revenue Total: 808,500.00 808,500.00 615.26 75,302.35 -733,197.65 90.69 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 321-53111-111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 40,000.00 40,000.00 0.00 1,360.00 38,640.00 96.60 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 40,000.00 40,000.00 0.00 1,360.00 38,640.00 96.60 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 8 of 23 Page 72 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 560 - Debt Service 321-57221-111 TIF PASS THRU - PRINCIPAL 280,000.00 280,000.00 0.00 3,562.11 276,437.89 98.73 % 321-57222-111 TIF PASS THRU - INTEREST 370,000.00 370,000.00 8,374.15 66,217.99 303,782.01 82.10 % Category: 560 - Debt Service Total: 650,000.00 650,000.00 8,374.15 69,780.10 580,219.90 89.26 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 321-57311-111 LOAN/BOND EXPENSE 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 150,000.00 150,000.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 840,000.00 840,000.00 8,374.15 71,140.10 768,859.90 91.53 % Fund: 321 - CRA Surplus (Deficit): -31,500.00 -31,500.00 -7,758.89 4,162.25 35,662.25 113.21 % Fund: 411 - CDBG Revenue Category: 412 - Intergovernmental 411-43151-411 CDBG GRANT GENERAL 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 -300,000.00 100.00 % Category: 412 - Intergovernmental Total: 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 -300,000.00 100.00 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 411-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 1,500.00 1,500.00 81.58 420.96 -1,079.04 71.94 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 1,500.00 1,500.00 81.58 420.96 -1,079.04 71.94 % Revenue Total: 301,500.00 301,500.00 81.58 420.96 -301,079.04 99.86 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 411-54991-411 GRANT EXPENSE 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 300,000.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 100.00 % Fund: 411 - CDBG Surplus (Deficit): 1,500.00 1,500.00 81.58 420.96 -1,079.04 71.94 % Fund: 511 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenue Category: 400 - Taxes 511-41111-111 PROPERTY TAX-GENERAL 845,934.00 845,934.00 36,821.25 223,592.23 -622,341.77 73.57 % 511-41130-111 STATE PROP. TAX CREDIT 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 51,436.76 -8,563.24 14.27 % 511-41141-111 MOTOR VEHICLE TAXES 110,000.00 110,000.00 10,294.01 49,046.11 -60,953.89 55.41 % Category: 400 - Taxes Total: 1,015,934.00 1,015,934.00 47,115.26 324,075.10 -691,858.90 68.10 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 511-47111-111 INTEREST EARNINGS 6,500.00 6,500.00 6,556.85 46,817.29 40,317.29 720.27 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 6,500.00 6,500.00 6,556.85 46,817.29 40,317.29 620.27 % Revenue Total: 1,022,434.00 1,022,434.00 53,672.11 370,892.39 -651,541.61 63.72 % Expense Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 511-54311-141 STRUCTURES 100,000.00 100,000.00 1,941.50 8,268.00 91,732.00 91.73 % 511-54311-171 STRUCTURES 0.00 0.00 253,849.31 253,849.31 -253,849.31 0.00 % 511-54311-213 STRUCTURES 400,000.00 400,000.00 73,215.78 98,115.03 301,884.97 75.47 % 511-54411-121 EQUIPMENT 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 0.00 60,000.00 100.00 % 511-54411-151 EQUIPMENT 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 20,757.90 -757.90 -3.79 % 511-54411-171 EQUIPMENT 362,000.00 362,000.00 51,048.72 279,886.06 82,113.94 22.68 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 942,000.00 942,000.00 380,055.31 660,876.30 281,123.70 29.84 % Expense Total: 942,000.00 942,000.00 380,055.31 660,876.30 281,123.70 29.84 % Fund: 511 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Surplus (Deficit): 80,434.00 80,434.00 -326,383.20 -289,983.91 -370,417.91 460.52 % Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Revenue Category: 420 - Charges for Services 621-46111-621 SALES & SERVICE 3,558,564.00 3,558,564.00 308,422.87 2,138,431.61 -1,420,132.39 39.91 % 621-46118-000 UTILITY PENALTIES 38,000.00 38,000.00 2,552.48 17,870.13 -20,129.87 52.97 % 621-46211-621 COMPACTR/DUMSPTER LEASE 12,000.00 12,000.00 2,557.80 9,733.10 -2,266.90 18.89 % 621-46321-621 RECYCLING SERVICE CHARG 60,000.00 60,000.00 5,529.41 38,008.74 -21,991.26 36.65 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 9 of 23 Page 73 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 621-46322-621 SALE OF RECYCL MATERIAL 10,000.00 10,000.00 307.20 1,602.10 -8,397.90 83.98 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 3,678,564.00 3,678,564.00 319,369.76 2,205,645.68 -1,472,918.32 40.04 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 621-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 25,000.00 25,000.00 13,705.73 82,501.71 57,501.71 330.01 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 25,000.00 25,000.00 13,705.73 82,501.71 57,501.71 230.01 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 621-49111-621 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 105.00 105.00 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 105.00 105.00 0.00 % Revenue Total: 3,703,564.00 3,703,564.00 333,075.49 2,288,252.39 -1,415,311.61 38.21 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 621-51111-111 REGULAR SALARIES 84,195.00 84,195.00 6,745.88 50,408.56 33,786.44 40.13 % 621-51111-112 REGULAR SALARIES 27,165.00 27,165.00 2,064.80 15,591.00 11,574.00 42.61 % 621-51111-114 REGULAR SALARIES 46,475.00 46,475.00 3,461.88 25,340.07 21,134.93 45.48 % 621-51111-115 REGULAR SALARIES 24,348.00 24,348.00 1,783.64 13,427.34 10,920.66 44.85 % 621-51111-212 REGULAR SALARIES 25,816.00 25,816.00 1,981.46 14,933.51 10,882.49 42.15 % 621-51111-621 REGULAR SALARIES 989,324.00 989,324.00 63,393.17 477,666.25 511,657.75 51.72 % 621-51121-621 OVERTIME SALARIES 12,000.00 12,000.00 652.32 1,531.37 10,468.63 87.24 % 621-51131-621 PART-TIME SALARIES 17,975.00 17,975.00 0.00 0.00 17,975.00 100.00 % 621-51211-111 SOCIAL SECURITY 5,565.00 5,565.00 474.13 3,557.56 2,007.44 36.07 % 621-51211-112 SOCIAL SECURITY 2,075.00 2,075.00 152.68 1,154.82 920.18 44.35 % 621-51211-114 SOCIAL SECURITY 3,555.00 3,555.00 254.01 1,860.44 1,694.56 47.67 % 621-51211-115 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,870.00 1,870.00 127.66 963.28 906.72 48.49 % 621-51211-212 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,975.00 1,975.00 136.74 1,034.70 940.30 47.61 % 621-51211-621 SOCIAL SECURITY 75,770.00 75,770.00 4,549.10 34,214.44 41,555.56 54.84 % 621-51221-111 RETIREMENT 3,722.00 3,722.00 363.54 2,715.04 1,006.96 27.05 % 621-51221-112 RETIREMENT 1,551.00 1,551.00 123.88 935.40 615.60 39.69 % 621-51221-114 RETIREMENT 6,042.00 6,042.00 346.20 2,534.08 3,507.92 58.06 % 621-51221-115 RETIREMENT 1,467.00 1,467.00 107.04 805.76 661.24 45.07 % 621-51221-212 RETIREMENT 2,458.00 2,458.00 118.92 237.84 2,220.16 90.32 % 621-51221-621 RETIREMENT 58,612.00 58,612.00 3,500.88 26,240.21 32,371.79 55.23 % 621-51231-111 HEALTH INSURANCE 24,788.00 24,788.00 2,742.40 19,169.44 5,618.56 22.67 % 621-51231-112 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,509.01 2,124.99 37.72 % 621-51231-114 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.52 3,696.62 1,937.38 34.39 % 621-51231-115 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,509.00 2,125.00 37.72 % 621-51231-212 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.50 3,696.56 1,937.44 34.39 % 621-51231-621 HEALTH INSURANCE 362,806.00 362,806.00 26,793.08 187,386.45 175,419.55 48.35 % 621-51241-111 LIFE INSURANCE 121.00 121.00 12.32 80.05 40.95 33.84 % 621-51241-112 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 621-51241-114 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.27 14.79 13.21 47.18 % 621-51241-115 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 621-51241-212 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 621-51241-621 LIFE INSURANCE 1,771.00 1,771.00 113.78 739.55 1,031.45 58.24 % 621-51261-621 WORKERS COMPENSATION 37,060.00 37,060.00 0.00 26,404.14 10,655.86 28.75 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 1,841,154.00 1,841,154.00 122,056.64 923,401.71 917,752.29 49.85 % Category: 503 - Supplies 621-52111-621 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 135,000.00 135,000.00 3,798.94 35,111.42 99,888.58 73.99 % 621-52181-621 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 5,500.00 5,500.00 0.00 2,697.80 2,802.20 50.95 % 621-52511-621 GASOLINE 3,750.00 3,750.00 173.49 934.23 2,815.77 75.09 % 621-52521-621 OTHER FUEL 162,000.00 162,000.00 8,907.79 40,949.07 121,050.93 74.72 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 306,250.00 306,250.00 12,880.22 79,692.52 226,557.48 73.98 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 621-53111-621 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110,000.00 110,000.00 8,379.46 75,023.48 34,976.52 31.80 % 621-53151-621 BANK FEES 68,000.00 68,000.00 5,104.93 36,124.57 31,875.43 46.88 % 621-53161-621 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 621-53193-621 DISPOSAL FEES 585,000.00 585,000.00 43,452.70 250,990.89 334,009.11 57.10 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 10 of 23 Page 74 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 621-53194-621 POST CLOSURE CARE 5,000.00 5,000.00 3,587.50 3,587.50 1,412.50 28.25 % 621-53211-621 LEGAL FEES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 100.00 % 621-53311-621 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 11,496.08 19,996.08 3.92 0.02 % 621-53421-621 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 6,000.00 6,000.00 634.25 1,072.47 4,927.53 82.13 % 621-53431-621 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 621-53441-621 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 20,000.00 20,000.00 695.58 10,425.87 9,574.13 47.87 % 621-53451-621 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 60,000.00 60,000.00 18,075.49 46,377.45 13,622.55 22.70 % 621-53511-621 ELECTRICITY 14,000.00 14,000.00 792.12 5,017.41 8,982.59 64.16 % 621-53521-621 HEATING FUEL 9,000.00 9,000.00 487.08 2,849.97 6,150.03 68.33 % 621-53561-621 PHONE & INTERNET 4,000.00 4,000.00 217.88 1,273.00 2,727.00 68.18 % 621-53711-621 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 8,000.00 8,000.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 100.00 % 621-53821-621 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 54,225.00 54,225.00 0.00 61,525.24 -7,300.24 -13.46 % 621-53831-621 LIABILITY INSURANCE 17,595.00 17,595.00 0.00 17,440.77 154.23 0.88 % 621-53841-621 VEHICLE INSURANCE 39,425.00 39,425.00 0.00 42,773.47 -3,348.47 -8.49 % 621-59211-621 LICENSES/PERMITS 1,000.00 1,000.00 120.00 142.00 858.00 85.80 % 621-59611-621 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 15,000.00 15,000.00 2,893.70 8,913.92 6,086.08 40.57 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 1,044,245.00 1,044,245.00 95,936.77 583,534.09 460,710.91 44.12 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 621-54212-621 ENGINEERING/DESIGN 350,000.00 350,000.00 0.00 2,309.50 347,690.50 99.34 % 621-54311-621 STRUCTURES 3,530,000.00 3,530,000.00 0.00 64,054.20 3,465,945.80 98.19 % 621-54411-621 EQUIPMENT 395,000.00 395,000.00 26.00 584,750.62 -189,750.62 -48.04 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 4,275,000.00 4,275,000.00 26.00 651,114.32 3,623,885.68 84.77 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 621-58111-621 CONTINGENCY 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 8,066,649.00 8,066,649.00 230,899.63 2,237,742.64 5,828,906.36 72.26 % Fund: 621 - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Surplus (Deficit): -4,363,085.00 -4,363,085.00 102,175.86 50,509.75 4,413,594.75 101.16 % Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER Revenue Category: 420 - Charges for Services 631-42122-631 CONNECTION CHARGES 1,000.00 1,000.00 34.00 1,634.00 634.00 163.40 % 631-42302-631 PERMITS 50.00 50.00 0.00 80.00 30.00 160.00 % 631-46111-631 SALES & SERVICE 2,971,447.00 2,971,447.00 254,348.97 1,817,286.40 -1,154,160.60 38.84 % 631-46118-000 UTILITY PENALTIES 25,000.00 25,000.00 2,448.99 17,143.31 -7,856.69 31.43 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 2,997,497.00 2,997,497.00 256,831.96 1,836,143.71 -1,161,353.29 38.74 % Category: 440 - Rents 631-46117-631 RENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,375.00 2,375.00 0.00 % Category: 440 - Rents Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,375.00 2,375.00 0.00 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 631-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 30,000.00 30,000.00 9,937.14 64,689.47 34,689.47 215.63 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 30,000.00 30,000.00 9,937.14 64,689.47 34,689.47 115.63 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 631-49111-631 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 582.00 582.00 0.00 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 0.00 0.00 0.00 582.00 582.00 0.00 % Revenue Total: 3,027,497.00 3,027,497.00 266,769.10 1,903,790.18 -1,123,706.82 37.12 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 631-51111-111 REGULAR SALARIES 87,422.00 87,422.00 6,745.88 50,408.56 37,013.44 42.34 % 631-51111-112 REGULAR SALARIES 27,110.00 27,110.00 2,064.80 15,591.00 11,519.00 42.49 % 631-51111-114 REGULAR SALARIES 46,475.00 46,475.00 3,461.88 25,340.07 21,134.93 45.48 % 631-51111-115 REGULAR SALARIES 24,348.00 24,348.00 1,783.64 13,427.34 10,920.66 44.85 % 631-51111-116 REGULAR SALARIES 11,100.00 11,100.00 838.52 6,288.90 4,811.10 43.34 % 631-51111-121 REGULAR SALARIES 13,708.00 13,708.00 1,070.18 7,797.03 5,910.97 43.12 % 631-51111-212 REGULAR SALARIES 25,790.00 25,790.00 1,981.46 14,933.51 10,856.49 42.10 % 631-51111-631 REGULAR SALARIES 606,910.00 606,910.00 47,862.65 328,661.89 278,248.11 45.85 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 11 of 23 Page 75 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 631-51121-631 OVERTIME SALARIES 24,752.00 24,752.00 1,201.51 6,484.34 18,267.66 73.80 % 631-51131-631 PART-TIME SALARIES 17,118.00 17,118.00 0.00 0.00 17,118.00 100.00 % 631-51211-111 SOCIAL SECURITY 6,198.00 6,198.00 474.13 3,557.56 2,640.44 42.60 % 631-51211-112 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,978.00 1,978.00 152.68 1,154.82 823.18 41.62 % 631-51211-114 SOCIAL SECURITY 3,555.00 3,555.00 254.01 1,860.44 1,694.56 47.67 % 631-51211-115 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,870.00 1,870.00 127.66 963.28 906.72 48.49 % 631-51211-116 SOCIAL SECURITY 838.00 838.00 55.54 418.86 419.14 50.02 % 631-51211-121 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,049.00 1,049.00 65.52 483.23 565.77 53.93 % 631-51211-212 SOCIAL SECURITY 3,133.00 3,133.00 136.74 1,034.70 2,098.30 66.97 % 631-51211-631 SOCIAL SECURITY 72,088.00 72,088.00 3,460.26 23,570.33 48,517.67 67.30 % 631-51221-111 RETIREMENT 3,722.00 3,722.00 363.54 2,715.04 1,006.96 27.05 % 631-51221-112 RETIREMENT 1,551.00 1,551.00 123.88 935.40 615.60 39.69 % 631-51221-114 RETIREMENT 6,042.00 6,042.00 346.20 2,534.08 3,507.92 58.06 % 631-51221-115 RETIREMENT 1,467.00 1,467.00 107.04 805.76 661.24 45.07 % 631-51221-116 RETIREMENT 657.00 657.00 50.32 377.40 279.60 42.56 % 631-51221-121 RETIREMENT 822.00 822.00 32.10 279.78 542.22 65.96 % 631-51221-212 RETIREMENT 2,458.00 2,458.00 118.92 237.84 2,220.16 90.32 % 631-51221-631 RETIREMENT 53,460.00 53,460.00 2,339.92 15,004.53 38,455.47 71.93 % 631-51231-111 HEALTH INSURANCE 24,788.00 24,788.00 2,742.40 19,169.44 5,618.56 22.67 % 631-51231-112 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,509.01 2,124.99 37.72 % 631-51231-114 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.52 3,696.62 1,937.38 34.39 % 631-51231-115 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,509.00 2,125.00 37.72 % 631-51231-116 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 314.70 2,215.94 1,164.06 34.44 % 631-51231-121 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 314.70 2,217.53 1,162.47 34.39 % 631-51231-212 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.50 3,696.56 1,937.44 34.39 % 631-51231-631 HEALTH INSURANCE 313,230.00 313,230.00 19,924.97 128,388.87 184,841.13 59.01 % 631-51241-111 LIFE INSURANCE 176.00 176.00 12.32 80.05 95.95 54.52 % 631-51241-112 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 631-51241-114 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.27 14.79 13.21 47.18 % 631-51241-115 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 631-51241-116 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.37 8.89 8.11 47.71 % 631-51241-121 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.37 8.89 8.11 47.71 % 631-51241-212 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.28 14.81 13.19 47.11 % 631-51241-631 LIFE INSURANCE 1,529.00 1,529.00 81.91 532.42 996.58 65.18 % 631-51261-631 WORKERS COMPENSATION 19,340.00 19,340.00 0.00 15,459.11 3,880.89 20.07 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 1,434,126.00 1,434,126.00 100,669.85 707,417.24 726,708.76 50.67 % Category: 503 - Supplies 631-52111-631 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 78,620.00 78,620.00 1,529.05 9,417.31 69,202.69 88.02 % 631-52181-631 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 5,150.00 5,150.00 0.00 2,296.71 2,853.29 55.40 % 631-52311-631 MEMBERSHIPS 2,970.00 2,970.00 0.00 275.00 2,695.00 90.74 % 631-52411-631 POSTAGE 3,360.00 3,360.00 0.00 337.28 3,022.72 89.96 % 631-52511-631 GASOLINE 14,900.00 14,900.00 565.24 3,544.96 11,355.04 76.21 % 631-52521-631 OTHER FUEL 39,900.00 39,900.00 3,231.35 9,586.06 30,313.94 75.97 % 631-52611-631 CHEMICALS 35,850.00 35,850.00 0.00 5,641.90 30,208.10 84.26 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 180,750.00 180,750.00 5,325.64 31,099.22 149,650.78 82.79 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 631-53111-631 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 123,045.00 123,045.00 6,031.93 80,989.70 42,055.30 34.18 % 631-53151-631 BANK FEES 68,000.00 68,000.00 5,104.93 36,124.56 31,875.44 46.88 % 631-53161-631 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 % 631-53211-631 LEGAL FEES 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 631-53311-631 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 11,496.08 19,996.08 3.92 0.02 % 631-53421-631 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 14,500.00 14,500.00 937.54 1,051.00 13,449.00 92.75 % 631-53431-631 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 11,000.00 11,000.00 0.00 1,675.64 9,324.36 84.77 % 631-53441-631 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 112,000.00 112,000.00 1,579.20 28,842.72 83,157.28 74.25 % 631-53451-631 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 10,750.00 10,750.00 218.89 1,424.41 9,325.59 86.75 % 631-53461-631 FACILITY REPAIRS 102,500.00 102,500.00 0.00 28,047.00 74,453.00 72.64 % 631-53466-631 SEWER BACKUP CLAIMS 10,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 100.00 % 631-53511-631 ELECTRICITY 20,000.00 20,000.00 1,795.12 9,306.31 10,693.69 53.47 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 12 of 23 Page 76 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 631-53521-631 HEATING FUEL 4,200.00 4,200.00 0.00 571.08 3,628.92 86.40 % 631-53531-631 ELECTRIC POWER 220,500.00 220,500.00 13,061.74 79,759.78 140,740.22 63.83 % 631-53561-631 PHONE & INTERNET 4,968.00 4,968.00 470.10 4,055.60 912.40 18.37 % 631-53571-631 CELLULAR PHONE 1,540.00 1,540.00 39.94 239.64 1,300.36 84.44 % 631-53611-631 RENT-LAND 1,300.00 1,300.00 0.00 1,334.57 -34.57 -2.66 % 631-53631-631 RENT-MACHINES 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 631-53711-631 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 5,815.00 5,815.00 0.00 1,895.00 3,920.00 67.41 % 631-53821-631 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 151,498.00 151,498.00 0.00 159,607.71 -8,109.71 -5.35 % 631-53831-631 LIABILITY INSURANCE 35,050.00 35,050.00 0.00 29,305.63 5,744.37 16.39 % 631-53841-631 VEHICLE INSURANCE 20,470.00 20,470.00 0.00 15,175.89 5,294.11 25.86 % 631-59211-631 LICENSE/PERMITS 3,375.00 3,375.00 0.00 1,625.00 1,750.00 51.85 % 631-59611-631 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 15,000.00 15,000.00 2,118.02 7,207.69 7,792.31 51.95 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 958,611.00 958,611.00 42,853.49 508,235.01 450,375.99 46.98 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 631-54212-631 ENGINEERING/DESIGN 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 2,309.50 22,690.50 90.76 % 631-54311-631 STRUCTURES 156,000.00 156,000.00 0.00 40,320.97 115,679.03 74.15 % 631-54411-631 EQUIPMENT 672,000.00 672,000.00 10,000.00 412,206.59 259,793.41 38.66 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 853,000.00 853,000.00 10,000.00 454,837.06 398,162.94 46.68 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 631-55502-631 TRANSFER TO STORMWATER 50,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 631-55600-631 TRANSFER TO GIS 45,000.00 45,000.00 0.00 45,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 631-58111-631 CONTINGENCY 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 695,000.00 695,000.00 0.00 95,000.00 600,000.00 86.33 % Expense Total: 4,121,487.00 4,121,487.00 158,848.98 1,796,588.53 2,324,898.47 56.41 % Fund: 631 - WASTEWATER Surplus (Deficit): -1,093,990.00 -1,093,990.00 107,920.12 107,201.65 1,201,191.65 109.80 % Fund: 641 - WATER Revenue Category: 420 - Charges for Services 641-42302-121 PERMITS 0.00 0.00 32.00 424.00 424.00 0.00 % 641-46111-641 SALES & SERVICE 2,315,263.00 2,315,263.00 171,114.98 1,334,124.92 -981,138.08 42.38 % 641-46114-641 WATER MAINS 1,000.00 1,000.00 393.00 1,959.00 959.00 195.90 % 641-46115-641 METERS & REMOTES 2,831.00 2,831.00 684.00 2,785.00 -46.00 1.62 % 641-46118-000 UTILITY PENALTIES 25,000.00 25,000.00 2,031.39 13,238.89 -11,761.11 47.04 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 2,344,094.00 2,344,094.00 174,255.37 1,352,531.81 -991,562.19 42.30 % Category: 440 - Rents 641-46117-641 RENT 40,791.00 40,791.00 3,399.21 22,395.26 -18,395.74 45.10 % Category: 440 - Rents Total: 40,791.00 40,791.00 3,399.21 22,395.26 -18,395.74 45.10 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 641-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 93,150.00 93,150.00 18,574.33 117,400.73 24,250.73 126.03 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 93,150.00 93,150.00 18,574.33 117,400.73 24,250.73 26.03 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 641-46314-641 BAD DEBT COLLECTIONS 5,000.00 5,000.00 1,880.42 3,753.46 -1,246.54 24.93 % 641-49111-641 MISCELLANEOUS 32,000.00 32,000.00 2,958.00 16,188.00 -15,812.00 49.41 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 37,000.00 37,000.00 4,838.42 19,941.46 -17,058.54 46.10 % Revenue Total: 2,515,035.00 2,515,035.00 201,067.33 1,512,269.26 -1,002,765.74 39.87 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 641-51111-111 REGULAR SALARIES 89,000.00 89,000.00 6,745.80 50,408.26 38,591.74 43.36 % 641-51111-112 REGULAR SALARIES 25,761.00 25,761.00 2,064.76 15,590.70 10,170.30 39.48 % 641-51111-114 REGULAR SALARIES 46,115.00 46,115.00 3,461.86 25,340.04 20,774.96 45.05 % 641-51111-115 REGULAR SALARIES 24,348.00 24,348.00 1,783.66 13,427.43 10,920.57 44.85 % 641-51111-116 REGULAR SALARIES 7,775.00 7,775.00 559.02 4,192.65 3,582.35 46.08 % 641-51111-121 REGULAR SALARIES 13,708.00 13,708.00 1,070.20 7,797.18 5,910.82 43.12 % 641-51111-212 REGULAR SALARIES 25,815.00 25,815.00 1,981.48 14,933.66 10,881.34 42.15 % 641-51111-641 REGULAR SALARIES 459,689.00 459,689.00 40,366.77 323,760.97 135,928.03 29.57 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 13 of 23 Page 77 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 641-51121-641 OVERTIME SALARIES 25,752.00 25,752.00 1,092.08 11,098.81 14,653.19 56.90 % 641-51131-641 PART-TIME SALARIES 13,000.00 13,000.00 0.00 0.00 13,000.00 100.00 % 641-51211-111 SOCIAL SECURITY 6,105.00 6,105.00 473.90 3,555.34 2,549.66 41.76 % 641-51211-112 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,978.00 1,978.00 152.70 1,154.92 823.08 41.61 % 641-51211-114 SOCIAL SECURITY 3,555.00 3,555.00 253.97 1,859.99 1,695.01 47.68 % 641-51211-115 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,870.00 1,870.00 127.62 963.05 906.95 48.50 % 641-51211-116 SOCIAL SECURITY 559.00 559.00 37.02 279.19 279.81 50.06 % 641-51211-121 SOCIAL SECURITY 1,049.00 1,049.00 65.50 483.27 565.73 53.93 % 641-51211-212 SOCIAL SECURITY 3,133.00 3,133.00 136.76 1,034.81 2,098.19 66.97 % 641-51211-641 SOCIAL SECURITY 53,320.00 53,320.00 2,939.26 23,781.27 29,538.73 55.40 % 641-51221-111 RETIREMENT 3,686.00 3,686.00 363.28 2,712.86 973.14 26.40 % 641-51221-112 RETIREMENT 1,551.00 1,551.00 123.92 935.70 615.30 39.67 % 641-51221-114 RETIREMENT 6,042.00 6,042.00 346.12 2,533.56 3,508.44 58.07 % 641-51221-115 RETIREMENT 1,467.00 1,467.00 107.00 805.54 661.46 45.09 % 641-51221-116 RETIREMENT 438.00 438.00 33.56 251.70 186.30 42.53 % 641-51221-121 RETIREMENT 822.00 822.00 32.12 279.72 542.28 65.97 % 641-51221-212 RETIREMENT 2,458.00 2,458.00 118.80 237.60 2,220.40 90.33 % 641-51221-641 RETIREMENT 38,832.00 38,832.00 2,153.38 17,340.81 21,491.19 55.34 % 641-51231-111 HEALTH INSURANCE 24,788.00 24,788.00 2,742.02 19,165.83 5,622.17 22.68 % 641-51231-112 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,508.98 2,125.02 37.72 % 641-51231-114 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.47 3,696.24 1,937.76 34.39 % 641-51231-115 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 499.50 3,508.98 2,125.02 37.72 % 641-51231-116 HEALTH INSURANCE 2,253.00 2,253.00 209.80 1,477.29 775.71 34.43 % 641-51231-121 HEALTH INSURANCE 3,380.00 3,380.00 314.70 2,217.54 1,162.46 34.39 % 641-51231-212 HEALTH INSURANCE 5,634.00 5,634.00 524.50 3,696.32 1,937.68 34.39 % 641-51231-641 HEALTH INSURANCE 210,698.00 210,698.00 17,077.95 129,991.95 80,706.05 38.30 % 641-51241-111 LIFE INSURANCE 121.00 121.00 12.15 79.24 41.76 34.51 % 641-51241-112 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.26 14.72 13.28 47.43 % 641-51241-114 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.29 14.78 13.22 47.21 % 641-51241-115 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.26 14.72 13.28 47.43 % 641-51241-116 LIFE INSURANCE 11.00 11.00 0.91 5.92 5.08 46.18 % 641-51241-121 LIFE INSURANCE 17.00 17.00 1.35 8.85 8.15 47.94 % 641-51241-212 LIFE INSURANCE 28.00 28.00 2.26 14.72 13.28 47.43 % 641-51241-641 LIFE INSURANCE 1,029.00 1,029.00 86.41 553.49 475.51 46.21 % 641-51261-641 WORKERS COMPENSATION 16,274.00 16,274.00 0.00 10,727.63 5,546.37 34.08 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 1,139,047.00 1,139,047.00 89,092.87 703,456.23 435,590.77 38.24 % Category: 503 - Supplies 641-52111-641 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 140,000.00 140,000.00 10,784.71 28,095.44 111,904.56 79.93 % 641-52116-641 METERS 65,000.00 65,000.00 10,046.99 27,585.89 37,414.11 57.56 % 641-52117-641 SAMPLES 20,345.00 20,345.00 558.00 5,841.00 14,504.00 71.29 % 641-52181-641 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 4,625.00 4,625.00 249.31 2,491.24 2,133.76 46.14 % 641-52311-641 MEMBERSHIPS 2,720.00 2,720.00 0.00 523.00 2,197.00 80.77 % 641-52411-641 POSTAGE 7,960.00 7,960.00 235.53 1,212.01 6,747.99 84.77 % 641-52511-641 GASOLINE 19,500.00 19,500.00 1,363.34 6,441.49 13,058.51 66.97 % 641-52521-641 OTHER FUEL 2,700.00 2,700.00 241.85 841.89 1,858.11 68.82 % 641-52611-641 CHEMICALS 90,500.00 90,500.00 8,406.03 34,732.02 55,767.98 61.62 % 641-52931-641 INSURED REPAIRS/REPLACE 0.00 0.00 0.00 22,190.66 -22,190.66 0.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 353,350.00 353,350.00 31,885.76 129,954.64 223,395.36 63.22 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 641-53111-641 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 141,464.00 141,464.00 6,403.41 83,378.12 58,085.88 41.06 % 641-53151-641 BANK FEES 68,000.00 68,000.00 5,104.93 36,124.56 31,875.44 46.88 % 641-53161-641 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 100.00 100.00 0.00 116.30 -16.30 -16.30 % 641-53211-641 LEGAL FEES 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 641-53311-641 AUDIT 20,000.00 20,000.00 11,496.08 19,996.08 3.92 0.02 % 641-53421-641 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,570.02 5,963.37 -3,963.37 -198.17 % 641-53431-641 ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE 4,000.00 4,000.00 1,561.40 2,011.44 1,988.56 49.71 % 641-53441-641 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 17,000.00 17,000.00 1,981.53 4,441.55 12,558.45 73.87 % 641-53451-641 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 7,500.00 7,500.00 2,550.75 4,231.22 3,268.78 43.58 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 14 of 23 Page 78 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 641-53461-641 FACILITY REPAIRS 100,000.00 100,000.00 1,325.00 1,325.00 98,675.00 98.68 % 641-53511-641 ELECTRICITY 4,320.00 4,320.00 347.24 2,381.20 1,938.80 44.88 % 641-53521-641 HEATING FUEL 5,160.00 5,160.00 202.39 1,766.69 3,393.31 65.76 % 641-53531-641 ELECTRIC POWER 170,000.00 170,000.00 9,621.07 55,090.55 114,909.45 67.59 % 641-53561-641 PHONE & INTERNET 3,132.00 3,132.00 338.99 789.47 2,342.53 74.79 % 641-53571-641 CELLULAR PHONE 1,612.00 1,612.00 39.94 239.64 1,372.36 85.13 % 641-53611-641 RENT-LAND 1,250.00 1,250.00 458.76 1,334.57 -84.57 -6.77 % 641-53631-641 RENT-MACHINES 1,400.00 1,400.00 242.83 477.61 922.39 65.89 % 641-53711-641 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 4,800.00 4,800.00 0.00 1,525.00 3,275.00 68.23 % 641-53821-641 PROP & EQUIP INSURANCE 69,356.00 69,356.00 0.00 70,301.34 -945.34 -1.36 % 641-53831-641 LIABILITY INSURANCE 13,784.00 13,784.00 0.00 13,331.69 452.31 3.28 % 641-53841-641 VEHICLE INSURANCE 6,185.00 6,185.00 0.00 11,890.79 -5,705.79 -92.25 % 641-59211-641 LICENSE/PERMITS 1,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 1,495.00 5.00 0.33 % 641-59611-641 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 15,000.00 15,000.00 1,729.91 6,066.72 8,933.28 59.56 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 659,563.00 659,563.00 44,974.25 324,277.91 335,285.09 50.83 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 641-54212-641 ENGINEERING/DESIGN 85,000.00 85,000.00 0.00 24,047.25 60,952.75 71.71 % 641-54311-641 STRUCTURES 535,000.00 535,000.00 0.00 0.00 535,000.00 100.00 % 641-54411-641 EQUIPMENT 150,000.00 150,000.00 52,973.02 59,715.13 90,284.87 60.19 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 770,000.00 770,000.00 52,973.02 83,762.38 686,237.62 89.12 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 641-55600-641 TRANSFER TO GIS 45,000.00 45,000.00 0.00 45,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 641-58111-641 CONTINGENCY 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 645,000.00 645,000.00 0.00 45,000.00 600,000.00 93.02 % Expense Total: 3,566,960.00 3,566,960.00 218,925.90 1,286,451.16 2,280,508.84 63.93 % Fund: 641 - WATER Surplus (Deficit): -1,051,925.00 -1,051,925.00 -17,858.57 225,818.10 1,277,743.10 121.47 % Fund: 651 - ELECTRIC Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 651-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 10,000.00 10,000.00 5,267.70 30,187.18 20,187.18 301.87 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 10,000.00 10,000.00 5,267.70 30,187.18 20,187.18 201.87 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 651-46112-000 LEASE PAYMENTS 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,899,532.09 -1,691,306.91 47.10 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,899,532.09 -1,691,306.91 47.10 % Revenue Total: 3,600,839.00 3,600,839.00 265,296.60 1,929,719.27 -1,671,119.73 46.41 % Expense Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 651-54311-000 STRUCTURES 675,000.00 675,000.00 0.00 0.00 675,000.00 100.00 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 675,000.00 675,000.00 0.00 0.00 675,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 651-55100-111 TRANSFER TO GENERAL 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,615,555.58 1,975,283.42 55.01 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 3,590,839.00 3,590,839.00 260,028.90 1,615,555.58 1,975,283.42 55.01 % Expense Total: 4,265,839.00 4,265,839.00 260,028.90 1,615,555.58 2,650,283.42 62.13 % Fund: 651 - ELECTRIC Surplus (Deficit): -665,000.00 -665,000.00 5,267.70 314,163.69 979,163.69 147.24 % Fund: 661 - STORMWATER Revenue Category: 420 - Charges for Services 661-42302-121 PERMITS 900.00 900.00 0.00 0.00 -900.00 100.00 % 661-46120-000 STORMWATER SURCHARGE 191,416.00 191,416.00 16,156.41 112,792.33 -78,623.67 41.07 % Category: 420 - Charges for Services Total: 192,316.00 192,316.00 16,156.41 112,792.33 -79,523.67 41.35 % Category: 460 - Investment Income 661-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 5,000.00 5,000.00 2,166.59 14,510.55 9,510.55 290.21 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 2,166.59 14,510.55 9,510.55 190.21 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 15 of 23 Page 79 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 661-49111-000 MISCELLANEOUS 13,600.00 13,600.00 0.00 6,000.00 -7,600.00 55.88 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 13,600.00 13,600.00 0.00 6,000.00 -7,600.00 55.88 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses 661-45901-661 TRANS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 % 661-45907-000 TRANSFER FROM SEWER 50,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 -50,000.00 100.00 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses Total: 50,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Revenue Total: 260,916.00 260,916.00 18,323.00 183,302.88 -77,613.12 29.75 % Expense Category: 503 - Supplies 661-52111-661 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 12,000.00 12,000.00 0.00 108.76 11,891.24 99.09 % 661-52117-661 SAMPLES 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 100.00 % 661-52181-661 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 100.00 % 661-52311-661 MEMBERSHIPS 500.00 500.00 0.00 150.00 350.00 70.00 % 661-52411-661 POSTAGE 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % 661-52511-661 GASOLINE 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 100.00 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 13,900.00 13,900.00 0.00 258.76 13,641.24 98.14 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 661-53111-661 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 101,600.00 101,600.00 3,305.00 23,298.60 78,301.40 77.07 % 661-53121-661 CONSULTING SERVICES 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,000.00 100.00 % 661-53211-661 LEGAL FEES 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 661-53441-661 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 100.00 % 661-53451-661 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 300.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 100.00 % 661-53461-661 FACILITY REPAIRS 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 0.00 15,000.00 100.00 % 661-53561-661 PHONE & INTERNET 500.00 500.00 0.47 2.82 497.18 99.44 % 661-53611-661 RENT-LAND 830.00 830.00 0.00 835.68 -5.68 -0.68 % 661-53711-661 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 450.00 1,550.00 77.50 % 661-53841-661 VEHICLE INSURANCE 400.00 400.00 0.00 0.00 400.00 100.00 % 661-59611-661 BAD DEBT EXPENSE 600.00 600.00 206.48 676.93 -76.93 -12.82 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 126,230.00 126,230.00 3,511.95 25,264.03 100,965.97 79.99 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay 661-54212-661 ENGINEERING/DESIGN 33,000.00 33,000.00 22,393.00 22,393.00 10,607.00 32.14 % 661-54311-661 STRUCTURES 265,000.00 265,000.00 93,492.00 106,666.00 158,334.00 59.75 % Category: 550 - Capital Outlay Total: 298,000.00 298,000.00 115,885.00 129,059.00 168,941.00 56.69 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses 661-58111-661 CONTINGENCY 250,000.00 250,000.00 0.00 0.00 250,000.00 100.00 % Category: 570 - Other Financing Uses Total: 250,000.00 250,000.00 0.00 0.00 250,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 688,130.00 688,130.00 119,396.95 154,581.79 533,548.21 77.54 % Fund: 661 - STORMWATER Surplus (Deficit): -427,214.00 -427,214.00 -101,073.95 28,721.09 455,935.09 106.72 % Fund: 721 - GIS SERVICES Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 721-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 200.00 200.00 262.19 931.00 731.00 465.50 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 200.00 200.00 262.19 931.00 731.00 365.50 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses 721-45901-721 TRANS FROM OTHER FUNDS 120,000.00 120,000.00 0.00 120,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Category: 480 - Other Financing Uses Total: 120,000.00 120,000.00 0.00 120,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Revenue Total: 120,200.00 120,200.00 262.19 120,931.00 731.00 0.61 % Expense Category: 500 - Personnel 721-51111-721 REGULAR SALARIES 55,149.00 55,149.00 4,192.58 31,759.35 23,389.65 42.41 % 721-51211-721 SOCIAL SECURITY 4,192.00 4,192.00 277.70 2,116.89 2,075.11 49.50 % 721-51221-721 RETIREMENT 3,287.00 3,287.00 251.52 1,905.30 1,381.70 42.04 % 721-51231-721 HEALTH INSURANCE 16,901.00 16,901.00 1,573.50 11,089.50 5,811.50 34.39 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 16 of 23 Page 80 of 657Budget Report For Fiscal: 2025-2026 Period Ending: 04/30/2026 Variance Original Current Period Fiscal Favorable Percent Total Budget Total Budget Activity Activity (Unfavorable) Remaining 721-51241-721 LIFE INSURANCE 83.00 83.00 6.82 44.34 38.66 46.58 % 721-51261-721 WORKERS COMPENSATION 65.00 65.00 0.00 60.83 4.17 6.42 % Category: 500 - Personnel Total: 79,677.00 79,677.00 6,302.12 46,976.21 32,700.79 41.04 % Category: 503 - Supplies 721-52111-721 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 1,272.44 3,727.56 74.55 % Category: 503 - Supplies Total: 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 1,272.44 3,727.56 74.55 % Category: 504 - Contract Services 721-53111-721 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25,000.00 25,000.00 485.00 4,161.67 20,838.33 83.35 % 721-53441-721 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 100.00 % 721-53561-721 PHONE & INTERNET 700.00 700.00 196.47 1,145.82 -445.82 -63.69 % 721-53711-721 SCHOOL & CONFERENCE 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 193.40 3,806.60 95.17 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 31,700.00 31,700.00 681.47 5,500.89 26,199.11 82.65 % Expense Total: 116,377.00 116,377.00 6,983.59 53,749.54 62,627.46 53.81 % Fund: 721 - GIS SERVICES Surplus (Deficit): 3,823.00 3,823.00 -6,721.40 67,181.46 63,358.46-1,657.30 % Fund: 811 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMP Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 811-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 200.00 200.00 204.28 1,295.31 1,095.31 647.66 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 200.00 200.00 204.28 1,295.31 1,095.31 547.66 % Revenue Total: 200.00 200.00 204.28 1,295.31 1,095.31 547.66 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 811-53851-112 PAYMENT TO STATE 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 0.00 60,000.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 0.00 60,000.00 100.00 % Expense Total: 60,000.00 60,000.00 0.00 0.00 60,000.00 100.00 % Fund: 811 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMP Surplus (Deficit): -59,800.00 -59,800.00 204.28 1,295.31 61,095.31 102.17 % Fund: 812 - HEALTH INSURANCE Revenue Category: 460 - Investment Income 812-47111-000 INTEREST EARNINGS 20,000.00 20,000.00 19,098.53 114,014.74 94,014.74 570.07 % Category: 460 - Investment Income Total: 20,000.00 20,000.00 19,098.53 114,014.74 94,014.74 470.07 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues 812-45001-000 REVENUE FROM EMPLOYEES 375,000.00 375,000.00 27,187.50 183,588.24 -191,411.76 51.04 % 812-45002-000 REVENUE FROM EMPLOYER 2,700,000.00 2,700,000.00 257,608.00 1,556,586.00 -1,143,414.00 42.35 % 812-45003-000 FLEX REV. FROM EMPLOYEE 20,000.00 20,000.00 1,703.84 218,305.88 198,305.88 1,091.53 % 812-45004-000 COBRA PYMTS - EMPLOYEES 1,000.00 1,000.00 496.44 827.40 -172.60 17.26 % 812-49111-000 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.04 12.04 0.00 % 812-49114-000 REVENUE-RE-INS CARRIER 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 9,720.47 5,720.47 243.01 % Category: 470 - Miscellaneous Revenues Total: 3,100,000.00 3,100,000.00 286,995.78 1,969,040.03 -1,130,959.97 36.48 % Revenue Total: 3,120,000.00 3,120,000.00 306,094.31 2,083,054.77 -1,036,945.23 33.24 % Expense Category: 504 - Contract Services 812-53111-112 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 15,000.00 75.00 % 812-53861-112 PREMIUM EXPENSE 580,000.00 580,000.00 52,158.02 352,857.69 227,142.31 39.16 % 812-53862-112 CLAIMS EXPENSE 3,200,000.00 3,200,000.00 53,716.04 813,735.19 2,386,264.81 74.57 % 812-53863-112 FLEXIBLE BENFT EXPENSES 25,000.00 25,000.00 1,554.54 12,802.74 12,197.26 48.79 % 812-59913-112 TAX EXPENSE 850.00 850.00 0.00 0.00 850.00 100.00 % Category: 504 - Contract Services Total: 3,825,850.00 3,825,850.00 107,428.60 1,184,395.62 2,641,454.38 69.04 % Expense Total: 3,825,850.00 3,825,850.00 107,428.60 1,184,395.62 2,641,454.38 69.04 % Fund: 812 - HEALTH INSURANCE Surplus (Deficit): -705,850.00 -705,850.00 198,665.71 898,659.15 1,604,509.15 227.32 % Report Surplus (Deficit): -16,527,612.00 -16,527,612.00 -185,335.71 1,746,340.17 18,273,952.17 110.57 % 5/7/2026 8:08:18 AM Page 17 of 23 Page 81 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 10.a Council to convene as the Board of Equalization. Staff Contact: City Council Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 82 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 10.b Council to adjourn as the Board of Equalization and reconvene as the Scottsbluff City Council. Staff Contact: City Council Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 b) Page 83 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.a Council to consider action on the first reading of the Ordinance levying special assessments on the land and real estate upon which unsafe structures were located at 1216 and 1220 5th Avenue, resulting in their subsequent demolition. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 84 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. --- AN ORDINANCE FINDING, ASCERTAINING, DETERMINING, EQUALIZING AND FIXING THE BENEFITS TO AND LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON THE LAND AND REAL ESTATE UPON WHICH UNSAFE STRUCTURES WERE LOCATED AND THEIR SUBSEQUENT DEMOLITION IN THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING THE COSTS FOR DEMOLITION TO THE EXTENT OF SPECIAL BENEFIT TO SUCH LANDS AND REAL ESTATE AND TO PUBLISH IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: Section 1. That, for the purpose of paying the cost of demolition because of unsafe structures, including asbestos abatement and site stabilization in the City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska ("City"), the Mayor and City Council, sitting as a Board of Equalization, after publication of notice to the property owners and a public hearing as required by section 4-6- 22 of the Municipal Code, and afterdue consideration, determine such costs of the City to be the amount of $40,050.00, and find,ascertain, determine, equalize and fixbenefits to, and levy assessments on the followinglands and real estate forthe demolition of unsafe structures within the City as follows: OWNER OF REAL ESTATE BENEFIT ASSESSMENT RECORD Lincoln Trust Lot Twelve (12), SECOND HALL $20,025.00 $20,025.00 Company, Custodian ADDITION to ScottsbluffNebraska, in FBO Bruce A. Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska; according to Langlois, IRA the recorded plat thereof. Lot Thirteen(13), SECOND HALL $20,025.00 $20,025.00 Lincoln TrustFBO ADDITION to the City of Scottsbluff, Scotts Bruce Langlois Bluff,County, Nebraska. Section 2. That such assessments shall be, and the same are hereby made and declared to be a lien upon such lands and real estate fromand afterthe date of this Ordinance, and shall become delinquent in twenty (20) days after such date, shall draw interest at a rate of six percent (6%) per annum from such date until the assessment shall become delinquent, and thereafter shall draw interest at the rate of nine percent (9%) per annum. Section 3. Such assessments shall be payable at the officeof the City Finance Director in City Hall. Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication shall be in pamphlet form. Passed and approved on this __ day of May, 2026. Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: Kimberley Wright, City Clerk (Seal) Approved as to Form: City Attorney Page 85 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.b Council to consider action on the first reading of the Ordinance dealing with the number of apprentice plumbers that may assist master plumbers and journeyman plumbers. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 b) Page 86 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. --- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF,NEBRASKA AMENDING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 53 DEALING WITH THE NUMBER OF APPRENTICE PLUMBERS THAT MAY ASSIST MASTER PLUMBERS AND JOURNEYMAN PLUMBERS, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF,NEBRASKA: Section 1. Chapter 4, Article 3, Section 53, of the ScottsbluffMunicipal Code is now amended to provide as follows: "§ 4-3-53 SAME; APPRENTICE PLUMBER; CERTIFICATE. An apprentice plumber holding a certificateissued by the Plumber Inspector may assist the holder of a master plumber's license in the installation and repair of plumbing, but may not perform the actual installation or repair. Provided, not more thanfour (4) apprentice plumbers may be employed to assist one master plumber, nor may more than three (3) apprentice plumbers per journeyman plumber be employed. (Ord. 1116, passed 2-25-1957; Ord. 2445, passed -- 1979; Ord. __, passed __, 2026)" Section 2. Any prior code sections at Chapter 4, Article 3, Section 53, and all other ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflictwith this Ordinance are repealed. However, this Ordinance shall not be construed to affect any rights, liabilities, duties, or causes of action, either criminal or civil, existing or actions pending at the time this Ordinance has become effective. Section 3. This Ordinance shall become effectiveupon its passage, approval and publication. Publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED ON ______, 2026. Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Page 87 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.c Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to Annex Two Tracts of Land situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and the Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M., commonly identified as 21st Avenue and County Road K Right-of- Way. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 c) Page 88 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING TWO TRACTS OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19 IN TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 54 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY, NEBRASKA AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: Section 1. The following described real estate is found and declared to be contiguous and adjacent to the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska (“City”), to be urban or suburban in character, and not to be agricultural land which is rural in character: A Tract of Land Situated in The Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, More Particularly Described as Follows: Beginning At the Intersection of The West Line of The Southwest Quarter Of Section 18, And the Easterly Extension of The South Right-Of-Way Line Of 34th Street, As Platted and Recorded in Deed Book 88, Page 140, In the Scotts Bluff County Register of Deeds Office; Thence Easterly on Said Easterly Extension Of the South Right-Of-Way Line Of 34th Street, To the Point Of Intersection With the East Right-Of-Way Line of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), Said Right-Of-Way Line Being 33.00 Feet East of And Parallel with The West Line of Section 18; Thence Southerly on Said East Right-Of-Way Line Of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), To the Point of Intersection with The Centerline Of the Enterprise Canal; Thence Westerly on The Centerline Of Said Canal, To the Point of Intersection with The West Line of The Southwest Quarter Of Section 18; Thence Northerly on Said West Line of The Southwest Quarter Of Section 18, To the Point of Beginning. And A Tract of Land Situated in The Southwest Quarter of Section 18 And The Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of The 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, More Particularly Described As Follows: Beginning At the Southwest Corner of Section 18, Thence Northerly on The West Line of The Southwest Quarter of Section 18, To the Point Of Intersection With the Easterly Extension of The North Line of Lot 1, Block 6, Indian Hills Addition, As Platted and Recorded in Deed Book 147, Page 37, In The Scotts Bluff County Register of Deeds Office; Thence Easterly on Said Easterly Extension of The North Line of Lot 1, To the Point of Intersection With The East Right-Of-Way Line of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), Said Right-Of-Way Line Being 33.00 Feet East of And Parallel with The West Line Of Section 18; Thence Southerly on Said East Right-Of-Way Line of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), To the Point of Intersection with The North Right-Of-Way Line of County Road K, Said Right-Of-Way Line Being 33.00 Feet North Of and Parallel with The South Line of Section 18; Thence Easterly On Said North Right-Of-Way Line of County Road K, To the Point of Intersection With The East Line of a Tract of Land as Described in Instrument 2000-5652; Thence Southerly on The East Line of Said Tract, And Southerly Extension Thereof, To the Point of Intersection with The South Right-Of-Way Line Of County Road K, Said Right-Of-Way Line Being 33.00 Feet South of And Parallel With The North Line of Section 19; Thence Westerly on Said South Right-Of- Way Line of County Road K, To the Point of Intersection with The East Right- Of-Way Line of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), Said Right-Of-Way Line Being Page 89 of 657 33.00 Feet East of And Parallel with The West Line of Section 19; Thence Southerly On Said East Right-Of-Way Line of Sugar Factory Road (21st Avenue), To the Point of Intersection with The Easterly Extension of The South Line of a Tract of Land as Described in Miscellaneous Book 91, Page 357; Thence Westerly on Said Easterly Extension of The South Line of Said Tract, To the Point of Intersection with The West Line of The Northwest Quarter Of Section 19; Thence Northerly on Said West Line of The Northwest Quarter Of Section 19, To the Point of Beginning (“real estate”). Section 2. The real estate described above is annexed to and included within the corporate limits of the City, and hereafter shall be and remain a part of the City for all purposes whatsoever as of the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 3. Any map describing the corporate limits of the City is amended to provide for the addition of the real estate to the corporate limits of the City. Section 4. The inhabitants of the real estate described above shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges, and subject to all the laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of the City. Such inhabitants shall receive substantially the benefits of other inhabitants of lands within the City as soon as practical, and adequate plans and necessary City Council action, if any, to furnish such benefits as police, fire, snow removal, sanitation and water service shall be adopted as provided in Section 16-120 R.R.S. (Reissue 2022). Section 5. All ordinances, parts of ordinances, resolutions and policies of the City in conflict with this Ordinance are repealed. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED on June ___, 2026. __________________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk (Seal) Approved as to form: _____________________________ City Attorney Page 90 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.d Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to consider the Zoning Text Amendment to Chapter 25, Article 4 regarding Fences. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 d) Page 91 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA AMENDING AND REVISING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 4, DEALING WITH FENCES AND WALLS, TO CLARIFY MATERIALS AND SIMPLIFY THE FENCING REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, AND TO REPEAL AND REVISE RELATED CODE SECTIONS AT CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 44 AND 45, SECTION 25, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 12 AND CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 22, SECTION 6 OF THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: 1. Section 1. Chapter 25, Article 4, of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is now amended and revised to provide as follows: “§ 25-4-1 INTENT. The regulations in this article govern the type, location, and construction of fences, walls, and hedges. §25-4-2 DEFINITIONS. a. OPEN FENCE: A fence where the design of the fence has more than fifty percent (50%) of the surface area open. b. CLOSED FENCE: A fence where the design of the fence has more than fifty percent (50%) of the surface area closed. c. CURB SIDEWALK: A sidewalk built adjoining the curb of a public street. d. FENCE HEIGHT: The height of a fence measured from the average grade of the ground, measured within eighteen (18) inches on either side of the fence. §25-4-3 APPLICABILITY. (A) The regulations contained in this article shall apply to all fences with a height above grade of thirty (30) inches and over. (B) A permit to erected a fence is required in all districts, except A, AR, and R-1B. §25-4-4 RESIDENTIAL FENCES. Fences constructed within residential districts, excluding R-1B, or on land used for residential purposes in the O-P district are subject to the following provisions: (A) Construction Requirements Page 92 of 657 a. Front. i. All fences constructed in front yard building setbacks shall not exceed forty-eight (48) inches in height. ii. All fences constructed in front yard building setbacks shall be constructed as an open fence. b. Street Side. iii. All fences constructed in the street side yard building setback shall not exceed seventy-two (72) inches, except; iv. A closed fence exceeding forty-eight (48) inches shall not be constructed adjoining a curb sidewalk. v. All fences constructed in the street side yard building setback may be constructed as a closed fence. c. Interior Side and Rear. vi. All fences constructed outside of a front or street side yard building setback shall not exceed seventy-two (72) inches. vii. All fences constructed outside of a front or street side yard building setback may be constructed as a closed fence. (B) Material Requirements a. Fences shall be constructed of wood, chain-link, PVC/resin, stone or masonry materials, or ornamental metals only. b. Fences shall not be constructed of railroad ties, salvage, or sheet metal. c. Barbed wire and/or electrified fences are not permitted within the corporate limits of the city and are defined as any fence that includes in its material barbs, blades, razors, electric current or other features specifically designed to injure or abrade an individual or animal who attempts to negotiate the fence. §25-4-5 COMMERCIAL, PUBLIC, AND INDUSTRIAL FENCES. Fences constructed within commercial, public, and industrial districts are subject to following provisions: (A) Construction Requirements a. Front and Street Side. i. All fences constructed in the front and street side yard building setbacks shall not exceed forty-eight (48) inches. Page 93 of 657 ii. If no front or street side yard building setback is present, all fences constructed shall not exceed ninety-six (96) inches. b. Interior Side and Rear. i. All fences constructed outside a front or street side yard building setback shall not exceed ninety-six (96) inches. (B) Material Requirements a. Fences shall not be constructed of railroad ties or salvage. b. Barbed wire and electrified fences are not permitted within the corporate limits of the city. Except barbed wire may be used in the construction of fencing in an industrial district provided that the bottom strand of the barbed wire shall be at least eighty-four (84) inches above ground level and said fence complies with the provisions of 20-5-31. §25-4-6 SIGHT TRIANGLE; STREETS; ALLEYS. (A) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article to the contrary, no fence exceeding thirty-six (36) inches in height, measured from the average grade of the ground, measured within eighteen (18) inches on either side of the fence, may be built within the sight triangle as defined in the subsections below. a. Streets. i. A triangular area bounded on two sides by the intersecting street right-of- way lines and on the third side by a line connecting points on each right- of-way line which are twenty (20) feet from their intersection. b. Alleys. i. A triangular area bounded on two sides by the intersecting right-of-way lines of the alley and adjoining side street and on the third side by a line connecting points on each right-of-way line which are located at the Page 94 of 657 distance from their intersection which are ten (10) feet from their intersection. §25-4-7 FENCES IN RIGHT-OF-WAY. No fences are allowed in the public right-of-way, except when allowed with a permit under the provisions of Chapter 20 of the Municipal Code. §25-4-8 OBSTRUCTION OF VISION; PROHIBITED. Anything in this article to the contrary notwithstanding, no fence may be constructed or maintained if it will obstruct the view from or to any driveway approach, street, alley, or sidewalk. §25-4-9 FENCES ON RETAINING WALLS. If a fence is constructed on the top of a retaining wall, the height of the fence is measured from the ground on the low side of the retaining wall; A retaining wall must be adequately designed, constructed, and drained to withstand any lateral pressure to which it is subject. §25-4-10 EFFECTS ON DRAINAGE. In all districts, fences shall be constructed and maintained so as to avoid limiting or obstructing the flow of water in natural drainage course or drainageways created within easements. §25-4-11 UTILITY EASEMENTS; FENCES ON. (A) In all Districts, a fence erected on a tract of land subject to an easement for the construction, maintenance, operations, or replacement of any water, sanitary or storm sewer, gas line, electric power, telephone, or other utility poles, or other cables or lines shall be designed and constructed to be readily removable, as determined by the Development Services Director, to permit the use of the easement. Such fences shall be Page 95 of 657 subject to removal by request whenever necessary to permit access. The cost of removal or replacement shall be the responsibility of the owner of the fence. (B) Permission by the Development Services Director to construct a fence on land that is subject to an easement shall not bind, and shall be without prejudice to the rights of, owners of easements other than the City. §25-4-12 FENCE; DILAPIDATED; DUTY TO REPAIR OR REMOVE. Fences must be kept in repair. The Development Services Director or his/her designee may order any dilapidated fence repaired or removed. §25-4-13 FENCE; VIOLATIONS; NUISANCE. Any fence constructed or maintained in a violation of any of the provisions of this article is hereby declared to be a nuisance. §25-4-14 OTHER PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO FENCES. (A) Fences in Mobile Home Parks: 25-9-9 (B) Fences in Planned Unit Developments: 25-7-34 (C) Off-Street Parking Lot Fences: 25-5-13 (D) Prohibition of Barbed Wire Fences: 20-5-31 (E) Refuse Collection Point Screening: 25-22-11 (F) Retaining Walls and Fences in Right-of-Way: 20-4-2 through 20-4-6 (G) Satellite Earth Station Fences: 25-21-3 Page 96 of 657 (H) Screen Fences: 25-22-7 (I) Wind Energy Conversion System Fences: 4-8-6 and 4-8-7 (J) Wireless Communication Tower Fences: 25-24-6.” 2. Section 2. Chapter 25, Article 2 Sections 44 and 45 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code are now repealed. 3. Section 3. Chapter 25, Article 7, Section 7 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is amended to provide as follows: “§25-7-12 WALLS AND FENCES. The general development standards in Article 4 of this chapter for fences, walls, and hedges as shall apply to fences, walls, and hedges in planned unit developments, providing the Planning Commission may require additional walls and fences if it determines that such walls or fences are necessary to protect adjacent properties or occupants of the planned unit development.” 4. Section 4. Chapter 25, Article 22, Section 6 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is amended to provide as follows: “§25-22-6 STREET YARD LANDCAPE PROVISIONS. (A) Depth of street yard landscape area. Landscaping shall be required adjacent to each street property line and shall extend from the right-of-way to a minimum depth inward of ten feet on private property for all land uses and zoning classifications. Provided however, that this requirement shall not be applicable land that is used for single-family or two-family residential uses. (1) Street yard landscaping depth may be reduced to not less than five feet in order to meet off-street parking requirements. (B) Location of street trees. All trees and shrubs planted in the street yard landscape area shall meet the spacing and location requirements of this chapter and those of Chapter 20, Article 7 of the Municipal Code. (C) Repealed.” 5. Section 5. Any prior code sections at Chapter 25, Article 4, Chapter 25, Article 2, Sections 44 and 45, Chapter 25, Article 7, Section12, and Chapter 25, Article 22, Section 6, and Page 97 of 657all other ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are repealed. However, this Ordinance shall not be construed to affect any rights, liabilities, duties, or causes of action, either criminal or civil, existing or actions pending at the time this Ordinance has become effective. 6. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. Publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED ON _____________, 2026. ______________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: ___________________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Approved as to form: __________________________________ City Attorney Page 98 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.e Council to consider action on the second reading of the Ordinance to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code to create the Public Use District within the City’s zoning jurisdiction. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 e) Page 99 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE DEALING WITH ZONING, AMENDING SECTION 25-1-4 BY UPDATING THE OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICT MAP TO SET FORTH VARIOUS PARCELS, LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE ZONING JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF WHICH ARE NOW DESIGNATED IN THE NEW PUBLIC USE DISTRICT, THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED IN VARIOUS ZONING DISTRICTS, A COPY OF THE VARIOUS PROPERTIES ALONG WITH THEIR SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY ASSESSOR IDENTIFACATION NUMBER, ADDRESS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS ATTACHED TO THIS ORDINANCE MARKED AS EXHIBIT “A” AND INCORPORATED IN THIS ORDINANCE BY REFERENCE, ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ON EXHIBIT “A” WILL NOW BE INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC USE DISTRICT (P) AND THE ZONING MAP SHALL BE AMENDED, REPEALING PRIOR SECTION 25-1-4, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: 1. Section 1. Chapter 25, 1-4 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is now amended to provide as follows: “§ 25-1-4, Zones: location maps. The boundaries of the zoning districts created in this chapter are shown on the zoning district map which is made part of this municipal code. The zoning district map and all information shown thereon shall have the same force and effect as if fully set forth and described herein. The official zoning district map shall be identified by the signature of the Mayor, attested by the City Clerk under the following statement: This is to certify that this is the official zoning district map described in §25-1-4 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code, passed this ______day of _________, 2026.” 2. Section 2. Previously existing Section 25-1-4 and all other Ordinances and parts of Ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are repealed. Provided, this Ordinance shall not be construed to affect any rights, liabilities, duties, or causes of action, either criminal or civil, existing or actions pending at the time this Ordinance has become effective. 3. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. Publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED ON _____________, 2026. ______________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: ___________________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Approved as to form: __________________________________ City Attorney Page 100 of 657City of Scottsbluff Exhibit A Present Zoning Parcel ID Address Legal Description Owner Acreage District Airport Authority of Scotts 10000068 - TR SE NE 19-22-54 (2.81) Bluff County 2.81 A 908 HILLTOP 10000272 ESTATE PL TR C, BLK 7, HILLTOP ESTATES SUB City of Scottsbluff 0.32 R-1A 10001138 - LT 2, BLK 2, WEBBER MANOR FOURTH ADD (3.88) City of Scottsbluff 3.88 C-2 10001608 - ACCR ATT TO GL 5 (1.2) City of Scottsbluff 1.20 AR 10001609 - ACCR ATT TO GL 8 (1.84) City of Scottsbluff 1.84 AR Board of Regents of the 10026029 - PT SE 10-22-55 (102.62) University of Nebraska 102.18 R-1A Board of Regents of the 10026045 4502 AVE I PT SE (S OF CANAL) 10-22-55 (19.44) University of Nebraska 19.44 R-1A 10027831 - PT SE (S OF DITCH) 14-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS (4.45) City of Scottsbluff 3.65 R-1A 10027874 1102 W 42ND ST PT NE NE, 15-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS State of Nebraska 22.61 R-1A Board of Regents of the 10042431 - PT S1/2 NW (N OF CANAL) 10-22-55 University of Nebraska 74.76 A 10051295 4505 5TH AVE PT S1/2 SW 12-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS (79.10) City of Scottsbluff 80.29 R-1A 1918 W SOUTH PT TL 14 AND ACCR SOUTH OF BELTLINE 27-22-55 10110127 BELTLINE HWY UNPLATTED LANDS (33.00) City of Scottsbluff 57.35 A LTS 1-12 BLK 1, LTS 1-12 BLK 4, LTS 1-6 BLK 5, LTS 1-6 BLK 6 10130241 - IMPERIAL FIRST ADD AMENDED City of Scottsbluff 8.77 R-1A 10229388 4109 5TH AVE PT N 1/2 NW 13-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS (46.09) City of Scottsbluff 45.10 R-1 10230807 400 E 20TH ST ALL BLK 1, SIXTH ADD City of Scottsbluff 2.82 R-1A 10232346 - LT 2, BLK 1, NORTHWOOD ADD REPLAT City of Scottsbluff 1.00 R-1A Page 101 of 65710234624 801 W 31ST ST BLK 2, NORTHWOOD ADD City of Scottsbluff 8.38 R-1A 10268898 - BLK 3, LACY PARK SUB City of Scottsbluff 3.35 A BLK 1A SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY COLLEGE TRACTS REPLAT Western Nebraska 10294732 1601 E 27TH ST (64.14) Community College 65.09 R-1 UNIT 1 WNCC/ESU#13 TECHNOLOGY CENTER Western Nebraska 10299424 - CONDOMINIUM REPLAT Community College 0.60 O&P 10299432 - BLK 4, SYKES ADD City of Scottsbluff 3.14 O&P 10301526 4215 AVE I PT SW SW (600'X600') 11-22-55 (8.26) UNPLATTED LANDS Educational Unit 13 8.27 R-4 N 100'OF S 193'OF E 100'OF W 163'OF SW SW 12-22-55 Nebraska Public Power 10301534 4201 5TH AVE UNPLATTED LANDS (.26) District 0.23 R-1A 10301542 - TR IN SW SW 12-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS (.44) City of Scottsbluff 0.44 R-1A 1600 W SOUTH PT ACCR GOVT LTS 1-3, 27-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS 10301593 BELTLINE HWY (PARK & ZOO) City of Scottsbluff 109.31 A PT SW SW, 15-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS CEDARVIEW 10303294 - ROAD(UN VACATED/DEDICATED) City of Scottsbluff 1.30 C-3 10303561 1615 20TH ST BLK 1-2, CLEVELAND ADD City of Scottsbluff 18.98 R-1A 10303596 - LTS 11-13, BLK 3, WESTMOOR 5TH ADD City of Scottsbluff 1.16 R-1A 10303618 1914 AVE I BLK 1, WESTMOOR 6TH ADD City of Scottsbluff 2.07 R-1A 10303626 - LT 1, BLK 1, WESTMOOR 7TH ADD City of Scottsbluff 1.20 R-1A 10303669 1722 AVE K WESTMOOR SCHOOL ADD Scottsbluff School District 9.18 R-1A 10303987 - LT 10A, BLK 3, MCKINLEY FOURTH ADD Scotts Bluff County 0.04 R-1 Board of Regents of the 10304347 - PT E1/2 SW, PT W1/2 SW (N ENT CAN) 10-22-55 (12.38) University of Nebraska 12.39 A 10304355 4500 AVE I PT E1/2 SE, 10-22-55 (3.28) State of Nebraska 3.28 R-1A 10304363 - PT E1/2 SE 10-22-55 State of Nebraska 5.07 R-1A 10304401 - PT S1/2 SW, UNPLATTED LANDS (.23) City of Scottsbluff 0.23 R-1A 10304460 1102 W 42ND ST PT NE NE,15-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS State of Nebraska 5.51 R-1A 10305122 - LT 1, BLK 1, NORTHWOOD ADD City of Scottsbluff 0.20 R-1A 10305149 2810 1ST AVE W 151.5' OF S 900' EX S 300', WILLIAM FRANK PARK ADD State of Nebraska 1.95 R-1A E 300' & VACATED 1ST AVE N OF 29TH ST & W 151.5' EX S 900', 10305157 2912 1ST AVE WILLIAM FRANK PARK ADD City of Scottsbluff 12.92 C-2 Page 102 of 657 10305165 313 E 27TH ST BLK 1B, FRANK SCHOOL ADD REPLAT Scottsbluff School District 26.24 R-1A 10305262 1809 3RD AVE ALL BLK 2, FIFTH ADD AMENDED City of Scottsbluff 2.07 R-1A 10305335 2212 AVE C BLK 3A, SECOND LINCOLN HEIGHTS ADD Scottsbluff School District 2.04 R-1A 10305408 2401 BROADWAY HIGH SCHOOL TR Scottsbluff School District 20.95 R-1A LTS 1-6, BLK 1, & LTS 1-3, BLK 2, REPLATOF BLK 41, NORTH 10305416 - SCOTTSBLUFF ADD Scottsbluff School District 2.31 R-1A 10305424 - LTS 15-16, BLK 1, COOKS ADD City of Scottsbluff 0.42 R-1A 240071 HIGHLAND 10305580 RD BLK 1, LACY PARK SUB City of Scottsbluff 18.84 A 10306056 - ROW IN SW 10-22-55 (4.28) Enterprise Canal 4.28 A 2620 COLLEGE Western Nebraska 10336095 PARK DR BLK 1A, SYKES ADD Community College 7.31 O&P 10339884 - PT N1/2, 17-22-54 (23.91) Scotts Bluff County 23.33 A 10344144 1306 9TH AVE PT TL 5, TL 9, 24-22-55 UNPLATTED LANDS Scottsbluff School District 2.27 R-1A 10344152 2005 5TH AVE LONGFELLOW SCHOOL ADD Scottsbluff School District 4.11 R-1A 10355618 2617 COLLEGE PK BLK 2A, SYKES ADD Scottsbluff School District 12.44 O&P WNCC/ESU#13 TECHNOLOGY CENTER CONDOMINIUM Western Nebraska 10356932 - REPLAT Community College 5.61 O&P 010229345 Airport Authority of Scotts (Partial ) - PT N 1/2, 17-22-54 Bluff County 31.44 A Page 103 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.f Council to consider action on the third reading of the Ordinance regarding the definition of fowl and to provide an exception for chickens in Chapter 2, Articles 2 and 3. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 f) Page 104 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA AMENDING THE SCOTTSBLUFF MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 2, ARTICLES 2 AND 3, TO INCLUDE A DEFINITION FOR FOWL IN ARTICLE 2 AND TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR CHICKENS UNDER ARTICLE 3, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: 1. Section 1. Chapter 2, Article 2, Section 9.1 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is now amended to provide as follows: “§ 2-2-9.1 FOWL Any birds of the order Galliformes. This shall include chickens, turkeys, pheasants and similar domesticated birds or fowl.” 2. Section 2. Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 15 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is now amended to provide as follows: “§ 2-3-15 FOWL AND POULTRY; KEEPING OF It is unlawful to own, keep, or harbor any fowl within the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff, except the ownership, keeping, or harboring of chickens according to the following requirements: (A) Any person owning chickens may own, keep, or harbor them in the rear yard, as defined by §25-2-140 of this code, provided an exception may be granted by the Development Services Director in instances where the rear yard is insufficient in area and/or width due to the location of existing structures; (B) The principal use of the property comprises of a detached single-family dwelling; (C) Owning, keeping, or harboring more than eight (8) chickens is prohibited; (D) Owning, keeping, or harboring roosters is prohibited; (E) Slaughtering chickens in prohibited; (F) Chickens must be kept in an enclosed structure at all times according to the following requirements: (1) The enclosed structure shall be no greater than 100 square feet; (2) The enclosed structure must be kept within a fenced yard of a single-family dwelling; (3) The enclosed structure shall fit the definition in Chapter 25 of the Municipal Code and must adhere to the accessory building setbacks for the side yard and rear yard of the underlying zoning district; and (4) The enclosed structure must be kept in a clean and orderly manner, so as not to Page 105 of 657 become a nuisance, as defined in Chapter 12 of the Municipal Code, to the general neighborhood in which the said enclosed structure is located (G) Commercial sale of eggs is prohibited.” 3. Any prior code sections at Chapter 2, Articles 2 and 3, and all other ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are repealed. However, this Ordinance shall not be construed to affect any rights, liabilities, duties, or causes of action, either criminal or civil, existing or actions pending at the time this Ordinance has become effective. 4. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its passage, approval and publication. Publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED ON _____________, 2026. ______________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: ___________________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Approved as to form: __________________________________ City Attorney Page 106 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.g Council to consider action on the third reading of the Ordinance to Annex a tract of land situated in the East Half of Section 10, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, commonly identified as 4500 and 4502 Avenue I. Staff Contact: Zachary Glaubius Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 g) Page 107 of 657 ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF NEBRASKA, ANNEXING UNPLATTED REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 55 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY, NEBRASKA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, AND THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT 2008-1629, THENCE NORTHERLY ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, THENCE WESTERLY ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 42ND STREET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, PIEPER FAMILY SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN INSTRUMENT 2025-1364, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 1, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 10, THENCE NORTHERLY ON SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 12, FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 147, PAGE 493, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ENTERPRISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT CANAL, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AND THEN SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AND ON SAID CANAL RIGHT OF WAY LINE, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 202, PAGE 582, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 1, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AND ON SAID CANAL RIGHT OF WAY LINE, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT AS PLATTED IN FAIRWAY ESTATES SUBDIVISION, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT, TO THE MOST SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF BLUE JAY COURT, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BLUE JAY COURT, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 2, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 202, PAGE 582, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 2, GREENVIEW SUBDIVISION, AND ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ENTERPRISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT CANAL, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 183, PAGE 745, THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 121, PAGE 448, THENCE EASTERLY ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF A TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, THENCE SOUTHERLY TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A TRACT OF LAND AS ALSO DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 185, PAGE 194, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT AND ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 71, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AMENDING SECTION 25-1-3.1 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF, NEBRASKA: Page 108 of 657SECTION 1. Nebraska Department of Transportation and The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska (“Owners”) have requested that the following described real property (the “Real Estate”) be included within the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff. A Tract of Land Situated in The East Half of Section 10, Township 22 North, Range 55 West of the 6th P.M., Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, More Particularly Described as Follows: Beginning At the Intersection of The West Right of Way Line of State Highway No. 71, As Described in Deed Book 185, Page 194, And the North Right Of Way Line Of 42nd Street, Thence Westerly on The North Right of Way Line Of 42nd Street, To the Point of Intersection with The East Line of a Tract of Land As Described in Instrument 2008-1629, Thence Northerly on The East Line Of Said Tract, To the Northeast Corner of Said Tract, Thence Westerly on The North Line of Said Tract, To the Northwest Corner of Said Tract, Thence Southerly On the West Line of Said Tract, To the Point of Intersection With The North Right of Way Line Of 42nd Street, Thence Westerly on The North Right Of Way Line Of 42nd Street, To the Southeast Corner of Block 1, Pieper Family Subdivision, As Recorded in Instrument 2025-1364, Thence Northwesterly On the Easterly Line of Said Block 1, To the Point Of Intersection With the West Line of The Southeast Quarter of Said Section 10, Thence Northerly on Said West Line of The Southeast Quarter, To The Southwest Corner of Block 12, Fairway Estates Subdivision, As Recorded In Deed Book 147, Page 493, Thence Easterly on The Southerly Line of Said Fairway Estates Subdivision, To the Point of Intersection with The Northerly Right Of Way Line of The Enterprise Irrigation District Canal, Thence Northeasterly And Then Southeasterly on The Southerly Line of Said Fairway Estates Subdivision, And on Said Canal Right of Way Line, To The Northwest Corner of Block 1, Greenview Subdivision, As Recorded in Deed Book 202, Page 582, Thence Continuing Southeasterly on The Southerly Line Of Said Block 1, Greenview Subdivision, And on Said Canal Right of Way Line, To The Point of Intersection with The West Right of Way Line of Blue Jay Court As Platted in Fairway Estates Subdivision, Thence Southerly on The West Right of Way Line of Blue Jay Court, To the Most Southwesterly Corner Of Blue Jay Court, Thence Easterly on The South Right of Way Line of Blue Jay Court, To the Northwest Corner of Block 2, Greenview Subdivision, As Recorded In Deed Book 202, Page 582, Thence Southeasterly on The Southerly Line of Said Block 2, Greenview Subdivision, And on The Northerly Right Of Way Line of The Enterprise Irrigation District Canal, To the Point Of Intersection With the West Right of Way Line of State Highway No. 71, As Described In Deed Book 183, Page 745, Thence Southerly on The West Right Of Way Line of State Highway No. 71, To the Point of Intersection with The North Line Of a Tract of Land as Described in Deed Book 121, Page 448, Thence Easterly On the North Line of Said Tract, To the Southeast Corner of a Tract Of Land as Described in Deed Book 185, Page 194, Thence Southerly to The Northwest Corner of a Tract of Land as Also Described in Deed Book 185, Page 194, Thence Continuing Southerly on The West Line of Said Tract And On The West Right of Way Line of State Highway No. 71, To the Point Of Beginning. SECTION 2. The Real Estate is contiguous or adjacent to the existing corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff, is urban or suburban in character, and does not constitute agricultural land which is rural in character. SECTION 3. The Real Estate is annexed to and included within the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff as of the effective date of this Ordinance. Page 109 of 657SECTION 4. The description and jurisdiction as provided for in Section 14-1-1 and 25-1-3.1 of the Scottsbluff Municipal Code is amended to provide for the addition of the Real Estate to the corporate limits of the City of Scottsbluff. SECTION 5. The Owners have requested annexation pursuant to §18-3301 and §16-117 of the Nebraska Revised Statutes and have waived the requirements of §16-120 of the Nebraska Revised Statutes which would otherwise require the City of Scottsbluff to provide to their Real Estate substantially the same services as are provided to other inhabitants of the City. SECTION 6. Section 25-1-31.1 of the Municipal Code is now amended and all ordinances, parts of ordinances, resolutions, and policies of the City of Scottsbluff in conflict with this Ordinance are repealed. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its approval, passage, and publication shall be in pamphlet form. PASSED AND APPROVED this ____ day of May, 2026. ______________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Approved as to Form and Legality: ___________________________________ City Attorney Page 110 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 11.h Council to discuss and consider action on a Resolution extending the obligation of funding for ambulance services for an additional four years, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Resolution. Staff Contact: Kimberley Wright Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 h) Page 111 of 657 RESOLUTION ____________ Be it resolved by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska that: 1. The City of Scottsbluff, the City of Gering, and the County of Scotts Bluff, entered into an agreement captioned “Agreement for the funding of Ambulance Services within Service Area under the Interlocal Cooperation Act”, which agreement has been extended on several occasions. 2. That following the last extension of said agreement, the provider of said ambulance service has transferred from Valley Ambulance Service, Inc. to Regional West Medical Center (RWMC). 3. Public safety, convenience, and welfare will be enhanced by the continuation of the agreement for an additional period of four (4) years with the understanding that the provider of the ambulance services is now RWMC. 4. The City of Scottsbluff now notifies the County Clerk of Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, and the Clerk of the City of Gering, Nebraska, of its agreement to continue the obligation of funding ambulance services for an additional four (4) year period ending June 30, 2030, subject to the same terms and provisions that existed in the Agreement for the funding of Ambulance Services within the Service Area under the Interlocal Cooperation Act of July 1, 2002 with the exception of the change noted in paragraph three (3) above and the contribution amounts set forth herein below. 5. The amount the City of Scottsbluff will contribute the following amounts which shall be payable to the County of Scotts Bluff, Nebraska: a. July 2026 to June 2027 $821.67 each month or $9,860.04 per year; b. July 2027 to June 2028 $838.10 each month or $10,057.20 per year; c. July 2028 to June 2029 $854.85 each month or $10,258.20 per year; and Page 112 of 657 d. July 2029 to June 2030 $871.95 each month or $10,463.40 per year. 6. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. Passed and approved this ___ day of ______________, 2026. _____________________________ Betsy Vidlak, Mayor ____________________________ Kimberley Wright, City Clerk Page 113 of 657 Agreement for Emergency Medical Services This Emergency Medical Services Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into on this _____ day of _____________,2026, by and between the County of Scotts Bluff in the State of Nebraska (hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY) and Regional West Medical Center (hereinafter referred to as RWMC). Together, the COUNTY and RWMC are referred to as the PARTIES. WHEREAS, the provision of emergency medical services is an essential service for the preservation of life, the mitigation of injury, and the protection of public welfare; and WHEREAS, ensuring the availability and continuity of emergency medical services is in the best interest of the individuals residing, working, or traveling in the COUNTY; and WHEREAS, a need exists within the COUNTY for primary and tiered emergency medical services; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES acknowledge that entering into this Agreement serves a valid public service and is in the best interest of the County and its residents; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, and agreements contained herein, the PARTIES, hereby, agree as follows: Section 1. Definitions: 1. SERVICE AREA shall be the area within the State of Nebraska within the boundaries of Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska. 2. REQUIREMENTS shall mean the laws of the United State of America and the State of Nebraska and regulations promulgated by agencies of the United States of America and the State of Nebraska applicable to the operations, clinical care and reimbursement of emergency medical services. 3. ALS means Advanced Life Support and further defined in Nebraska Title 172 Chapter 12 Section 002.01 4. BLS means Basic Life Support and further defined in Nebraska Title 172 Chapter 12 Section 002.02 1 Page 114 of 657Section 2. Contingency 1. The COUNTY's obligations under this Agreement, including the payment of any fees set forth herein, are expressly contingent upon the execution of one or more separate agreements (the "City Agreements") by and between the COUNTY and (i) the City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska, and (ii) the City of Gering, Nebraska (collectively, the "Cities"), under which the Cities agree to pay their proportionate shares of such fees. 2. Notice and Effective Date. COUNTY shall provide written notice to RWMC promptly upon execution and approval of both City Agreements by the respective governing bodies. This Agreement shall commence only upon delivery of such notice, and no payments or performance shall be required prior thereto. 3. RWMC consents to this contingency, acknowledges no rights or remedies against COUNTY arising therefrom, and agrees to cooperate (e.g., provide call volume data) to facilitate the City Agreements. Section 3. Terms: 1. The term of this agreement will be for forty-eight (48) months commencing on July 1, 2026; no automatic renewal – requires COUNTY Board approval. 2. Termination: (a) For cause (material breach, safety violation): 30 days post-notice with 15- day cure; (b) Mutual: This agreement may be cancelled by either party for nonperformance upon a 90-day written notice. Section 4. Responsibilities of RWMC: 1. RWMC will furnish at least three ALS equipped ambulances which comply with the REQUIREMENTS. 2. RWMC will provide twenty-four (24) hours of every day of the week at least one (1) primary crew of at least two persons and one (1) standby crew of at least two persons that meet the REQUIREMENTS. 3. RWMC maintains control of the operations for the emergency medical service 2 Page 115 of 657 including but not limited to staff configuration, emergency unit location, emergency unit configuration, management of the medical aspects of a scene, care and management of patients during transport, request and use of air medical transport, and prioritization of calls. 4. RWMC will not deny emergency medical service to any person in the COUNTY based on the ability to pay when the request for services is by a dedicated number such as 911, alarm system activations, or request from law enforcement, fire services or another EMS agency and the transport of the patient is to the nearest appropriate hospital. 5. RWMC maintains the right to require payment day of service, complete an advance beneficiary notice, or deny service for inability to pay to any person within the COUNTY when such call for service is a non-emergent request, does not meet medical necessity, and/or the destination is a non-covered location. 6. RWMC is responsible for all operating costs of the emergency medical service including a. Professional liability insurance b. Worker compensation c. Vehicle insurance d. Supplies, uniforms and equipment e. Repairs and maintenance f. Emergency unit purchase and maintenance g. Emergency unit housing and crew housing h. Employee payroll, payroll taxes, and benefits 1. Record keeping, billing and collection 7. RWMC is responsible for billing services provided to patients in compliance with the REQUIREMENTS and this agreement. 8. RWMC will provide services to Inmates of the Scotts Bluff County Detention Center and being held by the COUNTY pursuant to this agreement at no additional charge. RWMC may bill other jurisdictions for services for Inmates held by Scotts Bluff County Detention Center under the authority of the federal government, state government, county government or other government sub-divisions except Scotts Bluff County. 3 Page 116 of 657 9. RWMC will submit an annual report of emergency medical service operations, call volume, and current billing schedule. 10. RWMC shall designate and maintain, at its sole cost, a Physician Medical Director for the EMS service at all times during the term of this Agreement. The Physician Medical Director shall meet or exceed all requirements of the Nebraska Emergency Medical Services Practice Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 38-1201 et seq., and all applicable rules and regulations promulgated by the Nebraska Board of Emergency Medical Services, including, without limitation, the physician medical director qualifications, responsibilities, protocols, standing orders, supervision, and oversight requirements set forth in Nebraska law and 172 Neb. Admin. Code ch. 12. The Provider shall promptly notify the County of any change in the Physician Medical Director and shall ensure continuous compliance with all applicable state requirements. Section 5. Responsibilities of the COUNTY: 1. The COUNTY shall remit to RWMC the amount from; a. July 2026 to June 2027 $3,697.50 each month not to exceed 44,370.00 per year b. July 2027 to June 2028 $3771.45 each month not to excess 45,257.40 per year c. July 2028 to June 2029 $3846.85 each month not to exceed 46,162.14 per year d. July 2029 to June 2030 $3923.78 each month not to exceed 47,085.38 per year 2. Provide at no cost dispatch services to RWMC for all calls originating from universal emergency number 911 or, requests from other agencies coordinated by the Scotts Bluff County Consolidated Communications Center. These services include; i. Public safety answering point ii. Notification of RWMC m. Provide incident updates iv. Track all date and times of the incident v. Forward non-emergent communications relating to RWMC emergency medical service to RWMC vi. Allow access to two-way radio frequencies and/or channels as needed for communications with the Scotts Bluff County Consolidated 4 Page 117 of 657 Communications Center and emergency responders in the COUNTY Section 6. Insurance 1. RWMC shall procure and keep in force at its expense (1) commercial general liability insurance of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) coverage per occurrence with a Two Million Dollar ($2,000,000) general aggregate, (2) automobile liability insurance of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit; (3) professional liability insurance covering its activities hereunder affording not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) coverage per incident with Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) coverage aggregate; and (4) workers' compensation insurance covering all personnel involved with the services provided under this agreement who are its employees. RWMC will furnish County with evidence of such insurance upon request. Section 7. Liability 1. Each party will be responsible for its own acts and omissions under this agreement. Neither party will indemnify the other or hold it harmless except as may be required by federal, state or local law. Section 8. Miscellaneous 1. Audit Requirements. RWMC shall maintain and preserve all books, records, reports, invoices, supporting documentation, and other materials to the services provided under this Agreement for the period required by applicable law. Provider shall make such records available, upon reasonable request, to the County, the County’s auditors, the State of Nebraska, any federal agency, and any other person or entity authorized to audit or review RWMC’s compliance, to the extent necessary for the County to comply with all applicable state and federal laws, regulations, grant conditions, reimbursement requirements, and reporting obligations. RWMC shall cooperate fully with any audit, inspection, investigation, or review related to the services and shall provide access in a timely manner and without unreasonable delay. 5 Page 118 of 657 2. Completeness of Agreement. This Agreement expresses the entire agreement of the parties, neither party relying on any statement or representation not contained herein. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement between the parties. 3. Amendment. Any amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be set forth in a document signed by both parties. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – signature pages to follow] 6 Page 119 of 657 IN WI1NESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have signed this agreement, to be effective July 1, 2026. SCOTTS BLUFF COUNTY, NEBRASKA _____________________________________________ Mark Harris Chair Scotts Bluff County Commissioners Attest: __________________________________ Kelly Sides, Scotts Bluff County Clerk REGIONAL WEST MEDICAL CENTER Neb Resch President and Chief Executive Officer 7 Page 120 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 12.a Council to discuss and consider action on a Community Festival Permit for Broadway Bar and Arcade, 1717 Broadway, Scottsbluff, NE for the Broadway Bar and Arcade Anniversary Car Show on May 23, 2026 from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Permit includes closing Broadway and between 18th and 17th Streets from 7:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. Staff Contact: Kimberley Wright Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 121 of 657 APPLICATION COMMUNITY FESTIVAL, BUSINESS PROMOTIONAL EVENT, CARNIVAL PERMIT To be filed with the city Clerk at least 14 days, but no more than one year before proposed event. 1.__ _____________________________________________________________________________ (name of sponsoring organization) ________________________________________________________________________________ (street) (city) (state) (telephone number) _________________________________________________ ______________________________ (chairperson responsible for event ) (day telephone number) 2._________________________________________________________________________________ (name of co-sponsoring organization) ________________________________________________ ________________________________ (street) (city) (state) (telephone number) __________________________________________________ ______________________________ (contact person) (day telephone number) 3. Event Information ___ _____________________________________________________________________________ (name of event) __________________________________________________________________________________ (date(s) of event) (time(s) of event) ________________________________________________________________________________ (location of event) 4. Activity Information Describe general activities including whether there will be any vendors, music, loudspeakers. Serving or selling of alcoholic beverages*, etc.) ________________________________________________.______________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ *If alcoholic beverages will be sold or served, a special permit will be required. The applicant should contact the City Clerk for more information. 5. Street Closure _________________________________________________________________________________ Please note any streets to be closed and the times required for closure 6. Flags/Banners/Signs _______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Carnivals - If event includes a carnival, the next sheet should be completed. Page 122 of 6578. Have you provided for a public liability insurance policy naming the City as additional insured? Yes___________ No ____________ Community Festival/Business Promotion Street Carnival $200,000 for one person $ 800,000 for one person $500,000 for any one accident $ 2,000,000 for any one accident $ 50,000 for injuries to property $ 200,000 for injuries to property 9. Have you provided either a $2,500.00 cash deposit or surety bond for clean up. (This will be returned after it is determined that no repairs or clean up is required by City). Yes _________________ No ___________________ I (We) agree to abide by all regulations as stated in the Scottsbluff Municipal code regulating this permit. Dated:________________________________ Signed: _________________________________________ _______________________________________ (name of sponsoring organization) (signature of authorized representative of sponsoring organization) _________________________________________ _______________________________________ (name of co-sponsoring organization) (signature of authorized representative of co-sponsoring organization) Page 123 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 13.a Council to discuss and consider action on approving and accepting the final report for the Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All (SS4A) Project. Staff Contact: Kevin E Spencer Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 a) Page 124 of 657appendices Page 125 of 657Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan SAFE STREETS | STRONG COMMUNITY Page 126 of 657SCOTTSBLUFF SAFE STREETS FOR ALL SAFETY ACTION PLAN Plan Appendices The following appendices provide detailed technical information, supporting analysis, and expanded documentation for the Scottsbluff Safe Streets and Roads for All Safety Action Plan. These materials supplement the main report and are intended to support implementation, funding applications, and ongoing safety coordination efforts. The full set of appendices is also available online. View the Plan Appendices: Scan the QR code below or visit the project website: bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A The appendices include detailed information on crash analysis, High Injury Network (HIN) development, project sheets, cost estimates, engagement summaries, and supporting policies and programs. These materials are intended to be used by City staff, partner agencies, and stakeholders as a working resource to guide implementation of the Safety Action Plan over time. Page 127 of 657 A1 A2 A3 engagement collisions crash maps Community survey summaries, Tables and heat maps breaking HIN intersection overviews and event summaries down crashes city-wide crash trees A4 A5 A6 findings baseline data maps Key takeaways from analysis, showing Foundational Context for Maps used throughout the biggest safety concerns and gaps Understanding Scottsbluff Streets project A7 A8 A9 methods projects countermeasures Breaking down data sources, Detailed project sheets and Detailed overview of solutions analytical methods breakdown, cost estimates A10 A11 A12 support documentation supplemental assessments Summaries of Stakeholder FHWA concurrence and task Additional assessments sessions, letters of support force summaries conducted throughout the project Page 128 of 657 A1 engagement 5 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 129 of 657 A1 - Engagement Contents A1.1 SS4A Community Survey results ................................................................. 7 A1.2 SS4A Short Survey results ............................................................................8 A1.3 Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan Update survey results ...........................9 A1.4 Open house and event summaries .............................................................12 Open House Kickoff at 18th Street Plaza – Bands on Broadway ............................. 12 Oregon Trail Days Downtown and Legion Park Pop-Ups ......................................... 12 Summer Reading Wrap Up Party Pop-Up ................................................................................................. 13 Back to School Orientation at Scottsbluff High School, Bluffs Middle School, Westmoor Elementary School ..................................................................................... 13 2nd Annual Beef, Beans & Bluegrass ......................................................................... 14 Rotary Club Presentation - Community Safety Insights ............................................. 15 National Night Out Pop-Up Engagement Summary .................................................. 16 Empowering Families Trick-or-treating Event at 18th Street Plaza ............................17 Regional West Medical Center (RWMC) Annual Open Enrollment Benefits Fair ......17 Guadalupe Center Centennial Cinco de Mayo Fiesta ............................................... 18 A1.5 Media Outreach and Public Notice .............................................................19 Articles featured in Scottsbluff Star-Herald newspaper ........................................... 20 A1.6 School Stakeholder Summaries ..................................................................21 Roosevelt Elementary—Parents and Teachers Association ...................................... 21 Lincoln Heights Elementary ....................................................................................... 22 Bluffs Middle School ................................................................................................... 22 Longfellow Elementary .............................................................................................. 23 Westmoor Elementary ................................................................................................ 24 St Agnes Catholic School ........................................................................................... 25 Community Christian Elementary School .................................................................. 25 A1.7 Public Safety Stakeholders .........................................................................26 Scottsbluff Police & Fire, Regional West EMS, Nebraska State Patrol ..................... 26 A1.8 Public Transit Stakeholder ...........................................................................30 Public Transit Manager, Roadrunner Public Transit .................................................. 30 A1.9 Community Traffic Safety Comment Map Summary.................................32 A1.10 Key Takeaways & Themes from Public Input ............................................. 34 A1.12 Summary Charts from Public Input Survey ................................................36 A1.10 Key Takeaways & Themes from Public Input .............................................36 A1.12 Free Responses to Public Input Survey ......................................................41 6 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 130 of 657A1.1 SS4A Community Survey results Safety Action Plan. SS4A Community Survey Summary 1 — Highway 26 & Major Corridors Are the (Improve Driving Safety / Near Misses / Walk & Highest Safety Priority Bike / Lighting) Residents overwhelmingly identified Highway As part of the Safe Streets for All planning 26 and other high-volume arterials as the most process, the City conducted an SS4A community dangerous places to travel, citing speeding, red- survey to capture resident experiences related to light running, truck braking distance, and frequent traffic safety, near misses, and comfort walking, near misses at major signalized intersections. biking, and driving in Scottsbluff. The survey 2 — Driver Behavior & Enforcement Are Central was available online and promoted through City to Safety communication channels and public outreach Distracted driving, speeding, and red-light activities. Hundreds of residents participated, violations were repeatedly cited as daily risks. providing both quantitative responses and open- Respondents emphasized the need for visible ended comments. enforcement, accountability, and education to Survey results showed strong alignment with change unsafe driving behavior. crash data and stakeholder feedback. Speeding, 3 — Intersections & Signal Operations Need distracted driving, poor visibility, and red-light Improvement running were among the most frequently cited Participants highlighted short or unclear signal safety concerns. Highway 26 emerged as the timing, lack of protected left turns, poor lane corridor of greatest concern, particularly at major guidance, and visibility issues as contributors intersections where residents reported frequent to crashes and near misses—especially along near misses and serious crashes. Respondents Highway 26 and at complex intersections. also identified school areas and residential neighborhoods as locations with elevated safety 4 — School Zones & Neighborhood Streets risk due to congestion, inconsistent traffic control, Need Targeted Protection and limited enforcement during peak periods. School-area congestion, speeding, and crosswalk The survey further highlighted barriers to walking violations were common concerns. Residents and bicycling, including missing sidewalks, supported stronger school-zone standards, inadequate lighting, and lack of separation operational changes during pick-up/drop-off, and from vehicle traffic along major corridors such traffic calming on neighborhood streets. as Highway 26, Avenue I, Broadway, and East 5 — Walking & Biking Are Limited by Safety, Not Overland. Many participants expressed support Desire for improved crossings, pathway connections, Many respondents avoid walking or biking due lighting upgrades, and traffic calming measures. to missing sidewalks, unsafe crossings, lack Overall, survey findings directly informed the of separation from traffic, and poor lighting— prioritization of projects, policies, and programs particularly along Highway 26, Overland, Avenue included in the Safety Action Plan. I, Broadway, and 27th Street. SS4A Survey Key Themes 6 — Lighting, Visibility, and Maintenance Matter Survey responses revealed a consistent set Inadequate lighting, faded markings, vegetation of safety priorities across locations, modes, blocking sightlines, and rough pavement were and respondent types. These themes directly frequently cited as factors that increase crash risk informed the development and prioritization of and reduce comfort for all users. projects, policies, and programs included in the 7 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 131 of 657Overall, survey themes strongly align with the ● Target / WNCC area plan’s recommended projects, policies, and ● Sugar Factory Road programs focused on corridor safety, speed management, school safety, multimodal 2. Speed Management and Signal Timing connectivity, lighting/visibility, and maintenance/ Strong support for: markings. ● Lower speed limits through town A1.2 SS4A Short Survey results ● Longer yellow and all-red intervals Short SS4A surveys were administered in ● Protected left-turn arrows person at multiple outreach events between ● Advance warning / “prepare to stop” August and November 2025, including: flashers ● National Night Out Many comments note trucks cannot stop ● Downtown pop-up outreach safely with current timing. ● Westmoor Elementary School orientation 3. Enforcement and Driver Behavior ● Bluffs Middle School orientation Repeated statements that: ● Rotary Club presentation ● “Signs don’t work without enforcement” ● Regional West Medical Center employee ● Drivers ignore red lights, stop signs, and benefit fair (largest event) speed limits This approach allowed the project team Support for: to collect input from residents, parents, ● Increased police presence healthcare workers, transit riders, bicyclists, ● Traffic cameras (especially on Hwy 26 and and drivers in a low-barrier, conversational near schools) setting. Short Survey Key Themes ● Visible consequences for violations 4. School-Area and Neighborhood Safety 1. Highway 26 Is the Community’s Top Safety Concern Concerns around: Mentioned in the majority of responses ● Westmoor Elementary Issues include: ● Bluffs Middle School ● Red-light running ● Longfellow Elementary ● Speeding ● Residential grids with inconsistent yield/ stop control ● Short yellow and left-turn phases Suggested solutions: ● Heavy truck stopping challenges ● Crossing guards ● Poor visibility at signals and crosswalks ● One-way or parking restrictions during bell Repeated locations: times ● Avenue I ● Slower speeds ● Avenue B ● More predictable intersection control ● 5th Avenue ● 27th Street 8 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 132 of 657 “Speed limits “Highway 26 is don’t work if they “School pickup and drop- dangerous. People are not strictly off times are chaos. We run red lights enforced.” need slower speeds and constantly, and better crossings.” trucks can’t stoptime.” in “It’s hard to see people “Any point where crossing early in the I have to cross morning and at night.” Highway 26 feels unsafe.” QUOTES PULLED FROM SS4A SHORT SURVEYS 5. Walking, Biking, and Pathway Gaps A1.3 Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan Strong desire for: Update survey results ● Continuous sidewalks The Comprehensive Plan Update Survey also ● Multi-use pathways captured input from a broad cross-section of ● Safer crossings of Highway 26 residents across age groups, neighborhoods, and travel modes, providing additional ● Better separation from traffic perspective on everyday transportation Many respondents avoid walking or biking due safety concerns experienced throughout the to: community. ● Speed Supporting Plans and Community Input: ● Lighting Comprehensive Plan Update — Survey ● Lack of protection Findings 6. Lighting, Visibility, and Maintenance Between October 2024 and March 2025, the Frequent mentions of: City of Scottsbluff conducted a Comprehensive Plan Update Survey that included extensive ● Poor lighting at Hwy 26 intersections input related to transportation, traffic safety, ● Dark crossings near schools, parks, zoo, and mobility. Approximately 300 residents and pathways participated, with nearly 290 respondents ● Faded pavement markings answering transportation-specific questions. Although the survey was not conducted as ● Potholes and rough rail crossings part of the SS4A process, its findings provide Lighting viewed as both a safety and personal independent, citywide validation of the safety security issue challenges identified through crash analysis, High Injury Network (HIN) mapping, and SS4A stakeholder engagement. 9 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 133 of 657 Survey responses indicate that residents school zone safety, pedestrian visibility, and have low confidence in the safety of streets, a balanced approach combining engineering, intersections, and pedestrian crossings. Fewer enforcement, and education. than half of respondents agreed that streets and intersections are safe, and a majority The Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan disagreed or expressed uncertainty that the Update Survey confirms that Scottsbluff City is doing enough to address transportation residents experience and prioritize the same safety. These perceptions align closely with transportation safety challenges identified crash data findings that identify severe crashes through data-driven SS4A analysis. These concentrated along major corridors and at findings provide strong community support for high-volume intersections. the SS4A Safety Action Plan’s recommended projects, programs, and policies. Residents demonstrated strong support for walking, biking, and pathway infrastructure, Comp Plan Survey Key Themes with a clear majority supporting expansion A. High-Risk Corridors (US Highway 26, 27th of the pathway system. Many respondents Street, Broadway) reported regular use of walk/bike paths, trails, ● “Every Hwy 26 intersection — too many parks, and community facilities, underscoring speeding and red-light runners.” the importance of providing safe, connected facilities that support active transportation for ● “All the intersections along Highway 26 all ages and abilities. from Sugar Factory Road to Avenue I. So many accidents every year.” Open-ended survey responses revealed ● “Highway 26 and 27th Street — turning left strong geographic consistency in perceived is very dangerous and people run the red safety concerns. US Highway 26 was by far lights constantly.” the most frequently cited corridor residents avoid due to traffic safety concerns, followed ● “Broadway is used like a drag strip. It’s by 27th Street, Avenue I, Broadway, railroad extremely unsafe, especially at night.” crossings, and school areas. Commonly cited Validates corridor-based HIN focus, signal issues included speeding, red-light running, visibility improvements, speed management, poor signal visibility or timing, lack of safe and enforcement. pedestrian crossings, and conflicts near B. School Zones & Youth Safety schools and railroad infrastructure. ● “Any streets at school time. Drivers are When asked how Scottsbluff should address never paying attention.” safety concerns, residents consistently ● “27th Street by the high school — chaos identified solutions that align with proven every day, especially during arrival and SS4A strategies. These included improved dismissal.” signalization and warning systems, enhanced pedestrian crossings, sidewalk completion, ● “School crossing zones on 5th Avenue — lighting upgrades, speed management, cars do not stop in the current crosswalks.” stronger enforcement presence, and Supports school-zone standardization, expanded education and driver training— crossings, flashing beacons, and operational particularly in school areas. Collectively, safety programs. these responses reinforce the SS4A Plan’s emphasis on corridor-based improvements, 10 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 134 of 657 C. Pedestrian Crossings, Sidewalks, and Pathways ● “Most crosswalks downtown have no walk lights, and sidewalks are uneven.” ● “I am scared to bicycle in most parts of town… cars and bikes don’t know how to share the road.” ● “Pedestrian safety with button-activated crosswalks, like by the high school.” Direct support for RRFBs/PHBs, ADA improvements, sidewalks, and pathway connectivity. D. Speeding, Red-Light Running & Enforcement ● “Far too many choose to speed. I’d like to see cops pulling more people over.” ● “Highway 26 intersections — people are always running those lights.” ● “More police presence and actual enforcement of speed and school zones.” Supports education & enforcement strategies and data-driven deployment. E. Rail Crossings & Emergency Access ● “All the railroad crossings in town are horrible and damage vehicles.” ● “There should be an overpass somewhere more central — not just west of town.” ● “Railway Street and Broadway — congested, poorly designed, and unsafe.” Reinforces rail safety emphasis, access planning, and long-term grade separation concepts. These Comprehensive Plan survey themes provide additional context and demonstrate consistency with the safety priorities identified through the SS4A public engagement process. 11 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 135 of 657 A1.4 Open house and event summaries offered to those who interacted with the booth. Feedback was positive, with many expressing Open House Kickoff at 18th Street Plaza – appreciation that safety improvements are Bands on Broadway being pursued and that their input is valued. Date: Thursday, July 10, 2025 Oregon Trail Days Downtown and Legion Time: 5:00–8:30 p.m. Park Pop-Ups Location: 18th Street Plaza, Downtown Scottsbluff Dates: Friday & Saturday, July 12-13, 2025 As part of the public kickoff for the City of Times: 5:00—7:30 p.m.; 9:00 a.m.—2:00 p.m. Scottsbluff’s Safe Streets and Roads for All Locations: 10th Street and Legion Park in Gering (SS4A) Safety Action Plan, M.C. Schaff & during Oregon Trail Days Associates hosted a pop-up open house at the 18th Street Plaza during a Bands on Broadway To build on momentum from the kickoff event. The team set up an informational event, the SS4A team held additional pop- booth just outside the fenced concert area to up outreach events during the Oregon Trail maximize accessibility and visibility. Days festival in Gering. Booths were set up in a high-traffic area downtown between the The event was a strong success, attracting a International Food Fair and the Car Show to steady stream of foot traffic throughout the engage both locals and visitors. evening. Attendees were invited to: Staff shared project materials, answered • Learn more about the SS4A planning process questions, and encouraged public input on • View preliminary crash data and safety maps transportation safety. Like the kickoff, QR • Place stickers on a large poster map to codes were displayed for the online survey indicate where they live and comment map, and giveaways were distributed in exchange for participation. • Share local safety concerns Many attendees took time to mark locations of • Answer printed surveys provided in both concern or interest on the large printed map English and conversational Spanish or scanned the digital tools to participate later. • Access the online survey and interactive The informal and festive atmosphere helped commenting map via QR codes foster conversations that might not have Giveaway items like bike lights, drawstring happened in a more formal setting, including bags, tumbler glasses, and van zoomies were input from youth and older residents. 12 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 136 of 657Summer Reading transportation coloring sheet and a flyer with Wrap Up Party Pop-Up safe travel tips invitation for parents to explore the project website, complete the survey, : Tuesday, July 22, 2025 Dates and add comments to the online map. The : 6:00—7:30 p.m. Times event successfully combined summer fun with : Scottsbluff Public Library Location meaningful safety education. At the Scottsbluff Summer Reading Wrap- Up Party, the SS4A team hosted a lively and Back to School Orientation at Scottsbluff engaging popup event that combined learning High School, Bluffs Middle School, with fun. A standout feature was the Quick- Westmoor Elementary School Quiz Poster Dice Game, where kids rolled Dates: Saturday, August 12-13, 2025 dice, matched their total to a quiz question, Times: 5-8 p.m.; 8 a.m.-3 p.m.; 3:30-6:00 p.m. and discussed their answer with SS4A team Locations: Scottsbluff High School, Scottsbluff members and their parents. The questions, Middle School, Westmoor Elementary School tailored for different age groups, focused on The SS4A outreach team participated in multiple traffic signals, helmet safety, crosswalk use, back-to-school orientation events, including and “think-it-through” safety scenarios. Silly the high school’s freshmen and new student questions were included to boost laughter and orientation, four middle school orientation participation while reinforcing key messages. sessions, and Westmoor Elementary orientation. Kids also enjoyed cornhole and giant Jenga, At each location, the team set up in the lobby to with SS4A-themed prizes for different cornhole greet parents and students, answer questions, outcomes: a drawstring bag for missing the and gather feedback on traffic safety concerns. board, bike lights for a shot on the board During the middle school sessions, the SS4A (“Woody”), and a van-shaped zoomie for project was also highlighted in a presentation getting a bag in the hole (“Cornhole”). A slide, adding visibility. themed “I Walk/Bike/Roll to Read!” photo booth with themed props and word bubbles At Westmoor Elementary, the orientation offered another way for kids to interact, while featured a scavenger hunt for all parents and encouraging families to share photos with students, with the SS4A pop-up as one of SS4A hashtags. Finally, each child received the required stops. This interactive approach a Safety Starter Kit to take home, including a led to high participation, allowing the team to hand out over 300 postcards in just a few 13 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 137 of 657 hours. The event provided an opportunity to Intersections / Signals / Speeding – 90 lima, 220 other discuss parents’ safety concerns and promote (670 total) the project’s online resources, including the School Zones & Parking – 39 lima, 126 other (321 total) website, survey, and comment map. Highway Corridors – 30 lima, 121 other (271 total) Overall, these pop-ups expanded community Bicycle Infrastructure – 27 lima, 116 other (251 total) exposure to the SS4A project and fostered Broadway & Downtown – 15 lima, 133 other (208 total) direct engagement with families across Pathway Connections – 15 lima, 83 other (158 total) multiple school sites. Crosswalks & Sidewalks – 8 lima, 105 other (145 total) 2nd Annual Beef, Beans & Bluegrass Streetscape Improvements – 13 lima, 79 other (144 total) Dates: Saturday, August 23, 2025 East Overland Corridor – 11 lima, 76 other (131 total) Times: 10:00 a.m.—8:00 p.m. Public Transit (Bus Pullouts) – 9 lima, 78 other (123 total) Location: Broadway, Downtown Scottsbluff West 27th Street – 6 lima, 67 other (97 total) The SS4A outreach team hosted an interactive The results show that intersections, signal booth at the Beef, Beans & Bluegrass festival to operations, and speeding are the community’s engage residents and visitors from surrounding top priorities, followed by school zone safety, areas in the city’s Safe Streets for All planning corridor improvements, and active transportation effort. The team shared key findings from local connections. crash data (2014–2023), highlighting serious and In addition to voting, attendees engaged in fatal (KSI) crash trends, top contributing factors, numerous one-on-one conversations about and the importance of identifying priority safety local traffic safety, shared feedback on high-risk improvements through community input. locations, and offered valuable context about Participants were invited to “vote with beans” daily travel challenges. Several participants also for the types of safety projects they felt were completed the public survey and contributed most important. Each person received one lima new points to the online comment map. The bean worth five votes and five smaller beans event successfully reached a broad regional worth one vote each, which they could distribute audience and combined data education with a among project categories. A total of 263 people fun, hands-on activity—providing the SS4A team participated, casting votes across eleven with strong, community-driven input to help guide categories. Results (lima votes, other bean votes) project priorities and future implementation steps. are shown below in order of total votes received: 14 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 138 of 657 Help us Spill the BEANS Where’sLet us knowthe where BEEF? Set the TONE on Street Safety! you see safety issues! for Safer Streets! Don’t FIDDLE Around with Safety! Help our project! Rotary Club Presentation - Community cast votes for intersections, corridors, or other Safety Insights areas they perceived as high-risk based on their personal experiences and observations. Dates: Saturday, October 7, 2025 Times: 11:00 a.m.—1:00 p.m. During the presentation, the project team shared Location: Scottsbluff Country Club actual KSI crash data and maps, highlighting where severe crashes have occurred between As part of ongoing community engagement 2014 and 2023. This comparison allowed for the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan, the participants to see how their perceptions of project team met with the Scottsbluff/Gering danger aligned with—or differed from—verified Rotary Club to present an overview of the plan crash data. and gather local insights on traffic safety. The presentation introduced the Safe Streets for The session concluded with a group discussion All (SS4A) program and Vision Zero principles, in which members shared their primary safety emphasizing the goal of eliminating fatal and concerns and local insights, including common serious injury (KSI) crashes through a proactive, risk factors and potential improvement ideas. data-driven approach. The exercise provided valuable feedback about community perceptions of risk, while Upon arrival, Rotary members were invited to also reinforcing how crash data supports the participate in an interactive activity to identify prioritization of safety projects across Scottsbluff. what they believed to be the most dangerous traffic locations in the Scottsbluff area. Members 15 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 139 of 657 National Night Out Pop-Up Engagement Summary Help Make Scottsbluff’s streets Safer! ¡Ayuda a hacer las calles de Help Make Scottsbluff’s ¡Ayuda a hacer las calles de Dates: Tuesday, August 5, 2025 Scottsbluff más seguras! streetsYOU CAN Safer! MAKE A DIFFERENCE! Scottsbluff más seguras! Vision Zero: Times Vision Zero is a safety strategy : 6:00—8:00 p.m. employedYOU by communities CAN acrossMAKE AWe DIFFERENCE!Need Your Help: ¡TÚ PUEDES HACER LA DIFERENCIA! the country and the world with the Vision Zero: WeThroughout Need Your the Help: course of Scottsbluff Visión Cero: Visión Cero es una Necesitamos tu ayuda: Durante fundamental concept that no one ¡TÚ PUEDES HACER LA DIFERENCIA! Vision Zero is a safety strategy ThroughoutSafe Streets thefor courseAll project, of Scottsbluff we will be estrategia de seguridad adoptada el desarrollo del proyecto Calles should be killed or seriously injured Visión Cero: Location employed by communities across workingSafe Streets with fora talented All project, team we of will engi be- por comunidades en todo el país y Seguras para Todos en Scottsbluff, : Broadway, Downtown Scottsbluff while using roadways. estrategia de seguridadVisión Cero adoptada es una the country and the world with the neersworking and with stakeholders a talented inteam the comof engi- - en todo el mundo, basada en la idea trabajaremos con un talentoso equipo por comunidades en todo el país y Thefundamental City of Scottsbluff concept thatwas recentlyno one munity.neers andThis, stakeholders in combination in thewith com data- fundamental de que nadie debería deNecesitamos ingenieros ytu miembros ayuda: de la en todo el mundo, basada en la idea awardedshould grantbe killed funding or seriously from the injured US analysis,munity. willThis, guide in combination the projects. with data morir ni resultar gravemente herido comunidad.el desarrollo Este del proyectotrabajo, junto Calles con el fundamental de que Durante while using roadways. analysis, will guide the projects. al usar las vías públicas.nadie debería análisisSeguras de para datos, Todos guiará en Scottsblufflos proyectos., Department of Transportation’s Safe However, this only tells part of the As part of the Safe Streets and Roads for morir ni resultar gravemente herido trabajaremos con un talentoso equipo Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) story. We need your input to see the La ciudad de Scottsbluff recibió reciente- Pero eso solo cuenta parte de la The City of Scottsbluff was recently However, this only tells part of the al usar las vías públicas. de ingenieros y miembros de la program in order to complete an whole picture! Visit our website, fill out mente fondos del programa Safe Streets historia. ¡Necesitamos tu opinión para awarded grant funding from the US story. We need your input to see the La ciudad de Scottsbluff recibió reciente- comunidad. Este trabajo, junto con el Action Plan focused on achieving the survey, add pins, and upvote other and Roads for All (SS4A) del Departa- ver el panorama completo! Visita Department of Transportation’s Safe whole picture! Visit our website, fill out mente fondos del programa Safe Streets análisis de datos, guiará los proyectos. Vision Zero while improving safety people’s comments on the interactive mento de Transporte de los EE. UU. para nuestro sitio web, completa la encuesta, All (SS4A) public engagement program, the Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) the survey, add pins, and upvote other and Roads for All (SS4A) del Departa- for all roadway users in the Scotts- desarrollar un Plan de Acción enfocado en agrega pines en el mapa interactivo program in order to complete an commentingpeople’s map! comments YOUR onhelp the will interactive Pero eso solo cuenta parte de la bluff community – whether driving, mentoalcanzar de Transporte Visión Cero de losy mejorar EE. UU. la para seguri - de comentarios y vota a favor de los Action Plan focused on achieving makecommenting Scottsbluff map!streets YOUR safer! help will historia. ¡Necesitamos tu opinión para walking, biking, or more. desarrollardad para un todasPlan de las Acción personas enfocado usuarias en de comentarios con los que estés de Vision Zero while improving safety make Scottsbluff streets safer! ver el panorama completo! Visita alcanzarlas vías Visión en Cerola comunidad y mejorar de la Scottsbluff—seguri- nuestroacuerdo. sitio web,¡TU ayuda completa hará la que encuesta, las calles project team participated in National Night for all roadway users in the Scotts- dad para todas las personas usuarias de ya sea conduciendo, caminando, bluff community – whether driving, agregade Scottsbluffpines en el mapa sean interactivomás seguras! las víasen en bicicleta la comunidad o de cualquier de Scottsbluff— otra forma. walking, biking, or more. YOURYOUR VOICES. VOICES. de comentarios y vota a favor de los ya sea conduciendo, caminando, comentarios con los que estés de SAFER CHOICES. en bicicleta o de cualquier otra forma. Out (NNO), a nationwide annual event focused SAFER CHOICES. acuerdo.TUS VOCES. ¡TU ayuda DECISIONES hará que las SEGURAS. calles de Scottsbluff sean más seguras! on community safety, crime prevention, TUS VOCES. DECISIONES SEGURAS. and neighborhood connections. The event Safe StreetsScottsbluff for AllScottsbluff Calles Seguras para Todos Safe Streets for All en Scottsbluff bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A was held on along Broadway in downtown Calles Seguras para Todos en Scottsbluff Scottsbluff and attracted a large number of bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A families, children, and community members. Staff answered questions about the SS4A The project team hosted an SS4A pop-up tent program and Vision Zero principles and and worked closely with the Scottsbluff Police discussed local safety concerns, particularly Department to integrate transportation safety related to speeding, crossings, and school- outreach into the event. Approximately 500 area safety. SS4A project postcards were provided to the Police Department for inclusion in participant A key component of the pop-up was gift bags, significantly expanding project interactive safety conversations with children visibility beyond direct interactions at the tent. and families, reinforcing safe walking, biking, and street-crossing behaviors in an During the event, the team engaged in approachable and age-appropriate way. one-on-one conversations with residents, Participation in National Night Out allowed distributed project materials, promoted the the project team to reach residents who may SS4A project website, and encouraged not attend traditional public meetings and to participants to complete the online safety integrate transportation safety messaging into survey. Several short, paper-based surveys a trusted, community-oriented event focused were also completed at the event. on public safety. 16 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 140 of 657 Slow Drive Like Down for candy Your Costume collectors! Drive Safe. Walk Bright. Ride Smart. depends on it ! Be Seen. Be Safe. Be Spooky! Empowering Families Trick-or-treating candy corns and candy pumpkins—on priority Event at 18th Street Plaza project categories. We collected 1,158 votes and distributed bilingual English/Spanish info : Friday, October 31, 2025 Dates cards about the SS4A program. Times: 3:30—6:30 p.m. Location: 18th Street Plaza Regional West Medical Center (RWMC) Western Nebraska Empowering Families Annual Open Enrollment Benefits Fair hosted a community trick-or-treat event at the Dates: Thur.-Fri., November 7, 2025 18th Street Plaza in downtown Scottsbluff on Times: 1:00—7:00 p.m., 7:00 a.m.—Noon Friday, October 31, 2025, providing a safe, Location: RWMC family-friendly space for children to enjoy The SS4A team also hosted a project-category Halloween activities. The event featured local voting and information booth at the RWMC partners, giveaways, and supervised trick-or- Annual Open Enrollment Fair, where ~130 treating in a well-lit public setting. employees and local vendors used beans to vote The SS4A Scottsbluff team partnered with on priority projects and completed short surveys director Maricia Guzman at the Western about their top traffic-related safety concerns. Nebraska Empowering Families trick-or-treat Participants were encouraged to engage for a event, hosting a pop-up table where we chance to win a gift basket, resulting in strong handed out candy and invited grandparents, turnout and valuable input for the plan. parents, and older children to vote—using 17 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 141 of 657 Guadalupe Center Centennial Cinco de Mayo Fiesta Date: Saturday, May 2, 2026 Time: 10:45 a.m.—1:30 p.m. Location: Guadalupe Center, 1200 E 9th Street The SS4A team hosted a project-category voting and information booth at the Centennial Cinco de Mayo Fiesta at the Guadalupe Center. Approximately 10 community members and local vendors participated by using beans to vote on priority project categories and completing short surveys focused on traffic safety concerns, preferred improvements, and feedback on the draft Safety Action Plan. Participants were encouraged to engage through a small giveaway incentive, which contributed to strong turnout and meaningful community input. This event provided valuable feedback and helped ensure representation from residents who may not typically participate in formal public meetings or online engagement efforts. 18 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 142 of 657A1.5 Media Outreach and Public Notice Prior to the public open house kickoff for the Scottsbluff Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan, the project team conducted advance public outreach through local media to promote awareness and encourage participation. A formal public notice1 announcing the project and upcoming open house was published on July 3, 2025, in the Scottsbluff Star Herald. In addition, project representatives participated in a local radio interview to discuss the SS4A program, Vision Zero principles, and opportunities for community input. These efforts helped ensure the public was informed in advance of the kickoff event and supported broad, accessible outreach to residents who may not participate in traditional public meetings or online engagement activities. 1Public Notice: https://starherald.column.us/ search?activeNotice=CcPm1oGscrnp17Ucx6kz-0 To announce the availability of the Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan draft for public review, the project team conducted targeted outreach through local media and social media to raise awareness and encourage participation. A formal public notice² was published in the Scottsbluff Star-Herald on May 7, 2026, directing residents to review the draft plan on the project website. Screenshots of public notices published in Scottsbluff Star Herald, July 3, 2025 These efforts, combined with in-person outreach at (above) and May 7, 2026 (below). the Guadalupe Center Cinco de Mayo Fiesta, helped broaden awareness of the review period and reach residents who may be less likely to participate in traditional public meetings or online engagement activities. 1Public Notice: https://starherald.column.us/ search?activeNotice=Z0T835V7vcRZD1jE2K3j-0 19 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 143 of 657 Articles featured in Scottsbluff Star-Herald newspaper Scottsbluff aims to reduce crashes through safer Streets for All effort (July 11, 2025) https://starherald.com/news/local/government- politics/article_f17a18f3-2f30-47af-bb0a- b8d4e69eb0df.html From Crosswalks to Overpasses, Scottsbluff’s Safe Streets Plan Takes Shape (February 4, 2026) https://starherald.com/news/local/article_37eebe04- 4c9e-49da-b688-9895dd0e93ac.html Scottsbluff City Council adopts ‘Vision Zero’ street safety policy (May 6, 2026) https://starherald.com/news/local/article_44d213a0- b317-4111-a143-c32fb2f58ed8.html Public Notice (May 7, 2026) https://starherald.column.us/ search?activeNotice=Z0T835V7vcRZD1jE2K3j-0 20 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 144 of 657A1.6 School Stakeholder Summaries at 9th and 17th, to improve safety and manage speeds. Roosevelt Elementary—Parents and A general concern that while the posted speed Teachers Association limit on East Overland is appropriate, it is not Dates: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 consistently followed or enforced. Location: Roosevelt Elementary School Additional issues raised included limited parking The Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team met with availability around the school, the impact of the approximately six members of the Roosevelt school bus parking directly in front of the building, Elementary School Parents and Teachers and the importance of maintaining crossing Organization (PTO), along with school staff and guard coverage—with the City providing one on the project team (Susan, Katherine, and Adolfo). East Overland and the school typically assigning The purpose of the meeting was to listen to another on 8th Avenue. parent and staff concerns regarding traffic safety Participants also mentioned other problem areas around the school and identify possible focus across Scottsbluff, including visibility issues areas for future SS4A safety improvements. at West Overland and Avenue Z, jaywalking Key issues discussed centered on the challenges concerns related to the homeless population of student drop-off and pick-up operations. along East Overland, ordinance enforcement Participants noted that morning drop-off is more for campers and trailers parked on streets, and problematic than afternoon pick-up, with traffic safety challenges at Highway 26 and 27th Street. backing up along East Overland Drive and The group expressed strong support for onto 8th and 9th Avenues. The school’s after- continued engagement and offered outreach school program, serving about 165 students, opportunities, including distributing SS4A helps reduce congestion during dismissal, but flyers through newsletters or parent–teacher the morning period remains highly congested. conferences (with district approval). Roosevelt Suggestions included exploring whether 8th has approximately 265 students, and Principal Avenue could be made one-way during school Frances invited the SS4A team to visit during hours to help alleviate backups caused by school dismissal times to engage directly with parents stopping and idling in the travel lane. parents or attend a staff meeting to discuss Attendees identified several specific intersections transportation and safety concerns with teachers. and traffic control issues, including: This listening session provided detailed, location- The intersection of East Overland and 9th specific feedback to inform the SS4A plan’s school Avenue, described as consistently problematic, zone safety strategies, circulation improvements, especially during school traffic periods. and enforcement coordination for East Overland The need for additional stop control at 15th and and adjacent neighborhood streets. 9th (currently through on 9th) and potentially 21 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 145 of 657 Lincoln Heights Elementary informally as needed. It is difficult to maintain morning crossing guard coverage, though no Date: Thursday, September 25 , 2025 major incidents have been reported. One staff Location: Lincoln Heights Elementary School member uses a stop sign on 23rd Street north of The Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team met with the school (between Avenues C and D) to assist Principal Jeremy Behnke of Lincoln Heights students crossing. Elementary School to discuss current school traffic operations, safety challenges, and potential Pedestrian Access and Safe Routes to School: improvements around the campus. Most students who walk to Lincoln Heights live east of the school. The principal expressed Arrival and Dismissal Operations: Lincoln interest in exploring a Safe Routes to School Heights begins classes at 7:55 a.m., with program to formalize and improve walking and breakfast starting at 7:20 a.m. when students may biking connections in this area. enter through the front doors. Afternoon pick-up occurs around 3:10 p.m. The principal described Emergency Evacuation & Secondary Location: the system as generally well organized, though The designated secondary evacuation site for limited parking continues to make circulation and Lincoln Heights is Bluffs Middle School (BMS), parent access challenging. though reaching it requires crossing Avenue B and Broadway, which presents safety challenges. Bus and Daycare Operations: School buses and The school is evaluating alternative locations for daycare vans load and unload along Avenue C, emergency evacuations. directly east of the school. Parents are not permitted to park in this area, and most follow posted signage. Weather and Drainage Issues: Snow removal This arrangement helps reduce parent–bus conflicts around the school is generally prompt, but a and maintains orderly traffic flow. major drainage issue along Avenue C causes persistent standing water in gutters, especially School Zones and Signage: Principal Behnke near bus loading zones. This results in splashing identified school zone signage and speed from buses, icy conditions in winter, and leaf enforcement as the top safety priorities for the decay accumulation in fall months. Lincoln Heights area. Existing signage is limited and could be improved for both clarity and Overall, Lincoln Heights has a functioning coverage, particularly along: circulation system but would benefit from enhanced school-zone visibility, stronger speed • West 22nd Street, from Avenue B to midway enforcement, improved drainage, and potential between Avenues D and E Safe Routes to School coordination to better • West 23rd Street, from Avenue B to midway support students who walk or bike. between Avenues D and E Bluffs Middle School Parents frequently park and travel along Avenues Date: Thursday, September 25, 2025 C and D, as well as W. 22nd and W. 23rd Streets, Location: Bluffs Middle School creating congested areas during arrival and dismissal. The Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team met with Principal Jana Mason and School District Crossing Guards and Supervision: School Safety Officer James Todd at Bluffs Middle staff serve as crossing guards at Avenue C and School (BMS) to discuss current school traffic W. 22nd/23rd Streets, while Principal Behnke operations, safety challenges, and ongoing and Assistant Principal Mrs. Rodriguez monitor coordination with the City. Avenue D and the same intersections. Staff do not currently wear high-visibility vests but assist Arrival and Dismissal Operations: BMS begins 22 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 146 of 657 Let’s Work Together for functions adequately, though congestion leaving Safer School Streets the parking areas is unavoidable and managed steadily without significant safety concerns. We're creating a Safety Action Plan to reduce crashes Overall, Bluffs Middle School maintains well- and improve walking, biking, structured bus operations and consistent and driving around town—especially crossing supervision, but faces persistent near schools. to share your input SCAN congestion from early parent queues and turning movements at East 23rd and Broadway. These insights highlight opportunities to improve Your voice helps shape better, safer streets in Scottsbluff. circulation design, signage, and coordination for classes at 7:45 a.m. and dismisses students at both daily dismissal and community events. 3:00 p.m. School buses load in the west parking lot near the gym entrance, typically clearing Longfellow Elementary out by 3:08 p.m. Once buses depart, parents Date: Thursday, September 25 , 2025 move into the second and third rows of parking Location: Longfellow Elementary School spaces to pick up students. Parent vehicles begin The Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team met with forming a queue in the southern circular drive as Principal Lukas Benzel of Longfellow Elementary early as 2:15–2:30 p.m., often resulting in double School to discuss school zone safety, circulation parking and complete blockage of the circle drive challenges, and areas for potential improvement during peak dismissal periods. around the campus. Traffic and Congestion Issues:Heavy Arrival and Dismissal Operations: congestion occurs when parents attempt left Longfellow’s school day runs from 7:50 a.m. turns from East 23rd Street onto Broadway, to 3:05 p.m. Students may arrive for breakfast frequently blocking traffic before and after beginning at 7:20 a.m., with general drop-off school. These bottlenecks are consistent daily starting around 7:40 a.m. The morning drop-off and impact both circulation and visibility. The process operates smoothly, but afternoon pick-up school benefits from crossing guards stationed remains a major challenge due to congestion and at Broadway and 24th Street, and at 2nd Avenue queuing behavior around the school. and 24th Street, who assist students after school and, in most cases, before school as well. Traffic and Congestion Issues: Parents often begin arriving up to two hours before Street Configuration and Safety Observations: dismissal to secure parking or queue positions for Maintaining two-way traffic on 2nd Avenue has pick-up. This early arrival contributes to extended been viewed positively, as the natural congestion congestion along adjacent streets, particularly near helps reduce vehicle speeds near the school. 5th Avenue, where frequent U-turns by drivers After dismissal, many students walk to Pioneer further complicate traffic flow and create safety Park, the public library, or Runza, which has raised concerns. Despite this, conflicts between buses concerns regarding supervision and student and parent vehicles are relatively limited. safety beyond school property. The school and city have worked together to clarify responsibility Safety Concerns and Observations: for student behavior in nearby public spaces, Traffic speeds on 7th Avenue and East 21st Street particularly in response to occasional altercations. were reported as generally acceptable; however, the intersection of East 21st and 6th Avenue Event and After-Hours Traffic: Traffic flow during was identified as a notable safety concern due football games and other school events generally to a prior incident in which a staff member was 23 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 147 of 657 struck by a vehicle. The area around the north side of the school near the picnic tables also experiences persistent ice, slush, and water buildup following snow events, leading to slippery conditions for students and staff. Overall, Longfellow Elementary maintains a functional morning arrival routine, but the afternoon pick-up process and winter maintenance issues present ongoing safety and circulation challenges. The feedback gathered from Principal Benzel underscores the importance of addressing queue management, driver behavior, and localized drainage or icing encouraged to pull up to the sidewalk adjacent to problems in future school zone safety planning. their child’s zone or park farther away and walk to meet them. Westmoor Elementary Signage and School Zone Needs: Principal Date: Thursday, September 25 , 2025 Jolliffe noted that enhanced school-zone Location: Westmoor Elementary School signage—both for speeding awareness and Members of the Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team for internal traffic routing—would be helpful. met with Principal Bethany Jolliffe of Westmoor Expanded and more visible signage identifying Elementary to discuss school circulation, safety student zones and reinforcing speed limits procedures, and opportunities for improvement were identified as the most useful potential around the campus. improvements. Arrival and Dismissal Operations: Westmoor Bus Operations: Westmoor serves three to four begins classes at 8:00 a.m., with students buses, which currently load and unload on the allowed to arrive starting at 7:45 a.m. Dismissal north side of the school using designated pull- begins at 3:15 p.m., and all students are typically outs. While ongoing nearby construction has picked up within 7–8 minutes. The school has minimized parent–bus conflicts, the situation established a highly efficient pick-up system with may need to be re-evaluated once construction designated zones for each grade level to ensure concludes. accountability and smooth traffic flow. Staff use Crosswalks, Sidewalks, and Accessibility: walkie-talkies to coordinate movement and verify Existing crosswalk placement is considered that each student connects safely with their adequate, but the school is considering parent or guardian. additional internal sidewalks to improve on-site Supervision and Crossing Support: A staff pedestrian circulation between pick-up zones. member wearing a safety vest and holding a The current ADA accommodations meet student stop sign assists on West 18th Street near the needs—particularly since the building is single- 2nd- and 3rd-grade pick-up area, while additional level—but ADA curb ramps around the school staff monitor gates and escort students to could be improved or added at several corners. parents. Fewer than 20 students regularly walk Outreach: The SS4A team provided to school, and only a small number cross Avenue informational postcards for distribution at I, not enough to justify a formal crossing guard an upcoming staff meeting to encourage at this time. Students are not permitted to cross participation in the public survey and awareness mid-block to reach cars; instead, parents are of the citywide Safety Action Plan. 24 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 148 of 657This discussion reinforced that Westmoor’s on- sight distance. It was suggested that along 3rd site circulation procedures are well managed, but Avenue, added stop signs could help calm traffic. that improved school-zone signage, ADA ramp Team notes also discussed the possibility of upgrades, and pedestrian connectivity would retaining two-way traffic on 2nd Avenue while further enhance safety for students, staff, and introducing other speed-remediation measures if families. one-way conversions were ever considered. St Agnes Catholic School Winter and Drainage Conditions: During heavy snow events, snow piles up along 24th Dates: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 Street and 2nd Avenue, sometimes spilling into Location: St Agnes Catholic School the intersection and obstructing visibility and The Scottsbluff SS4A outreach team met with pedestrian access near the school. Principal Julie Brown of St. Agnes Catholic St. Agnes School to discuss existing school transportation Bus and Shared Campus Circulation: students ride on BMS bus routes, and Principal conditions, safety issues near the campus, and Brown personally meets students at the BMS opportunities for future improvements. parking lot to escort them back to St. Agnes. Arrival and Dismissal Operations: Afternoon bus drop-off arrangements are still St. Agnes operates from 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., being reviewed to ensure safe and consistent with buses arriving around 7:30 a.m. to drop off procedures. students. The school’s schedule is intentionally The SS4A offset by about 15 minutes from Bluffs Middle Outreach and Coordination: team provided 75 informational postcards for School (BMS) to minimize conflicts between the distribution to families during parent–teacher two campuses. conferences to encourage participation in the Traffic and Crossing Safety:The intersection of citywide Safety Action Plan survey. 2nd Avenue and East 23rd Street was identified In summary, crosswalk visibility, speeding, and as a major concern. A crossing guard stationed at parking near 2nd and 3rd Avenues emerged as 2nd Avenue and 24th Street has helped to slow St. Agnes’s primary concerns. The discussion traffic somewhat, but Principal Brown noted that a highlighted opportunities for additional stop 4-way stop at 2nd and 23rd would likely improve control, expanded crosswalk markings, sight- safety. Parking on both sides of residential distance improvements, and speed management avenues creates visibility and congestion issues, coordination with nearby BMS and SHS particularly near intersections; increasing no- campuses. parking zones near corners could help improve sight distance. Students also experience difficulty Community Christian Elementary School crossing at 23rd Street and 3rd/4th Avenues, Dates: Thursday, October 16, 2025 and missing crosswalks along 23rd and 24th Location: Community Christian School Streets east to 5th Avenue were noted as gaps. Administrator Building Additional yield or stop control at uncontrolled Grades Served: Preschool–8th Grade intersections would enhance pedestrian safety. Enrollment: ~100 Students + Daycare Program Speeding and Parking Behavior: The principal (infants to toddlers) emphasized speeding on 2nd and 3rd Avenues, Overview especially from high school drivers traveling to Community Christian School staff provided Scottsbluff High School (SHS). Parking along information on school operations, pickup and the narrow residential avenues also frustrates drop-off procedures, parking needs, pedestrian nearby residents and contributes to limited 25 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 149 of 657 activity, and safety concerns around the campus. General safety concerns after dark (lighting + The discussion included both school-day desire for cameras). operations and daycare movements. Seasonal and Weather Considerations School Operations & Traffic Patterns Snow/Flooding on Playground: City snow School Day: 8:00 AM–3:30 PM. removal on 15th Street is strong, while 14th Street Pickup/Drop-off Patterns: takes longer to clear. Grades 1–8: All pickup occurs along Avenue Summer Walking Trips: Daycare groups walk to E, on the east side of the school. Staff monitor the Zoo, parks, and occasionally downtown. to prevent students from crossing the street to Key Needs Identified for the SS4A Plan reach vehicles. • Improved lighting on 14th Street for both Preschool–Kindergarten: Pickup and drop-off safety and security. occur at the front entrance, with parents required • Speed management on 15th Street, including to walk in to sign children in/out. potential markings or signage. Daycare (Infants–Toddlers): Pickup/drop-off also • Crosswalk improvements on routes to at the front entrance on 14th Street, with peak McCaffree Park. times from 7–8 AM and 3:30–5:00 PM (open until • Parking expansion north of 14th Street to 6 PM). serve school and daycare operations. Crossing Guards: None are used or needed • General security improvements, including based on current operations. interest in cameras. Congestion: No major queuing or traffic conflicts; parking availability is a larger challenge. Additional Notes CCS distributed project postcards at Parent– Parking & Site Circulation Issues Teacher Conferences on October 28 and 30. Parking Shortages: The largest operational concern. CCS is considering adding parking A1.7 Public Safety Stakeholders north of 14th Street in an existing gravel area. Scottsbluff Police & Fire, Regional West Foot Traffic & Staff Safety: Some safety EMS, Nebraska State Patrol concerns due to evening foot traffic in the area; teachers walking to cars after dark have Dates: Thursday, November 6, 2025 experienced vehicle vandalism (e.g., windows Location: Scottsbluff PD Conference Room broken). Present: Captain Lance Kite, Captain Cody Enlow, Pedestrian & Roadway Safety Concerns Sgt. Philip Eckerberg, Chief of Police Krisa Brass, 15th Street: Marisa Nicol (RWHS), Sean Baumgartner (RWHS), Fire Chief Thomas Schingle, Nebraska State Speeding is a recurring issue. Patrol Captain Art Frerich Additional crosswalk markings and/or Children at Play warnings may be beneficial. 1. Public Safety Overview Students cross 15th Street to reach McCaffree Common Concerns and Crash Patterns Park for PE activities. Participants identified speeding, red-light and stop sign running, distraction, and impaired 14th Street: driving (including an increase in daytime DUI) Lighting deficiencies noted; improved lighting as the most frequent and severe traffic safety would improve visibility and security. concerns in Scottsbluff. High-speed motorcycle 26 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 150 of 657incidents were also cited as a growing risk. State Primary contributing factors: inattention/ Patrol noted that the divided US 26 corridor distraction, excessive speed, and impairment. carries as much, or more, morning traffic between 2. Enforcement & Driver Behavior Mitchell and Scottsbluff as the interstate in western Nebraska, underscoring its regional role Behavioral Issues and congestion levels. Speeding, red-light running, distracted driving, The pedestrian countdown signals on US and impaired driving dominate local enforcement 26 were described as both beneficial and efforts. Officers report limited staffing and problematic—helping some drivers slow down, competing service calls as barriers to consistent while prompting others to accelerate to “beat the traffic enforcement. light.” Enforcement Priorities & Support High-Crash Locations Grants such as the Selective Traffic Enforcement • Avenue I & US 26 – repeatedly described as Program (STEP) help fund targeted operations the most problematic intersection. and increased community engagement (e.g., National Night Out, school bicycle safety • East 27th Street & US 26 – sight distance programs). limited to approximately 700 ft due to the skewed angle. Visibility challenges are noted at angled intersections along US 26, particularly East 27th • Avenue B & US 26 – recurring T-bone and Street where sight distance is poor. injury crashes. • 14th Avenue & 20th Street – issues with stop- 3. Emergency Response & Access sign compliance. Difficult Locations • Broadway between 20th and 27th Streets •Broadway & 24th Street: frequent driver non- – excessive speeds and lane-weaving, with compliance with the crossing guard. Enforcement similar problems north of Beltline to the presence in the median temporarily improves railroad tracks. compliance. Crash Characteristics • Broadway & 20th / 24th / 27th Streets: T-bone collisions along the US 26 corridor were considered candidates for roundabout or identified as producing the highest numbers of signal improvements to slow and steady severe injury responses. traffic flow. 27 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 151 of 657 • E 17th Street (5th – 21st Avenues): narrow declined, the position remains unfilled. geometry and tight turning radius at 5th School-Area Concerns Avenue hinder large-vehicle access. • Inconsistent school-zone signage and speed • 2nd Avenue near the Middle School: limits citywide (some 15 mph, others 20 mph). functions effectively as a one-lane street; • Recommendation: standardize all school congestion improved since the Bearcub zones to a uniform speed (20 mph preferred), relocation, but parking management during simplify ordinances for enforceability, and school hours remains a challenge. ensure flashing beacons operate consistently. • Southeast neighborhoods: many non- • Speeds are generally self-limited during conforming, narrow streets pose difficulties active drop-off/pick-up due to congestion. for fire and sanitation trucks. Public Compliance During Response 6. Infrastructure & Design Feedback Drivers often fail to yield appropriately to Visibility, Lighting, and Safety Issues emergency vehicles, particularly on narrow or • Avenue I railroad crossing: poor visibility; high-volume corridors. vehicles can become airborne at higher 4. Crash Scenes, Coordination & speeds. Communication • Broadway bulb-outs: obstruct driver visibility near crosswalks. Fatal crashes remain the most challenging incidents to manage on scene. Agencies • Lighting deficiencies: reported strong working relationships but • Railway Street – entire corridor needs emphasized the need for better direct lighting upgrades. communication with the Nebraska State Patrol, • West Overland & South Beltline – skewed which currently requires routing through alignment, limited sight distance, 45 mph intermediaries rather than direct radio contact. limit too high. The group expressed interest in adopting • 24th & Broadway – inadequate E-ROC patch radio integration and in acquiring pedestrian visibility at night. drones to assist with crash investigation and • 14th & Broadway – poor visibility at documentation. Two drones were cited as an railroad crossing. appropriate local need. • 24th & Avenue B – dark eastbound 5. Vulnerable Users & Community Safety approach, narrow roadway. Pedestrians, Cyclists, and E-Bikes • 24th & Avenue I – steep hump at rail • Increasing use of e-bikes has created crossing and low nighttime visibility. enforcement and safety challenges. Current Signalization and Signage city ordinances mirror state statute but are difficult to interpret and enforce. • US 26 corridor: add advance flashing signal- ahead warning lights at all major signals • Recommendation: simplify e-bike (not only at city limits) to alert heavy-vehicle classifications, limit multi-use pathways to drivers. Class 1 e-bikes, and maintain the 15-mph pathway speed limit. • Stop bars missing along US 26 — recommend installing per MUTCD. • Avenue I crossing guard position (vacant since 2020) was noted; while the need has • E 27th Street signal head does not meet 28 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 152 of 657 MUTCD standards and should be updated. Educational Gaps & Opportunities Quick-Build & Enforcement Enhancements • Driver’s education no longer offered in • Install double-fine zone signage in school and schools; SPD expressed strong interest in construction areas. reinstatement. • Continue exploring roundabout feasibility at • Families face high private-course costs Broadway & 20th/24th/27th Streets. (~$300). Rail Delays • Discussion of potential funding through SS4A or Nebraska Trauma Program to reintroduce Trains continue to block emergency responses; school-based driver education. an overpass at 5th Avenue was strongly recommended to maintain north–south access. 9. Vision & Priorities 7. Data, Technology & Training Top Issues to Address Current Data Use • Corridor-wide speed management (especially US 26 and Broadway). • SPD maintains citation records from 2018 to present and will share for analysis. • Lighting and visibility upgrades on key urban arterials. • 2025 to date: 6,003 citations/warnings (3,018 citations + 2,615 warnings). • Signal-ahead warning lights throughout the US 26 corridor. • SPD/Terrytown typically responds to ~700 crashes per year. • Railroad crossing safety and an additional grade-separated crossing (5th Avenue • 2025 so far: ~838 total crashes (600+ overpass). PDO, 122 injury, 1 fatality). • Standardized, enforceable school-zone • Nebraska State Patrol reported 12 speeds and signage. Panhandle fatalities in 2025. • Enhanced inter-agency communication and Technology & Equipment Needs data tools. • Drones for crash reconstruction (two Departmental Needs recommended). • Staffing and sustained enforcement funding. • Improved inter-agency radio connectivity (direct patch to State Patrol). • Updated signal and signage infrastructure. • Mapping and data-sharing tools to enhance • Technology investments (drones, mapping, coordination and analysis. communication). 8. Programs, Education & Outreach • Consistent, simplified ordinances for enforceability (e-bikes, school zones). Current Initiatives Overall Themes • SPD actively participates in National Night The discussion underscored that Scottsbluff’s Out and school bicycle safety programs. public safety professionals are highly aligned • STEP grants now sought annually rather around a shared set of priorities: than seasonally, increasing capacity for 1. Speed and visibility management on primary enforcement and outreach. corridors (US 26, Broadway). • Nebraska State Patrol performs 13k–14k traffic 2. Consistent school-zone safety standards. stops per year in western Nebraska using selective STEP operations. 3. Improved lighting, signage, and access to 29 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 153 of 657 support safe operations and emergency and bicycle safety efforts. response. These insights will directly inform the SS4A Safety 4. Enhanced interagency coordination through Action Plan’s short- and mid-term strategies data sharing, communication upgrades, and for engineering, enforcement, and education joint planning. improvements. 5. Education and outreach, including youth driver programs and continued Safe Routes A1.8 Public Transit Stakeholder Public Transit Manager, Roadrunner Public Transit Dates: Thursday, October 9, 2025 Location: MCS Family of Companies office Purpose: Discuss operational needs, safety concerns, and transit related improvement opportunities for inclusion in the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan. Overview The Public Transit Manager provided updates on Roadrunner operations, funding changes, planned routing adjustments, and key safety challenges affecting fixed-route and flex-route service. He also provided scanned rider and driver surveys and will supply ridership data, project lists, and sample questions for a future rider-focused survey. Operational and Funding Notes Funding changes are anticipated for the upcoming fiscal year; more information will be available from City Administration. Planned transit-related projects will be forwarded for inclusion in the Safety Action Plan. Roadrunner re-branded from Tri-City Roadrunner in approximately January 2018, aligning with the introduction of flex-route service. Planned Route Adjustments Residency & Dome Rock Manor: Due to schedule delays when entering complexes, stops will move out to the main roadway; flex- route deviations will continue to be available by advance request. E 24th → E 26th Alignment: Routing will shift north to better serve the higher density of apartments along East 26th Street. 30 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 154 of 657Key Safety Concerns public transit survey to be deployed on buses Stopping in travel lanes: On East Overland and and at stops. 27th Street, the absence of parking lanes forces Copies of scanned rider and driver survey buses to stop in live traffic. responses (already provided). Bus stop shelters and lighting: Additional Driver Survey – Key Safety Feedback shelters and pedestrian-scale lighting are needed Drivers identified several recurring safety at high-volume stops. Six shelter structures have challenges: been donated (from a previous partnership), but installation funding remains a barrier. Intersections and Driver Behavior • Avenue I, 4-way stop: Frequent failure of Driver behavior and enforcement: Frequent motorists to yield properly; buses are often failures to yield at 4-way stops and inconsistent cut off. compliance with bus right-of-way indicators (e.g., flashing lights). • 5th & East Overland: Traffic control devices and signage are placed close to the Parking conflicts at bus stops: Vehicles park intersection, reducing visibility. too close to stops, causing buses to block traffic when boarding passengers. A flexible • School zones: High congestion during start, “No Parking Within [i.e. 30] Feet of a Bus Stop” lunch, and dismissal periods. ordinance is recommended. Boarding and Stopping Challenges ADA access: The Manager supports requiring • 27th Street: Heavy traffic makes boarding ADA landing pads or mats at bus stops whenever unsafe or difficult. Specific stops include sidewalks or curbs are replaced. SB Pawnshop, SB Subway, NB Arby’s, NB Facilities and Coordination Essential Fuel. KCTS and Open Plains have discussed shared • East Overland: High-volume stops at facility use (particularly the bus barn), but Roosevelt, Eastwood, 5th & O, and Family available space is insufficient. Dollar; drivers report motorists often ignore flashing bus lights. Major Priorities Identified for the SS4A Plan Bus turnouts/pull-outs at constrained or high- • High-Speed and Visibility Issues conflict stops. • 42nd Street & Highway 71 (SB): Limited sight distance caused by bus A-frame design and Adoption of a no-parking buffer near bus stops fast-moving traffic; most severe around 7:30 to maintain accessibility and reduce operational AM. conflict. : Difficult left-turn Consistent ADA improvements at and around bus • YMCA & Beltline movements with limited sight lines. stop locations. • Walmart Area: High traffic volumes, fast- Survey and Data Notes moving vehicles, and numerous conflict The Public Transit Manager will provide: points when entering/exiting the lot. • Ridership data (including flex-route vs. scheduled-route trips). • A list of planned transit infrastructure and operational projects. • A set of draft questions for a rider-facing 31 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 155 of 657 A1.9 Community Traffic Safety ● Railroad crossing safety and delay concerns, affecting both daily travel and Comment Map Summary emergency response As part of the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Many comments referenced the same corridors Plan engagement process, the project team and intersections identified through crash data developed and hosted an interactive Community and stakeholder interviews, reinforcing the Traffic Safety Comment Map to allow residents systemic nature of these safety challenges. to share location-specific safety concerns, Geographic Patterns observations, and suggestions (see Figure A1-1.). The map was available online throughout the Map comments were concentrated along: public engagement period and complemented ● US Highway 26 and adjacent intersections in-person outreach activities, surveys, and ● Broadway corridor stakeholder meetings. ● School areas and routes frequently used Participants were invited to drop pins and submit by students comments identifying locations where they experience safety challenges while walking, ● Railroad crossings and east–west travel biking, driving, or accessing transit. This tool routes provided an accessible way for community ● Neighborhood streets experiencing cut- members to share detailed, place-based input through traffic or speeding that might not be captured through traditional surveys alone. These geographic patterns closely matched the High Injury Network and Top 25 intersection Key Themes from Map Comments analysis, providing additional validation that the Comments submitted through the interactive map plan’s priority locations reflect lived experience. showed strong consistency with crash analysis Role in Shaping the Safety Action Plan findings, High Injury Network (HIN) results, and input received through other outreach efforts. Input from the Community Traffic Safety Common themes included: Comment Map directly informed several components of the Safety Action Plan, including: ● Speeding and aggressive driving, particularly along major corridors such as ● Identification of priority corridors and US Highway 26, Broadway, and Avenue B intersections for further analysis ● Red-light and stop-sign violations at high- ● Development of project concepts volume and skewed intersections emphasizing safer crossings, speed management, and visibility improvements ● Pedestrian crossing safety concerns, including limited visibility, lack of signals ● Refinement of the Countermeasure or warning devices, and poor nighttime Toolbox to reflect community-identified lighting issues ● School-area safety issues, including ● Consideration of equity and access, congestion during arrival and dismissal, particularly in areas with known driver non-compliance, and inadequate infrastructure gaps crossing protection The interactive map also helped elevate ● Sidewalk gaps and accessibility barriers, concerns that may not be apparent in crash especially for people using mobility aids, records alone, such as near-misses, perceived strollers, or bicycles danger, and accessibility challenges. 32 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 156 of 657Key Takeaway most pressing safety challenges are The Community Traffic Safety Comment Map concentrated along major corridors, in school provided a valuable platform for residents areas, and at high-conflict intersections. This to share firsthand experiences and location- community-driven input played a critical role in specific safety concerns. When combined shaping the SS4A Safety Action Plan’s priorities with crash data, stakeholder input, and survey and recommendations. results, the map confirmed that Scottsbluff’s Figure A1-1. Crowdsource Commenting Map 33 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 157 of 657 A1.10 Key Takeaways & Themes from Pedestrian and bicycle safety was a recurring theme across engagement methods. Public Input Participants highlighted sidewalk gaps, Across all engagement activities—including limited crossing opportunities, poor nighttime surveys, public events, stakeholder meetings, lighting, and discomfort sharing the roadway, school outreach, and the Community Traffic particularly for children, older adults, and Safety Comment Map—several consistent people with disabilities. At the same time, themes emerged. Regardless of how input was there was strong support for expanding provided, residents, stakeholders, and regional pathways and improving connectivity. users repeatedly identified the same safety Major corridors and railroad crossings were challenges and priorities, reinforcing the plan’s repeatedly identified as barriers to safe and data-driven findings. efficient travel. Input consistently pointed Speeding and driver behavior were the to US Highway 26, Avenue I, 27th Street, most frequently cited concerns. Community Broadway, and railroad crossings as locations members consistently described excessive where geometry, speed, visibility, and delays speeds, red-light running, and failure to yield— create both safety and access challenges. particularly along major corridors such as Enforcement, education, and visibility US Highway 26 and Broadway—as everyday were frequently mentioned as necessary safety issues that increase crash risk for all complements to infrastructure improvements. users. Many participants called for stronger Intersections and crossings were widely enforcement of speed and signal compliance, viewed as the most stressful and dangerous improved lighting and signage, and expanded locations. Residents expressed concern safety education—particularly for young about visibility, signal timing, and the lack of drivers and in school areas. pedestrian-focused treatments at high-volume Collectively, these themes demonstrate intersections, especially where school routes, strong alignment between public input, crash commercial access, or skewed approaches are analysis, and High Injury Network findings. present. Community members clearly support a School-area safety emerged as a top balanced approach that combines engineering priority. Parents, school staff, and residents improvements, operational strategies, emphasized congestion during arrival and education, and enforcement to address dismissal, inconsistent school-zone standards, systemic safety risks. These recurring themes and the need for clearer, more predictable directly informed the prioritization of corridors, traffic control and crossing protection near intersections, and strategies included in the schools. Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan. 34 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 158 of 657 Table A1-1. Outreach methods and participation counts Outreach Methods & Participation Summary Outreach Method Description Participation / Responses Notes Captured broad input on safety Online Community Project-specific SS4A survey distributed 395 responses concerns, priorities, and Survey (Long) online and promoted through City channels locations Allowed quick, accessible In-Person Short Survey Paper surveys and interactive voting (e.g., 720 participants participation at community & Voting Activities jars, boards) used at public events events Provided place-based input tied Community Traffic Interactive online map allowing users to 2,166 comments to specific corridors and Safety Comment Map submit location-based safety concerns intersections Public Open House / Outreach booths at community events and Engagement conducted in 7 events / 1,530 attendees Pop-Up Events gatherings English and Spanish Focused on school zones, School Outreach Meetings and discussions with school staff, 13 meetings / 217 participants crossings, and arrival/dismissal Meetings parents, and students safety Meetings with City departments, law Provided operational, Stakeholder & Agency enforcement, fire, EMS, transit, and partner 2 meetings enforcement, and emergency- Meetings agencies response perspectives Formal SS4A Task Force meetings guiding Reviewed data, priorities, and Task Force Meetings 4 meetings plan development draft recommendations Comprehensive Plan Citywide survey conducted as part of the ~300 respondents (≈290 Independent input reinforcing Update Survey ongoing Comprehensive Plan Update (Oct transportation responses) SS4A findings (City-Led) 2024–Mar 2025) Comment & Follow-Up Direct emails and written comments Included corridor- and issue- 6 comments Emails submitted to the project team specific feedback Feedback from commuters and regional Reflects Scottsbluff’s regional Regional Input users accessing Scottsbluff for work, school, Included across methods role as a service hub shopping, and services Total Engagement Combined participation across all outreach Includes in-person and online ~2100 individuals Reach methods participation 35 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 159 of 657 A1.10 Key Takeaways & Themes from Public Input A1.12 Summary Charts from Public Input Survey 2. What is your PRIMARY mode of transportation? MUST MANUALLY UPDATE AFTER REFRESHING PIVOT TABLE Walking 258 Bicycle 106 Car 43 Motorcycle 34 3. Please also select eBike_electric_scooter... 20 other 13 all other transportation Public_Transit 7 modes you TYPICALLY Skateboard use. Truck Running Side by Side (UTV) Pickup Truck Stroller Connection to Scottsbluff I attend school in Scottsbluff, I live in Scottsbluff 4. What is your PRIMARY I visit Scottsbluff for connection to Scottsbluff, recreat Nebraska? Please select I work in Scottsbluff, but one. live other Total Daily 8. How often do you travel by WALKING in Scottsbluff Monthly (i.e. for work, school, Never shopping, recreation, etc.)? Weekly 36 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 160 of 657 Top Safety Concerns 200 180 5. What are 160 140 your top safety 120 CONCERNS 100 when traveling 80 on Scottsbluff 60 roads? 40 20 Total 0 other Speeding Distracted Driving Lack of Bike Lanes Bike of Lack Inadequate Lighting Inexperienced Drivers Inadequate or Missing… Drivers Not Yielding to… Unsafe Turning or Lane… Drunk/Impaired Driving Failure to Yield/Improper… Driving or Passing Illegally Aggressive/Reckless Driving… Other Drivers Unexpectedly… Difficulty Seeing Far Enough… Red Light/StopSign Running Roadway Conditions (cracks;… Conditions Roadway Red Light / Stop Sign Running Total Pedestrians/Bicycles Violating… Slowing down turning vehicles Slower Speed Limits Higher reflectivity of traffic signs for… 6. What would Improved Lighting Additional yield signs in residential areas IMPROVE Replacing busy four-way intersections with… driving safety in Other Scottsbluff? Four-way stop signs in residential… Dedicated left turn arrows on traffic signals Addressing distracted driving A stronger law enforcement presence… Total 0 50 100 150 200 other Recreation/exercise 9. What do you tend to use Transportation_to_events walking for? Transportation_to_shopping Transportation_to_work/school 37 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 161 of 657 10. 10. On a scale of 1-5, how safe do you feel WALKING in Scottsbluff? Pedestrian Safety Issues Cars going too fast 11. Think of Distracted drivers (ie - cell phones) the times you Cars failing to stop at crosswalks have been a Poor sidewalk conditions/missing sidewalks PEDESTRIAN Difficulty crossing busy roads in Scottsbluff in the last Almost getting hit by a car or bike 6 months. High traffic volumes What safety Other problems Subpar lighting did you Lack of ADA accessible curbs/sidewalks experience if None of the above any? Bicyclists not stopping Pedestrian Safety Improvements Highly visible crosswalks More sidewalks/pathways Improved lighting along trails and sidewalks Longer walk signals at intersections Adding techniques to streets to slow down traffic (i.e. - bulb outs at intersections) 12. What Pedestrian bridge over busy roads would Dedicated pedestrian signal portion of traffic cycle improve your safety while Other WALKING: Refuge medians or pedestrian islands on busy roads Increased accessibility for wheelchairs and strollers (smooth sidewalks; curb cuts; etc.) Redesigning driveway entrances to slow down vehicles Eliminating right turn on red at some traffic signals 38 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 162 of 657 14. On a scale of 1-5, how safe do you feel bicycling in Scottsbluff? Improve safety while biking Dedicated bike lanes Trail-width sidewalks (8-10 ft) 15. What would improve your Signs encouraging drivers to share the safety and road with bicyclists Painted shared-lane markings on bike comfort while route roads (sharrows) BIKING in Bike lanes with a physical barrier Scottsbluff? Vehicles driving slower on roadways Other 13. How often do you Public Transit Usage 17. Do you travel by BICYCLING No in Scottsbluff (i.e. use public for work, school, Occasionally transportation to shopping,How Often recreation, Do you Travel by Bike? get into or around etc.)? Yes Scottsbluff? Daily (roadrunner bus, Weekly KCTS shuttle, etc) Monthly Lighting Upgrades Never No Yes 20. Have you How Often Do you Travel by Bike? experienced areas Daily on Scottsbluff Weekly roadways/ Monthly pathways that need lighting Never upgrades? 39 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 163 of 657 24. What is your Survey Responses - Age age? 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Under 20 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 60 to 69 70 to 79 80 years Prefer | Menos and over not to de 20 | 80 años answer | o m Prefiero Surveys versus Actual population 25. Help us 25.0% ensure we are hearing from all 20.0% ethnicities in our community. 15.0% Survey Data 10.0% Census Data 5.0% 0.0% 15-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+ Income Level $100,000 or more 26. What $20,000 - $50,000 income level best describes $50,000 - $100,000 you? Less than $20,000 Prefer not to say 40 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 164 of 657 Survey Areas Area 0: Outside of Scottsbluff 27. Where do Area 1: West of Ave B and North you reside? (Area 0-5) Area 2: East of Ave B and North Area 3: South of 27th, East of Area 4: South of W 20th St and Proportion of SurveysArea 5:versus South of Actual E 20th St and Population 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% Proportion 25.0% of Surveys 20.0% Population (Census) vs. Actual 15.0% Survey Responses Population 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Tract 1 Tract 2 Tract 3 Tract 4 Tract 5 Area 0 - Home Zipcode 69341 - Gering 69356 - Minatare 28. If “Area 69357 - Mitchell 0”: What is 69358 - Morrill your HOME zipcode? other A1.12 Free Responses to 16. Are there parts of town 21. If “yes”: Which Scottsbluff where you avoid walking or roadway locations need Public Input Survey bicycling for safety reasons? lighting upgrades? What makes them feel unsafe? Due to space constraints, free 22. If you had the power to do responses are not included, 18. If #17 “yes/sometimes”: so, what is the #1 thing you however, a summary of all free What would improve the would do to make Scottsbluff’s response comments is provided safety and comfort of using roads and streets safer? in Chapter 2. public transportation? 23. Please share any 7. Are there any intersections 19. If #17 “no”: Is there additional thoughts, questions, in Scottsbluff where you tend anything that would or concerns related to to have near misses while enable you to use public roadway safety in the area of driving? If so, where? transportation more Scottsbluff, Nebraska. frequently? 41 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 165 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 42 Appendix 1 - Engagement Page 166 of 657 A2 collisions 43 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 167 of 657 Appendix 2 Table of Contents A2.1 Overview of Crash Trends (10-Year and 5-Year Review) .....................................45 A2.2 Crash Severity Distribution ...................................................................................45 A2.3 Contributing Factors ..............................................................................................45 A2.4 High-Risk Users and Vulnerable Populations Mode Involvement ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������46 A2.5 High Injury Network (HIN) .....................................................................................46 A2.6 Railroad-Related and Special Context Crashes ..................................................46 A2.7 Key Collision Analysis Takeaways ........................................................................46 A2.8 Top crash locations or corridors ...........................................................................47 A2.9 Equity overlays (analyzed by demographics or geography) ..............................47 A2.10 Understanding Crash Density (Heat Maps) .........................................................47 A2.11 Heat Maps and Crashes by Crash Types ............................................................48 A2.11.1 Angle Crashes �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������50 A2.11.2 Front-Rear Crashes �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������52 A2.11.3 Single Vehicle Crashes ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������54 A2.11.4 Sideswipe Opposite Crashes ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������56 A2.11.5 Sideswipe (Same) Crashes ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������58 A2.11.6 Other / Unknown Crashes ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������60 A2.11.7 Front-Front Crashes �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������62 A2.11.8 Rear-Rear and Rear-Side Crashes ��������������������������������������������������������������������������63 A2.12 Crashes by Time of Day ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������64 A2.12.1 Morning - 6 to 9 AM .................................................................................................65 A2.12.2 Midday - 10 AM to 2 PM .........................................................................................66 A2.12.3 Afternoon - 3 to 6 PM ....................................................................67 A2.12.4 Evening - 7 to 10 PM ...............................................................................................68 A2.12.5 Late Night - 11 PM to 5 AM �����������������������������������������������������������������������������69 A2.12.6 Unknown Time Frame............................................................................................ 70 A2.13 Crashes by Year ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������71 A2.13.1 2014 .......................................................................................................................... 72 A2.13.2 2015 ......................................................................................................................... 73 A2.13.3 2016 ..........................................................................................................................74 A2.13.4 2017 ......................................................................................................................... 75 A2.13.5 2018 ......................................................................................................................... 76 A2.13.6 2019 ..........................................................................................................................77 A2.13.7 2020......................................................................................................................... 78 A2.13.8 2021 ......................................................................................................................... 79 A2.13.9 2022 ........................................................................................................................80 A2.13.10 2023 ........................................................................................................................81 44 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 168 of 657A2.1 Overview of Crash injury crashes (KSI) as the A2.3 Contributing primary performance measure. Trends (10-Year and Key Finding Factors 5-Year Review) Severe crashes are concentrated Crash reports were reviewed to identify primary contributing To understand systemic safety along high-volume arterial factors. The most common risks in Scottsbluff, crash data corridors, particularly US 26 and contributing factors in were evaluated over both a 10- major signalized intersections. Scottsbluff include: year period (2014–2023) and A2.2 Crash Severity a 5-year period (2019–2023). • Speeding Reviewing two time horizons Distribution • Failure to Yield / Left Turn allows the City to identify Crash severity distribution • Distracted Driving persistent patterns while also provides insight into the relative • Impaired Driving detecting emerging trends. burden of different crash types. • Red-Light Running Over the 10-year analysis 10-Year Severity Breakdown Contributing Percent Percent period (2014-2023), within the (ETJ Project Area) Factor Involved Unknown corporate limits, Scottsbluff Failure to • Property Damage Only (PDO): 57.0% 2.2% experienced: 4,134; 77.1% Yield • Total crashes: 4,907 • Possible/Minor Injury: 1,134; Speeding 9.7% 48.4% • Fatal crashes: 9 21.2% • Serious injury crashes: 62 • Serious Injury: 79; 1.5% Impairment 14.0% 5.4% • Total KSI (Fatal + Serious Injury) • Fatal: 14, 0.3% Red Light or crashes: 71 Stop Sign 20.4% 10.8% Although fatal crashes Running • People killed or seriously represent a small percentage Distracted 9.7% 71.0% injured (KSI persons): 9 of total crashes, they account Driving fatalities, 128 serious injuries for a disproportionate share of During the most recent 5-year community impact and are the Behavioral Patterns Identified period (2019–2023), the City primary focus of Vision Zero • T-bone/angle crashes are experienced: and SS4A strategies. common at signalized • Total crashes: 2,354 Key Observation intersections. • Fatal crashes: 5 A relatively small percentage of • Rear-end crashes occur • Serious injury Crashes: 35 crashes account for the majority frequently along high-volume of severe outcomes, reinforcing • Total KSI crashes: 40 corridors. the need for targeted corridor • Speed and distraction increase Trend Summary and intersection interventions. both crash frequency and Crash frequency over time has crash severity. shown: Key Finding • Overall crash trend: Increasing The majority of severe crashes • KSI trend: Stable are associated with predictable, • PDO trend: Stable preventable behaviors— While total crash counts are reinforcing the need for a important, SS4A prioritization balanced approach combining emphasizes fatal and serious engineering, enforcement, and education. 45 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 169 of 657 A2.4 High-Risk A2.5 High Injury Network A2.6 Railroad-Related Users and Vulnerable (HIN) and Special Context Populations A High Injury Network (HIN) was Crashes developed to identify corridors Mode Involvement and intersections that account for Railroad crossings and skewed approaches present unique Over the 10-year period: a disproportionate share of severe crashes. operational challenges. While • Crashes involving pedestrians: 51 total crash counts at railroad Network Findings • Crashes involving bicyclists: 36 crossings may be low relative to • Total roadway miles evaluated: major corridors, surface condition, • Crashes involving motorcycles: 203.8 miles visibility, and delay concerns 15 (known for KSI crashes only) • HIN mileage (intersections): increase overall safety risk and Although pedestrians and 12.3 miles driver frustration. bicyclists represent a smaller Additional context on railroad portion of total crashes, their risk of • Percent of KSI crashes operations, crossing conditions, serious injury or fatality per crash is occurring on HIN corridors: and related safety considerations significantly higher. 96.8% is provided in Appendix A12 – Top-ranked intersections (based Age-Based Trends - KSI Crashes Supplemental Assessments on 10Y Severity-Weighted Sum): . • 152 total drivers involved in KSI crashes (93 crashes) • US-26 & East 27th Street A2.7 Key Collision • 20th Street & Broadway • Youth drivers (under 20): 17 • US-26 & Avenue I Analysis Takeaways total, 11.1% • US-26 & 5th Avenue The collision analysis reveals • Drivers under 25: 25 total, The HIN analysis confirms hatt several consistent themes: 16.4% severe crashes are concentrated • Severe crashes are • Older drivers (65+): 33 total, along: concentrated along high- 21.7% • US Highway 26 volume arterial corridors. Equity Considerations • Avenue I • Signalized intersections Crash exposure and vulnerability • Avenue B account for a large share of were evaluated alongside • 27th Street injury crashes. • 20th Street demographic data. Areas with: • Speeding, distraction, and • Broadway • Higher concentrations of failure to yield are dominant • 5th Avenue lower-income households contributing factors. • 21st Avenue • School zones • East Overland • Vulnerable users face • Transit-dependent populations • South Beltline Highway disproportionately severe outcomes. • Older adults Several intersections remain high- ranked in both the 10-year and • Community perceptions of require additional consideration in high-risk locations strongly prioritizing investments. 5-year severity analyses, indicating persistent systemic risk rather than align with crash data findings. Key Finding short-term fluctuation. These findings directly informed Protecting vulnerable road users Key Finding the prioritization of capital projects is central to achieving the City’s (J-series), programs (P-series), and Vision Zero goal. A relatively small portion of the policy updates (O-series) included network accounts for a large share in the Safety Action Plan. of severe crashes, supporting corridor-based and intersection- focused interventions. 46 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 170 of 657A2.8 Top crash locations crash data (2014–2023), the neighborhood stands out for highest-ranked intersections the presence of Tier 1 and or corridors include: Tier 2 High Injury Network Analysis of the High Injury • US-26 & East 27th Street (HIN) segments on local Network (HIN) identifies key • 20th Street & Broadway streets, combined with factors corridors and intersections • US-26 & Avenue I such as incomplete sidewalk where crashes—particularly • US-26 & 5th Avenue infrastructure, proximity to fatal and serious injury (KSI) high-speed corridors (e.g., A 5-year analysis (2019–2023) crashes—are concentrated. East Overland), and increased shows similar patterns, with These locations reflect recurring pedestrian exposure. These the following intersections patterns of exposure, traffic conditions contribute to consistently ranking among the volume, and conflict, and elevated risk for vulnerable highest severity locations: represent the highest-priority users in an area with fewer built- areas for safety improvements. • South Beltline & Broadway in safety redundancies. • West 27th Street & Avenue B This finding reinforces Primary East–West KSI • South Beltline & 21st Avenue Corridors include US-26, the importance of pairing West 27th Street, 24th Street These corridors and corridor-level improvements (near Bluffs Middle School and intersections represent with neighborhood-scale Lincoln Heights), 20th Street, persistent safety challenges investments. Projects such as East and West Overland, and and serve as the foundation the Southeast Neighborhood South Beltline Highway. for the project and program Improvements (J11) and the recommendations identified in Southeast Pathway Spine Primary North–South KSI this plan. ( ) are directly responsive to Corridors include Avenue J5 I (Highway 71), Avenue B, A2.9 Equity overlays these conditions, improving Broadway, 5th Avenue, 10th connectivity, reducing exposure, Avenue, and 21st Avenue. (analyzed by and addressing safety needs in areas where both crash risk Spatial patterns indicate that demographics or and community vulnerability are the central and southeastern geography) present. portions of Scottsbluff experience a higher An equity overlay analysis was A2.10 Understanding concentration of KSI crashes, conducted to compare crash particularly along US-26, patterns with demographic and Crash Density (Heat Avenue I, Broadway, and geographic indicators, including Maps) areas identified as historically corridors serving schools and Crash heat maps illustrate commercial areas. Across the disadvantaged. This analysis highlights a concentration of where crashes are most community, KSI crashes are concentrated across disproportionately concentrated crashes—particularly along local streets—within the Scottsbluff’s transportation along arterial and higher-speed network. Warmer colors (yellow roadways rather than local southeast portion of Scottsbluff, where several census block and dark orange) indicate residential streets, where lower higher crash density, helping to speeds generally result in lower groups meet criteria for higher vulnerability. quickly identify corridors and severity outcomes. intersections where crashes Intersection-level analysis While high-crash corridors are recurring—not just isolated further highlights critical are present throughout the events. locations. Using 10 years of community, the southeast 47 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 171 of 657 A2.11 Heat Maps and It is important to note that crash the underlying causes and density does not always equate patterns of crashes across the Crashes by Crash Types to crash severity. High-density city. This information supports While the preceding map areas often reflect higher traffic the development of targeted, highlights individual crashes volumes and more conflict data-driven safety strategies by severity (including fatal and points, while severe crashes aligned with the Safe System serious injury crashes), the heat may also occur in lower-density approach. maps provide a broader view locations. For this reason, heat Locations that appear maps are used in combination of systemic risk by showing consistently across where crashes cluster over time. with severity analysis to These patterns help distinguish identify priority areas for safety multiple heat maps between one-time incidents and improvements. and severity analyses locations with consistent safety The following pages present represent the highest concerns. crash heat maps by crash type, priority candidates for offering additional insight into safety improvements. 48 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 172 of 657 All Crashes Heatmap All Crashes Modes (2014-23) Mode Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 4 57 331 549 2468 3409 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 22 21 749 792 Single Vehicle - Pedestrian 3 5 28 13 2 51 Single Vehicle - Bicycle 0 1 17 10 8 36 Single Vehicle (non- 6 16 73 54 701 850 pedestrian/bicycle) Other/Unknown 1 0 5 11 206 223 Totals 14 79 476 658 4134 5361 49 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 173 of 657 A2.11.1 Angle Crashes disproportionate share of severe between moving vehicles, outcomes due to the side-impact reinforcing the need for 1,841 Crashes, 49 KSIs nature of these collisions. countermeasures such as Angle crashes represent one of The crash map and heat map protected turn phases, improved the most common and highest- show strong clustering along signal timing, high-visibility risk crash types in Scottsbluff, major corridors and signalized crosswalks, and enhanced with 1,841 total crashes and 49 intersections, particularly where intersection control to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes traffic volumes and turning conflict points and crash severity. (KSIs) over the study period. movements are highest. The Angle crashes are These crashes typically occur concentration of angle crashes concentrated at high- at intersections and are often in these areas highlights the volume intersections and associated with left-turn conflicts, importance of improving are a leading contributor failure to yield, and signal or stop- intersection operations and to serious injuries—making control violations. While many visibility. The first harmful intersection-focused angle crashes result in property event data indicates that the improvements a top safety damage only, they account for a vast majority involve collisions priority. 50 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 174 of 657 Angle Crashes Heatmap Angles Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 4 45 236 304 1170 1759 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 6 2 73 81 Struck by Falling, Shifting Cargo or Anything Set in 000011 Motion by Motor Vehicle Totals 4 45 242 306 1244 1841 51 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 175 of 657 A2.11.2 Front-Rear The crash map and heat map Targeted improvements such show concentrations along as signal coordination, access Crashes major routes where traffic management, improved signage, 1,301 Crashes, 8 KSIs queues and turning movements and speed management can help Front-rear crashes account for are common. The first harmful reduce the occurrence of these 1,301 total crashes in Scottsbluff, event data confirms that most crashes. but only 8 fatal and serious injury front-rear crashes involve crashes (KSIs), indicating that vehicle-to-vehicle contact with Front-rear crashes are while frequent, they are generally relatively low injury severity. frequent but typically lower in severity. These crashes While these crashes are less less severe, often are typically associated with likely to result in serious injuries, their frequency contributes to signaling congestion following too closely, sudden and operational issues stopping, and congestion-related overall system inefficiency and conditions, particularly along can indicate operational issues rather than high-risk higher-volume corridors and near such as signal timing, access crash conditions. signalized intersections. density, or driver expectancy. 52 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 176 of 657 Front-Rear Crashes Heatmap Front-Rear Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 8 73 219 971 1271 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 3 3 24 30 Totals 0 8 76 222 995 1301 53 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 177 of 657 A2.11.3 Single Vehicle delineation and signage, Single vehicle crashes shoulder and clear zone are less concentrated but Crashes enhancements, and targeted more severe, often linked 1,519 Crashes, 31 roadway design improvements to speed and roadside KSIs to reduce the likelihood and hazards along higher-speed severity of run-off-road crashes. corridors. Single vehicle crashes account for 1,519 total crashes in Scottsbluff, Single Vehicle Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) including 31 fatal and FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals serious injury crashes Animal (Live) 1 1 5 119 126 (KSIs), representing Bridge Pier or Support 1 1 a higher severity rate Bridge Rail 2 13 15 Cable Barrier 1 4 5 compared to many other Cargo/Equipment Loss or 2 2 crash types. These crashes Shift typically involve a vehicle Culvert 1 3 2 6 leaving the roadway and Curb 1 3 14 18 striking a fixed object, Ditch 3 2 23 28 Embankment 1 1 2 2 6 overturning, or otherwise Fell/Jumped from Motor 1 1 losing control. Common Vehicle contributing factors Fence 7 1 60 68 include speed, impairment, Fire/Explosion 2 2 weather conditions, and Guardrail End Terminal 1 1 Guardrail Face 1 3 8 12 roadway characteristics such as curves, shoulders, Immersion, Full or Partial 1 1 and roadside hazards. Jackknife 2 2 Mailbox 2 10 12 The crash map and heat Other Fixed Object (wall, map show that single 1 8 6 65 80 vehicle crashes are more building, tunnel, etc.) dispersed than other Other Non-Collision 4 4 5 13 crash types but tend to Other Non-Fixed Object 1 3 1 50 55 Other Post, Pole, or 2 3 3 47 55 cluster along higher-speed Support corridors and at the edges Overturn/Rollover 2 3 13 13 35 66 of the developed area. Parked Motor Vehicle 10 15 557 582 The first harmful event Pedalcycle 1 17 10 8 36 data indicates that many Pedestrian 3 5 28 13 2 51 Railway Vehicle (train, 112 crashes involve collisions engine) with fixed objects such Strikes Object at Rest from 1 1 as poles, utility supports, MV in Transport fences, and ditches, Traffic Sign Support 3 5 3 123 134 reinforcing the role of Tree (standing) 1 3 25 29 roadside conditions in Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 12 10 84 108 crash outcomes. Effective Work Zone/Maintenance 1 1 countermeasures Equipment may include speed management, improved Totals 9 22 128 92 1268 1519 54 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 178 of 657 Single Vehicle Crashes and Heatmap 55 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 179 of 657 A2.11.4 Sideswipe drift, or loss of control. centerline delineation, edge line Opposite Crashes The crash map and heat map striping, speed management, show these incidents are and targeted corridor treatments 57 Crashes, 1 KSIs dispersed across the network, to reinforce lane discipline Sideswipe opposite-direction with occasional clustering along and reduce the likelihood of crashes are relatively higher-speed or undivided crossover conflicts. uncommon in Scottsbluff, with corridors where opposing traffic 57 total crashes and only 1 fatal is in close proximity. The first Sideswipe opposite or serious injury crash (KSI) harmful event data indicates that crashes are rare but over the study period (2014- most involve vehicle-to-vehicle often linked to lane 2023). These crashes typically contact with limited severity. departure on higher- occur when vehicles traveling While infrequent, these crashes speed, undivided in opposite directions encroach can be serious when they occur into the opposing lane, often at higher speeds. Potential roadways. due to improper passing, lane countermeasures include 56 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 180 of 657 Sideswipe Opposite Crashes Heatmap Sideswipe (Opposite) Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Cargo/Equipment Loss or 000011 Shift Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 1 5 9 36 51 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 0 0 4 4 Struck by Falling, Shifting Cargo or Anything Set in 000011 Motion by Motor Vehicle Totals 0 1 5 9 42 57 57 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 181 of 657 A2.11.5 Sideswipe turning movements, or higher Potential countermeasures (Same) Crashes traffic volumes. include improved lane The crash map and heat markings, access management, 370 Crashes, 2 KSIs map show these crashes are turn lane delineation, and Sideswipe crashes involving concentrated along major corridor design strategies that vehicles traveling in the same corridors and multi-lane reduce unnecessary weaving direction account for 370 total roadways, where traffic density and conflict points. crashes in Scottsbluff, with only and lane-changing activity are 2 fatal or serious injury crashes greatest. The first harmful event Sideswipe same- (KSIs), indicating generally data confirms that most involve direction crashes are low severity outcomes. These vehicle-to-vehicle contact with common on multi- crashes typically occur during limited injury severity. While not lane changes, merging, or typically severe, these crashes lane corridors and when drivers fail to maintain can indicate issues related to are typically linked their lane position, often in lane clarity, driver expectancy, to lane changes and areas with multiple lanes, and corridor operations. merging behavior. 58 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 182 of 657 Sideswipe (Same) Crashes Heatmap Sideswipe (Same) Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 2 12 14 267 295 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 2 1 71 74 Work Zone/Maintenance 001001 Equipment Totals 0 2 15 15 338 370 59 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 183 of 657 A2.11.6 Other / The crash map and heat map reporting. Safety strategies for show a relatively dispersed these crashes are generally Unknown Crashes pattern with no strong addressed through broader 223 Crashes, 1 KSIs clustering, reflecting the varied system-wide improvements, Crashes categorized as “Other” nature of these incidents. including roadway design or “Unknown” account for 223 The first harmful event data consistency, driver awareness, total crashes in Scottsbluff, indicates a mix of vehicle- and ongoing monitoring. related and miscellaneous including 1 fatal or serious injury “Other/Unknown” crash (KSI). These crashes impacts, with the majority include incidents that do not fit resulting in property damage crashes are diverse standard collision categories or only. While these crashes and dispersed, where sufficient detail was not provide less actionable insight reinforcing the recorded to classify the crash individually, they still contribute need for consistent type. As a result, this category to overall system risk and underscore the importance data collection and represents a mix of conditions system-wide safety and contributing factors. of continued data quality improvements and consistent improvements. 60 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 184 of 657 Other/Unknown Crashes Heatmap Other/Unknown/Non-Specified Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 0 5 11 152 168 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 0 0 52 52 Railroad - Train and 100001 Pedestrian Struck by Falling, Shifting Cargo or Anything Set in 000011 Motion by Motor Vehicle Work Zone/Maintenance 000011 Equipment Totals 1 0 5 11 206 223 61 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 185 of 657 A2.11.7 Front-Front the centerline into opposing of opposing vehicles. The first traffic, often due to loss of harmful event data confirms most Crashes control, distraction, impairment, or involve direct vehicle-to-vehicle 16 Crashes, 1 KSIs passing maneuvers. impact. Preventative strategies Front-front crashes are among The crash map shows these focus on maintaining lane the least common crash types in incidents are rare and widely discipline and reducing crossover Scottsbluff, with 16 total crashes dispersed, with no strong risk through measures such as and 1 fatal or serious injury crash clustering pattern. Despite their centerline delineation, speed (KSI) over the study period (2014- low frequency, front-front crashes management, and targeted 2023). These crashes typically can result in severe outcomes treatments on higher-speed or occur when a vehicle crosses due to the combined speeds undivided roadways. Rare but high-risk crashes typically linked to lane departure and opposing traffic conflicts. Front-Front Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 1 4 3 6 14 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 1 0 1 2 Totals 0 1 5 3 7 16 62 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 186 of 657A2.11.8 Rear-Rear and such as intersections, driveways, may indicate localized operational Rear-Side Crashes or parking areas. or access issues. Improvements The crash map indicates a such as clearer pavement 34 PDO Crashes, 0 KSIs dispersed pattern with minor markings, access management, Rear-rear and rear-side crashes clustering in more developed and improved visibility can help are relatively infrequent, with areas where vehicle interactions reduce their occurrence. 34 total crashes and no fatal are more frequent. The first or serious injury crashes (KSIs) harmful event data shows these Low-speed, low- recorded (2014-2023). These crashes are overwhelmingly severity crashes often crashes generally occur at low property damage only, reflecting tied to parking, access, speeds and are often associated their lower severity. While not a and tight maneuvering with parking maneuvers, queuing primary safety concern in terms conditions. conditions, or constrained spaces of serious injuries, these crashes Rear-Rear and Rear-Side Crashes First Harmful Event (2014-23) FHE Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Motor Vehicle in Transport 0 0 0 0 15 15 Parked Motor Vehicle 0 0 0 0 19 19 Totals 0 0 0 0 34 34 63 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 187 of 657 A2.12 Crashes by Time of While fewer crashes occur these patterns supports during the evening and targeted safety strategies, Day nighttime hours, these periods including speed management, Crash patterns in Scottsbluff show a relatively higher visibility improvements, and vary by time of day, with the proportion of fatal and serious enforcement efforts aligned highest concentration of injury crashes (KSIs), suggesting with higher-risk time periods. crashes occurring during the more severe outcomes when midday and afternoon periods. crashes do occur. In contrast, Most crashes occur Together, these timeframes morning crashes account for a during midday and account for the majority of total smaller share of severe crashes afternoon travel, crashes, reflecting increased relative to their total volume. but crashes in traffic volumes, daily activity This variation highlights the the evening and influence of factors such as patterns, and a higher number nighttime are more of vehicle interactions across speed, lighting conditions, and the system. driver behavior at different likely to result in times of day. Understanding serious injuries. All Crashes by Weekday and Time of Crash (2014-23) Morning Midday (10 Afternoon Evening Night (11 Weekday Unknown Totals (6–9 AM) AM–2 PM) (3–6 PM) (7–10 PM) PM–5 AM) Sun 26 136 143 64 60 50 479 Mon 125 267 262 67 32 48 801 Tue 170 263 235 68 34 44 814 Wed 132 241 273 79 30 49 804 Thu 156 257 290 79 31 51 864 Fri 145 276 269 154 61 44 949 Sat 62 183 132 138 68 67 650 Totals 816 1623 1604 649 316 353 5361 64 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 188 of 657 Crashes by Time of Day A2.12.1 Morning - 6 to 9 AM Morning crashes are largely commute-related and tend to be lower severity, reflecting more 816 Crashes, 7 KSIs predictable traffic patterns and daylight conditions. Despite steady Morning Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) crash volumes, morning Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals crashes result Sun 1 4 3 18 26 in fewer severe Mon 1 12 23 89 125 Tue 1 1 21 24 123 170 outcomes, likely Wed 1 8 16 107 132 due to lower Thu 1 13 24 118 156 speeds and Fri 1 13 19 112 145 more consistent Sat 6 7 49 62 traffic flow Totals 1 6 77 116 616 816 during commute hours. 65 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 189 of 657 A2.12.2 Midday - 10 AM to 2 PM 1,623 Crashes, 28 KSIs While midday accounts for a high Midday crashes are steady and broadly distributed, share of total crashes, it does not reflecting routine daytime travel with moderate show a proportional increase in volumes and generally lower severity outcomes. severe injury crashes. Midday Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Sun 1 2 9 17 107 136 Mon 3 28 38 198 267 Tue 1 6 23 33 200 263 Wed 1 2 17 36 185 241 Thu 1 4 24 36 192 257 Fri 4 21 37 214 276 Sat 4 14 17 148 183 Totals 4 25 136 214 1244 1623 66 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 190 of 657 Crashes by Time of Day A2.12.3 Afternoon - 3 to 6 PM The afternoon period combines 1,604 Crashes, 28 KSIs high crash frequency with elevated Afternoon crashes increase in concentration severity, making it the most critical and severity, aligning with peak traffic volumes, congestion, and higher conflict at key intersections. window for safety improvements. Afternoon Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Sun 4 15 21 103 143 Mon 3 19 36 204 262 Tue 2 23 33 177 235 Wed 4 15 29 225 273 Thu 11 23 37 219 290 Fri 4 37 29 199 269 Sat 10 20 102 132 Totals 2 26 142 205 1229 1604 67 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 191 of 657 A2.12.4 Evening - 7 to 10 PM 649 Crashes, 17 KSIs Despite fewer total crashes than Evening crashes are moderately frequent and peak periods, the evening shows a more dispersed, with activity extending beyond noticeable increase in severe crash core corridors into local streets and activity areas. proportion. Evening Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Sun 2 2 8 10 42 64 Mon 2 9 8 48 67 Tue 4 14 8 42 68 Wed 6 11 62 79 Thu 2 7 14 56 79 Fri 20 12 122 154 Sat 1 4 9 17 107 138 Totals 3 14 73 80 479 649 68 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 192 of 657 Crashes by Time of Day A2.12.5 Late Night - 11 PM to 5 AM 316 Crashes, 8 KSIs Late night has the highest severity Late night crashes are relatively infrequent but rate relative to total crashes, widely scattered, often occurring along higher- indicating elevated risk despite low speed corridors and lower-visibility locations. traffic volumes. Late Night Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Sun 1 10 7 42 60 Mon 1 1 7 3 20 32 Tue 3 3 28 34 Wed 1 1 3 4 21 30 Thu 5 4 22 31 Fri 2 3 4 52 61 Sat 2 6 7 53 68 Totals 2 7 37 32 238 316 69 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 193 of 657 Crashes by Time of Day A2.12.6 Unknown Time Frame 353 Crashes, 3 KSIs Unknown-time crashes represent Crashes with unknown time of day are limited in a small share of total incidents and number and broadly dispersed, reflecting gaps in do not significantly influence overall reporting rather than a distinct temporal pattern. time-of-day trends. Unknown Crashes by Weekday and Severity (2014-23) Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals Sun 1 2 2 45 50 Mon 2 1 45 48 Tue 1 1 1 41 44 Wed 3 4 42 49 Thu 2 49 51 Fri 1 43 44 Sat 3 1 63 67 Totals 2 1 11 11 328 353 70 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 194 of 657 Crashes by Year KSI Crashes by Year and Severity (2014-23) A2.13 Crashes by Year Year Fatal Inj-A Totals Annual crash totals remain relatively consistent 2014 8 8 over the study period, with moderate 2015 2 6 8 fluctuations and no sustained upward or 2016 6 6 downward trend. Total crashes peaked in 2014 2017 6 6 and declined to their lowest level in 2020, with 2018 3 10 13 volumes generally stabilizing in the years that 2019 2 13 15 followed. 2020 4 9 13 2021 4 4 Fatal and serious injury (KSI) crashes show 2022 2 9 11 greater variability year to year, with the highest 2023 1 8 9 concentrations occurring between 2018 and Totals 14 79 93 2020 and a peak in fatalities observed in 2020. The lack of a consistent All Crashes by Year and Severity (2014-23) downward trend in total Year Fatal Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Totals crashes—despite year-to- 2014 8 25 72 471 576 year variation—suggests that 2015 2 6 37 92 417 554 systemic risk factors have 2016 6 52 75 410 543 remained largely unchanged, 2017 6 45 93 430 574 reinforcing the need for 2018 3 10 37 66 400 516 targeted, systemwide safety 2019 2 13 45 82 396 538 2020 4 9 32 76 360 481 interventions rather than 2021 4 62 27 394 487 isolated improvements. 2022 2 9 75 37 408 531 2023 1 8 66 38 448 561 Totals 14 79 476 658 4134 5361 While total crashes are relatively stable, the variability in KSI crashes highlights the importance of focusing on severity—not just frequency— when identifying priority safety improvements. 71 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 195 of 657 A2.13.1 2014 corridor connections. Monthly distribution is relatively steady, with 576 Crashes, 8 KSIs modest increases in late summer and fall. No Crashes in 2014 are broadly distributed, with the single month dominates, indicating crash risk is highest concentrations along primary corridors present year-round rather than driven by isolated and within the central street grid. Corridors such spikes. as US-26 and major north–south routes show recurring clusters, reflecting higher traffic volumes As the highest crash year in the study and turning conflicts at signalized intersections. period, 2014 establishes a baseline of Neighborhood streets show fewer crashes but systemwide risk and recurring high- still reflect localized risk near activity centers and crash locations. 2014 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 0 Inj-A 1 2 1 3 1 8 Inj-B1 225 111561 25 Inj-C 3 10 5 5 7 5 2 3 5 11 7 9 72 PDO 39 56 35 27 36 29 33 29 34 33 51 69 471 Totals 43 66 42 34 48 35 38 34 40 49 67 80 576 72 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 196 of 657 Crashes by Year A2.13.2 2015 Monthly trends remain relatively even, with minor fluctuations but no strong seasonal spike. 554 Crashes, 8 KSIs This consistency reinforces that crashes occur Crash patterns in 2015 closely mirror 2014, with throughout the year, particularly in locations with concentrations again along major corridors ongoing exposure and user conflict. and within the central grid. While total crashes Persistent crash locations from 2014 to decreased slightly, the spatial distribution remains 2015 show that reduced totals alone largely unchanged, indicating the same roadway do not reflect improved safety without segments continue to experience recurring conflicts tied to volumes, access, and design. changes in underlying risk conditions. 2015 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 2 Inj-A 1 1 2 1 1 6 Inj-B411 55538 23 37 Inj-C 4 3 9 9 10 9 6 10 5 8 9 10 92 PDO 47 32 28 28 39 31 25 26 34 30 47 50 417 Totals 55 36 38 38 54 47 36 42 48 38 58 64 554 73 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 197 of 657 A2.13.3 2016 Monthly distribution remains relatively even, with modest variation throughout the year and no 543 Crashes, 6 KSIs dominant peak period. This reinforces that crash Crashes in 2016 show a slight reduction in risk is ongoing and tied more to location and overall volume, but the spatial pattern remains roadway conditions than to seasonal spikes. consistent, with concentrations along primary The reduction in total crashes does corridors and within the central street grid. Key not correspond to a shift in where intersections and corridor segments continue crashes occur, indicating continued to experience recurring conflicts, indicating persistent exposure and operational challenges. systemic risk at established high-crash locations. 2016 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 0 Inj-A 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Inj-B264355557514 52 Inj-C5611485488727 75 PDO 23 41 38 39 29 29 33 29 35 33 35 46 410 Totals 31 54 53 46 42 39 43 43 50 46 39 57 543 74 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 198 of 657 Crashes by Year A2.13.4 2017 Monthly trends show typical variation, with slightly higher activity during late summer and fall, but no 574 Crashes, 6 KSIs significant deviation from established patterns. Crash patterns in 2017 reflect a return to higher Crashes remain consistently distributed across total volumes, with continued clustering along the year. major corridors and intersections. The central grid The increase in crashes from 2016 and key east–west routes remain focal points to 2017, without a change in spatial for crash activity, consistent with prior years and pattern, reinforces that underlying risk indicative of sustained traffic demand and turning conflicts. factors remain unchanged across the network. 2017 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 0 Inj-A 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Inj-B54255 272715 45 Inj-C 6 8 7 6 6 8 10 11 10 6 5 10 93 PDO 55 36 28 24 38 38 29 23 33 38 28 60 430 Totals 67 49 38 35 49 47 41 41 45 51 35 76 574 75 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 199 of 657 A2.13.5 2018 Monthly distribution remains relatively even, though several late-year months show increased 516 Crashes, 13 KSIs crash totals. Overall, crash occurrence continues Crashes in 2018 show a slight decrease in to reflect consistent systemwide conditions rather total volume, but the spatial pattern remains than isolated spikes. consistent, with concentrations along primary While total crashes declined, the corridors and within the central street grid. Key increase in KSI crashes signals a shift intersections continue to exhibit recurring crash toward higher severity outcomes at activity, reflecting ongoing exposure and turning conflicts. familiar high-risk locations. 2018 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 1 3 Inj-A 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 10 Inj-B1 365 284143 37 Inj-C 2 3 3 5 5 3 7 5 4 10 10 9 66 PDO 41 45 27 35 28 30 24 31 34 44 34 27 400 Totals 45 49 34 46 38 34 34 48 43 56 48 41 516 76 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 200 of 657 Crashes by Year A2.13.6 2019 Monthly trends show moderate variability, with several higher-activity months distributed 538 Crashes, 15 KSIs throughout the year. No single period dominates, Crash patterns in 2019 remain concentrated reinforcing consistent exposure across the along major corridors and intersections, with network. continued clustering in the central grid and along 2019 represents a peak in KSI crashes key east–west routes. Total crashes increased within the study period, highlighting slightly from 2018, but the overall spatial increasing severity despite relatively distribution remains stable, indicating persistent conflict points. stable overall crash patterns. 2019 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 2 Inj-A 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 13 Inj-B414421666515 45 Inj-C 7 3 5 6 11 4 5 7 9 6 8 11 82 PDO 37 36 43 29 26 28 30 21 34 32 39 41 396 Totals 49 42 53 40 39 37 42 34 51 44 50 57 538 77 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 201 of 657 A2.13.7 2020 Monthly trends show variability throughout the year, but no clear seasonal pattern. The 481 Crashes, 13 KSIs persistence of crash locations suggests that Crashes in 2020 reached the lowest total in the reduced volumes alone did not eliminate study period, yet the spatial pattern remained underlying roadway risks. consistent, with activity concentrated along 2020 demonstrates that lower traffic major corridors and within the central street grid. volumes do not necessarily result Despite reduced overall traffic volumes, key in safer outcomes, as KSI crashes intersections and corridor segments continued to experience recurring crashes. remained elevated and fatalities peaked during this year. 2020 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 1 1 4 Inj-A 1 1 3 1 2 1 9 Inj-B632 22343322 32 Inj-C 7 8 1 4 1 9 2 7 10 7 7 13 76 PDO 29 33 27 20 22 23 30 25 33 44 33 41 360 Totals 43 44 31 27 25 35 36 39 46 55 43 57 481 78 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 202 of 657 Crashes by Year A2.13.8 2021 Monthly distribution is relatively even, with moderate variation throughout the year. Crash 487 Crashes, 4 KSIs activity continues to reflect stable exposure and Crash patterns in 2021 remain consistent with recurring conflict locations across the network. prior years, with concentrations along major The sharp decrease in KSI crashes corridors and within the central grid. Total crashes in 2021 suggests a return to lower increased slightly from 2020, but overall volumes severity outcomes, though crash remained lower than earlier years in the study period. locations and underlying risk patterns remain unchanged. 2021 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 0 Inj-A 1 1 2 4 Inj-B435673495 97 62 Inj-C122 1274152 27 PDO 32 43 22 30 30 34 28 34 38 41 29 33 394 Totals 37 48 29 37 38 39 40 47 46 46 40 40 487 79 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 203 of 657 A2.13.9 2022 slightly higher activity in late summer and fall months. Overall, crash occurrence continues to 531 Crashes, 11 KSIs reflect stable systemwide exposure rather than Crash patterns in 2022 remain consistent with isolated seasonal influences. prior years, with concentrations along major corridors and within the central street grid. Total The rebound in total crashes, crashes increased from 2021, returning closer to combined with elevated KSI levels, pre-2020 levels, while maintaining similar spatial indicates a return to pre-2020 risk distribution and recurring conflict locations. conditions without meaningful changes Monthly trends show moderate variability, with to underlying safety patterns. 2022 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 2 Inj-A 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 9 Inj-B 4 6 11 2 9 3 5 8 12 5 4 6 75 Inj-C284732212231 37 PDO 33 47 39 22 34 23 30 24 35 36 33 52 408 Totals 39 62 56 33 46 29 38 33 51 43 41 60 531 80 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 204 of 657 Crashes by Year A2.13.10 2023 Monthly distribution remains steady, with consistent crash occurrence throughout the year. 561 Crashes, 9 KSIs The persistence of these patterns highlights In 2023, crash patterns continue to follow ongoing exposure and recurring conflict points established trends, with activity concentrated across the network. along primary corridors and key intersections. Despite fluctuations in total crashes Total crashes increased further, approaching the and KSI counts, the consistency in higher range observed earlier in the study period, crash locations underscores the while the spatial distribution remains largely unchanged. need for targeted, systemwide safety improvements to address persistent risk. 2023 Crashes by Month and Severity Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals Fatal 1 1 Inj-A 1 1 1 3 1 1 8 Inj-B 1 4 2 6 6 11 3 7 4 10 8 4 66 Inj-C3252324 2573 38 PDO 59 33 29 40 40 33 26 40 35 31 50 32 448 Totals 64 39 36 48 49 47 34 48 41 49 66 40 561 81 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 205 of 657 Over the past decade (2014-2023), Scottsbluff has experienced 5,361 crashes (City+ETJ), including 93 fatal and serious injury crashes. Severe crashes are concentrated along US 26 and other high-volume arterial corridors, particularly at signalized intersections. Speeding, distraction, and failure to yield are the most common contributing factors. While pedestrians and bicyclists represent a smaller share of total crashes, their injury severity is significantly higher. These findings guided the development of corridor-focused, school-zone, and multimodal safety improvements included in this plan. 82 Appendix 2 - Collisions Page 206 of 657 A3 crash maps 83 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 207 of 657 Appendix 3 Table of Contents A3.1 Top 26 High Injury Network (HIN) Intersections – Detailed Mapping and Severity Analysis ................................................................................................................... 85 US-26 / E 27th Street....................................................................................................................... 86 20th Street / Broadway ...................................................................................................................87 US-26 / Avenue I ............................................................................................................................. 88 US-26 / 5th Avenue ......................................................................................................................... 89 US-26 / Avenue B ............................................................................................................................ 90 East 20th Street ................................................................................................................................ 91 US-26 / East Overland..................................................................................................................... 92 US-26 / 21st Avenue .........................................................................................................................93 South Beltline / Broadway ...............................................................................................................94 West 27th Street / Avenue B ........................................................................................................... 95 West 33rd Street / Avenue I ............................................................................................................ 96 South Beltline /Avenue I ..................................................................................................................97 S Beltline / 21st Avenue .................................................................................................................. 98 US-26 / NE-71 ................................................................................................................................... 99 US-26 / 14th Avenue ......................................................................................................................100 W 20th St / Avenue I .......................................................................................................................101 E 20th St / 5th Avenue ...................................................................................................................102 W 27th St / Avenue I .......................................................................................................................103 W 42nd St / Avenue I (NE-71) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������104 US-26 / CR 19 ..................................................................................................................................105 W 27th Street / Avenue F ...............................................................................................................106 L79G / CR 19 ...................................................................................................................................107 East Overland / 21st Avenue ..........................................................................................................108 E Overland / 14th Avenue ..............................................................................................................109 W Overland Drive / Broadway ........................................................................................................110 W 20th Street / Railway ...................................................................................................................111 84 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 208 of 657A3.1 Top 26 High The map shown at the bottom evaluation of crash type of this page is the ten year HIN, patterns (e.g., angle, rear-end, Injury Network (HIN) and the following pages show side-swipe, single vehicle), Intersections – Detailed intersection close ups and user involvement, and severity crashes from the five year HIN. concentration, as well as Mapping and Severity For each of the Top 26 weather and lighting. By pairing Analysis intersections, the following are severity-weighted rankings with provided: spatial visualization and mode- Detailed crash mapping and specific breakdowns, the City pivot table summaries are • An intersection-level crash location map ensured that countermeasure provided for each of the Top 26 selection is tailored to the intersections identified through • A pivot table summarizing dominant crash patterns at each crashes by severity category the Severity Weighted Sum location. ranking process. Intersections • A pivot table summarizing were ranked using both 10- crashes by mode (vehicle, pe- This structured approach year (2014–2023) and 5-year destrian, bicycle, etc.) strengthens the defensibility of project prioritization (2019–2023) crash data to • Documentation of intersec- evaluate persistent and recent tion control type (signalized, by demonstrating that severity trends. This dual- stop-controlled, T-intersection, recommended improvements window analysis allows the etc.) correspond directly City of Scottsbluff to distinguish • Supporting legend and data to documented crash between long-term systemic source notes characteristics and not solely to risk and emerging crash public perception or anecdotal These intersection-specific concerns. patterns. exhibits allow for direct Figure A3-1. Ten Year HIN 85 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 209 of 657 US-26 / E 27th Street Key Pattern High-frequency angle and rear-end crashes at a skewed, curved divided US26|E27th Severity highway intersection with Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total visibility constraints and Angle 2 8 6 8 24 incomplete pedestrian Front-Rear 1 4 5 facilities. Sideswipe (same) 2 2 Single Vehicle 1 1 2 Countermeasures Grand Total 2 9 7 15 33 Signal visibility improvements 30 (additional mast arms or 25 near-side heads), advance 20 signal-warning flashers, Inj-A protected left-turn phasing 15 Inj-B evaluation, high-visibility 10 Inj-C crosswalkUS26|E27th reconstruction Severity 5 Shape: MODEPDO withCrashes full-leg coverage, slip- Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total laneAngle channelization review, 2 8 6 8 24 0 Color: SEVERITY andFront enhanced-Rear corridor 1 4 5 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle (same) lighting.Sideswipe (same) 2 2 Single Vehicle 1 1 2 US26|E27th Severity Grand Total 2 9 7 15 33 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 30 Angle 2 8 6 8 24 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 8 6 8 24 25 Dark - Lit 1 3 1 3 8 20 Inj-A Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 1 5 5 4 15 15 Inj-B Front-Rear 1 4 5 10 Inj-C Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 5 5 PDO Dark - Lit 2 2 Light 1 2 3 0 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Sideswipe (same) 2 2 (same) Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 Light 2 2 US26|E27th Severity Single Vehicle 1 1 2 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Pedalcycle 1 1 AngleUS-26 & E 27th Street2 8 6 8 24 Light 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 8 6 8 24 10-Year Rank: #1 | 5-Year Rank: #1 Other Non-Fixed Object 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 3 1 3 8 Signalized – Skewed, Curved Divided Highway Light 1 1 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Grand Total 2 9 7 15 33 IntersectionLight 1 5 5 4 15 FrontThirty-three-Rear crashes were recorded between 2019–2023,1 4 with angle5 Crosswalk coverage is incomplete. Continental markings are present on Motorcrashes Vehicle dominating in Transport and rear-end collisions occurring1 at4 substantial5 the west side crossing E 27th Street, but east–west crosswalks are absent frequency.Dark - Lit Injury severity is present across crash types, consistent2 with2 on the south side, and north–south crosswalks are missing on the east high-speed,Light multi-lane conflict exposure. 1 2 3 side due to lack of sidewalk on the southeast corner. Existing crosswalk Sideswipe (same) 2 2 US-26 operates as a 45-mph divided four-lane corridor that curves markings across US-26 are long and exhibit limited visibility. Pedestrian Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 signals include numeric countdown displays. A southeast-bound right-turn throughLight this segment of the community and intersects East2 27th Street2 slip lane on US-26 includes an ADA-compliant crossing. No advance flashing Singleat a skew. Vehicle Dedicated left-turn lanes and medians1 are introduced1 at2 the signal-warning beacons are present despite the curved highway alignment. Pedalcycleintersection. Signal heads are mounted on a single-span1 diagonal “box1 cage”Light structure extending from the northeast1 to southwest corner.1 The crash profile reflects high-speed approach conditions, skewed OtherSignal Nonvisibility-Fixed is constrainedObject for certain approaches, particularly1 1 for geometry, limited signal visibility, incomplete pedestrian connectivity, and eastboundLight E 27th Street right-lane vehicles positioned at the1 stop bar.1 complex multi-lane turning exposure at a primary corridor intersection. Grand Total 2 9 7 15 33 86 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 210 of 65720th Street / Broadway Key Pattern Angle and rear-end crashes at a high-turnover downtown arterial transition with complex lane assignments and adjacent access drives. Countermeasures Signal timing and coordination refinement, turn-lane delineation enhancements, access management review, pedestrian visibility improvements,20thSt|Bdwy and Severity downtownCrashes speed PDO Inj-C Inj-B Inj-A Total Angle 7 3 5 15 managementFront-Rear strategies.. 12 2 14 Shape: MODE Sideswipe (same) 1 1 Single Vehicle 3 1 1 5 Color: SEVERITY Other 2 2 Grand Total 25 3 8 1 37 20 20thSt|Bdwy Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 15 Inj-A Angle 5 3 7 15 10 Inj-B Motor Vehicle in Transport 5 3 7 15 5 Inj-C Dark - Lit 3 1 1 5 0 Light 2 2 6 10 PDO Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Other Front-Rear 2 12 14 (same) Vehicle Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 12 14 Dark - Lit 1 2 3 Light 1 10 11 2. 20th Street & Broadway Sideswipe (same) 1 1 10-Year Rank: #2 | 5-Year Rank: #3 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 Signalized – Downtown Arterial Transition Single Vehicle 1 1 3 5 Intersection Pedestrian 1 1 Thirty-seven crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle Light 1 1 Utility Pole/Light Support 1 2 3 and rear-end crashes representing the dominant types. Injury severity Dark - Lit 1 1 2 is present and consistent with high turning volumes and urban arterial Light 1 1 progression conflicts. Traffic Sign Support 1 1 This intersection marks the north end of downtown and functions as a Dark - Lit 1 1 transition between commercial core and mixed professional/residential Other 2 2 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 areas. Broadway south of the intersection operates as a two-lane section Dark - Lit 1 1 with diagonal parking on both sides but widens at the intersection to Light 1 1 provide a northbound left-turn-only lane, a through lane, and a shared Grand Total 1 8 3 25 37 through/right lane. Southbound includes a single lane at the intersection, transitioning to parallel parking south of nearby access drives. intersection is signalized with marked crosswalks and pedestrian push- North of the intersection, Broadway provides two northbound lanes (no buttons on all legs. parking) and southbound lanes consisting of left-only, through-only, and Adjacent generators include downtown commercial uses, restaurants and right-only movements. 20th Street operates as a principal east–west banking access drives, the post office (one block west), residential areas arterial with multi-lane approaches: westbound includes one through and elementary school to the east, and Bluffs Middle School farther north. lane, one left-only lane, and one shared through/right lane; eastbound The crash pattern reflects multi-lane turning exposure, downtown access includes one through lane, one left-only lane, and one right-only lane. The density, and arterial progression conflicts within a constrained urban grid. 87 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 211 of 657 US-26 / Avenue I Key Pattern Very high crash frequency at a multi-lane highway- to-highway commercial intersection with complex turning paths and lane- tracking deficiencies. Countermeasures Protected left-turn phasing evaluation, installation of pavement turning arcs and enhanced lane-use markings, signal timing and progression refinement, access coordination, and upgraded intersection Shape: MODE lighting. Color: SEVERITY US26|AveI Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 30 Angle 2 6 8 12 28 25 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 6 8 12 28 20 Inj-A Dark - Lit 2 1 4 7 15 Inj-B Dawn/Dusk 1 1 10 Inj-C Light 2 3 7 8 20 5 PDO Front-Rear 2 16 18 0 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 16 18 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Dark - Lit 2 2 (same) Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 1 14 15 US-26 & Avenue I Sideswipe (same) 5 5 10-Year Rank: #3 | 5-Year Rank: #2 Motor Vehicle in Transport 5 5 Light 4 4 Signalized – Major Highway-to-Highway Unknown 1 1 Commercial Node Single Vehicle 1 1 Overturn/Rollover 1 1 Fifty-two crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle crashes Dark - Lit 1 1 representing the dominant crash type and rear-end crashes occurring Grand Total 2 6 10 34 52 at substantial frequency. Injury severity is present across crash types, reflecting high-volume, multi-lane conflict exposure. US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway (45 mph) with paved No pavement turning arcs are present for the multiple left-turn movements. shoulders, medians, and dedicated left-turn lanes approaching the Field observations indicate improper lane tracking, particularly westbound intersection. Avenue I (NE-71) is a principal north–south arterial and state US-26 vehicles turning into the far-right southbound lane of Avenue I highway. On the north leg, two northbound lanes are provided, though toward Walmart on the southwest corner. Additional commercial generators the right lane transitions almost immediately into a right-only movement include a convenience store (NW) and restaurants on the northeast and serving adjacent commercial access. Southbound on the north leg southeast corners. includes one left-turn lane and two through lanes. On the south leg, two The crash pattern reflects a high-volume highway-to-highway intersection southbound lanes are provided, while northbound includes a left-only with complex lane assignments, permissive turning exposure, and deficient lane, a shared left/through lane, and a shared through/right lane. lane-use guidance. 88 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 212 of 657US-26 / 5th Avenue Key Pattern Angle and rear-end crashes at a skewed, school-adjacent divided highway intersection with adjacent access complexity. Countermeasures Left-turn phasing evaluation, signal timing refinement, skew-related visibility enhancements, pathway crossing visibility improvements (including LPI evaluation), and access coordination north of the intersection. Shape: MODE US26|5thAve Severity Crashes PDO Inj-C Inj-B Inj-A Total Color: SEVERITY Angle 4 5 4 1 14 Front-Rear 9 1 1 11 Sideswipe (same) 1 1 US26|5thAve Severity Single Vehicle 2 2 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Sideswipe (opp.) 1 1 Angle 1 4 5 4 14 Grand Total 16 6 6 1 29 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 5 4 14 16 Dark - Lit 1 2 1 4 14 Dawn/Dusk 2 2 Light 2 5 1 8 12 Front-Rear 1 1 9 11 10 Inj-A Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 9 11 8 Inj-B Dark - Lit 3 3 6 Light 1 1 6 8 Inj-C 4 Sideswipe (same) 1 1 PDO 2 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 0 Single Vehicle 2 2 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Sideswipe Fence 1 1 (same) Vehicle (opp.) Light 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Sideswipe (opp.) 1 1 US-26 & 5th Avenue Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 10-Year Rank: #4 | 5-Year Rank: #4 Grand Total 1 6 6 16 29 Signalized – Skewed School-Adjacent Highway Intersection Twenty-nine crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, primarily A multi-use pathway crosses 5th Avenue on the north side with marked angle and rear-end collisions consistent with high turning volumes along crosswalk and pedestrian signal indications. Winters Creek (stop- a divided arterial corridor. controlled) intersects 5th Avenue immediately north of the median US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with medians and opening, allowing left turns onto 5th. Scottsbluff High School occupies the dedicated left-turn lanes approaching the intersection. 5th Avenue is southwest corner, with residential uses on the southeast and northeast a two-lane north–south roadway that widens at the intersection. The corners and office/professional uses on the northwest. A school access north leg provides one northbound lane, while the southbound approach drive to teacher parking connects just south of the intersection. includes a left-only lane and a shared through/right lane. On the south leg, The crash pattern reflects skew geometry, permissive left-turn conflicts, one left-only, one through, and a channelized right-turn lane are provided. school-related traffic peaks, and closely spaced access points north of the The intersection is skewed, influencing sight lines and turning geometry. signal. 89 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 213 of 657 US-26 / Avenue B Key Pattern High-frequency angle crashes driven by permissive left turns and multi-lane crossing exposure on a major divided corridor. Countermeasures Protected left-turn phase evaluation, signal timing and coordination refinement, yellow/all-red interval review, enhanced lane-use delineation, and intersection lighting optimization. Shape: MODE Color: SEVERITY US26|AveB Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 1 4 6 15 26 US26|AveB Severity Front-Rear 14 14 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Single Vehicle 3 3 Angle 1 4 6 15 26 Grand Total 1 4 6 32 43 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 6 15 26 30 Dark - Lit 1 4 5 Light 3 5 10 18 25 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 1 3 20 Front-Rear 14 14 Inj-A Motor Vehicle in Transport 14 14 15 Inj-B Dark - Lit 3 3 Inj-C Dawn/Dusk 2 2 10 PDO Light 8 8 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 5 Single Vehicle 3 3 0 Other Post, Pole, or Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Support 1 1 Light 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 2 2 Dark - Lit 2 2 Grand Total 1 4 6 32 43 US-26 / Avenue B US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with medians and dedicated left-turn lanes approaching the intersection. Avenue B is a multi- 10-Year Rank: #5 | 5-Year Rank: #7 lane north–south corridor with two through lanes in each direction and Signalized – High-Volume Divided Highway auxiliary left-turn lanes. The intersection does not operate with an exclusive Intersection protected left-turn phase. A pedestrian pathway crosses the south leg and Forty-three crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle is served by pedestrian signal indications. crashes (26) representing the dominant crash type. Rear-end crashes (14) The crash profile reflects high turning volumes, permissive left-turn also indicate progression-related and queue-related conflicts along the conflicts, and corridor progression dynamics typical of heavily trafficked US-26 corridor. Injury severity is present across crash types and under signalized highway intersections. both daylight and dark-lit conditions. 90 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 214 of 657US-26 / East 20th Street Key Pattern Angle crashes driven by high-speed divided highway crossings with closely spaced frontage-road conflicts. Countermeasures Median opening evaluation, access consolidation, enhanced advance warning signage, intersection lighting improvements, and feasibility assessment of signalization or alternative control. Shape: MODE US26|E20th Severity Color: SEVERITY Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 1 4 1 7 13 Front-Rear 1 2 3 US26|E20th Severity Sideswipe (same) 2 2 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Single Vehicle 2 2 Angle 1 4 1 7 13 Grand Total 1 4 2 13 20 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 1 7 13 14 Light 1 3 1 7 12 12 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 Front-Rear 1 2 3 10 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 3 Light 1 2 3 8 Inj-A Sideswipe (same) 2 2 Inj-B 6 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 Inj-C Light 2 2 4 PDO Single Vehicle 2 2 Traffic Sign Support 2 2 2 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 0 Unknown 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Grand Total 1 4 2 13 20 (same) US-26 / East 20th Street openings and is stop-controlled on both sides of US-26. Frontage roads intersect East 20th Street immediately north and south of the highway. 10-Year Rank: #6 | 5-Year Rank: #12 The southern S Frontage Road/East 20th Place is stop-controlled, while Unsignalized – High-Speed Divided Highway the northern frontage road is yield-controlled with lower traffic volumes. Crossing Adjacent land uses include mixed commercial and residential areas to the Twenty crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, primarily angle south and big-box retail, hotel, restaurant, and commercial development to collisions, with injury outcomes concentrated in crossing movements. the north, generating frequent turning movements. US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with medians and The crash pattern reflects high-speed through traffic on US-26 combined dedicated left-turn lanes, posted at 45 mph and not stop-controlled. East with complex crossing and turning conflicts created by closely spaced 20th Street is a two-lane roadway with auxiliary left-turn lanes and median frontage-road intersections. 91 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 215 of 657 US-26 / East Overland Key Pattern Angle and rear-end crashes at a high-speed gateway intersection with transition from rural to urban cross- section. Countermeasures Signal timing and yellow/ all-red interval review, continued use and evaluation of advance warning flashers, access management, enhanced lane-use delineation, and intersection lighting Shape: MODE improvements. Color: SEVERITY US26|Eover Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 3 3 5 11 12 Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 3 5 11 10 Dark - Lit 2 2 1 5 8 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 6 Inj-B 4 Light 1 4 5 2 Inj-C Front-Rear 1 4 5 0 PDO Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 5 Motor Vehicle in Transport Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 2 2 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Other 1 1 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 Single Vehicle 1 1 2 Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 1 1 US-26 & East Overland Dark - Lit 1 1 10-Year Rank: #7 | 5-Year Rank: #11 Other 1 1 Signalized – Southeast Gateway Intersection Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Nineteen crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle and Grand Total 4 5 10 19 rear-end collisions representing the predominant crash types. Injury crashes are present but consistent with other high-volume signalized corridor intersections. This intersection serves as the southeastern gateway into Scottsbluff Land uses include the Sugar Factory on the southwest corner and a and is the first signalized intersection for westbound traffic entering convenience store on the northwest corner, generating turning activity. the community. US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with The intersection benefits from advance flashing signal-warning beacons paved shoulders, medians, and dedicated left-turn lanes. East Overland south of the intersection to alert approaching drivers to signal phase Drive functions as a four-lane roadway west of the intersection with turn changes. lanes and medians, transitioning to a two-lane roadway without paved Crash patterns reflect high-speed approach conditions transitioning into shoulders to the east. an urban signalized environment with significant turning movements. 92 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 216 of 657US-26 / 21st Avenue Key Pattern Angle and rear-end crashes at a skewed signalized highway intersection with limited signal visibility and closely spaced access points. Countermeasures Signal head visibility improvements (additional heads or mast-arm relocation), stop bar and advance detection review, signal timing refinement, and US26|21stAve Severity access coordination with Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total adjacent intersections. Angle 1 5 1 7 14 Front-Rear 2 3 5 Shape: MODE Sideswipe (same) 1 1 Color: SEVERITY Single Vehicle 2 2 Grand Total 1 5 3 13 22 16 14 US26|21stAve Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 12 Angle 1 5 1 7 14 10 Inj-A Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 5 1 7 14 8 Inj-B Dark - Lit 1 2 3 6 Inj-C Light 3 1 6 10 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 4 PDO Front-Rear 2 3 5 2 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 3 5 0 Light 2 3 5 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle (same) Sideswipe (same) 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 Single Vehicle 2 2 Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 Light 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 1 1 Light 1 1 Grand Total 1 5 3 13 22 US-26 & 21st Avenue assumed eastbound stop bar on the west leg of US-26. US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with medians and dedicated left-turn 10-Year Rank: #8 | 5-Year Rank: #10 lanes. 21st Avenue includes medians on the north side and provides one Signalized – Skewed Highway Intersection left-turn, one through, and one right-turn lane in both northbound and Twenty-two crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, primarily angle southbound directions. and rear-end collisions. Injury crashes are present but limited relative to Operational complexity is increased by closely spaced intersections: East overall volume. 20th Place intersects 21st Avenue just south of US-26, and Delta Drive This signalized intersection occurs at a skew and includes signal heads intersects just north on the east side (with restricted left-turn movements). mounted on a single-span structure. Signal visibility is limited from the The skewed alignment, limited signal visibility, and adjacent access points contribute to turning and queue-related conflicts. 93 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 217 of 657 South Beltline / Broadway Key Pattern Rear-end and angle crashes at a high-volume, multi-lane regional gateway with dual- left phasing. Countermeasures Signal timing optimization, left-turn phasing review, enhanced lane-use delineation, pedestrian visibility improvements, andSBelt|Bdwy intersection lighting Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total upgrades. Angle 1 3 1 4 9 Front-Rear 4 20 24 Shape: MODE Sideswipe (same) 1 8 9 Color: Single Vehicle 1 1 2 4 SEVERITY Grand Total 1 4 7 34 46 30 25 SBelt|Bdwy Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 20 Inj-A Angle 1 3 1 4 9 15 Inj-B Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 3 1 4 9 10 Inj-C Dark - Lit 2 2 5 Light 1 1 1 4 7 PDO Front-Rear 4 20 24 0 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Motor Vehicle in Transport 4 20 24 (same) Dark - Lit 1 4 5 Light 3 16 19 Sideswipe (same) 1 8 9 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 8 9 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 1 7 8 Single Vehicle 1 1 2 4 Pedalcycle 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Curb 1 1 Light 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 1 1 South Beltline & Broadway Light 1 1 Pedestrian 1 1 10-Year Rank: #9 | 5-Year Rank: #5 Light 1 1 Signalized – Regional Bridge & Commercial Grand Total 1 4 7 34 46 Gateway Intersection Forty-six crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, primarily rear-end and angle collisions. Injury crashes are present but not dominant relative to total crash volume. signal configuration. The intersection serves major commercial generators, This signalized intersection sits just north of the Scottsbluff–Gering including Safeway (NE), YMCA (SE), and surrounding retail uses, and bridge and carries high regional traffic volumes. Both South Beltline and includes marked crosswalks with pedestrian push-buttons. The Monument Broadway operate as four-lane corridors with medians introduced near Valley Pathway passes beneath the south leg of Broadway. the intersection. Dual left-turn lanes are provided on key approaches, with The crash pattern reflects heavy volumes, dual-left phasing, and turning multiple through and right-turn lanes creating a high-capacity, multi-phase complexity typical of major gateway intersections. 94 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 218 of 657West 27th Street / Avenue B Key Pattern Rear-end and angle crashes at a signalized commercial arterial intersection with cross-section transition to residential. Countermeasures Signal timing optimization (including progression review),W27th|AveB protected turn- Severity phase evaluation, enhanced pavementCrashes markings and Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total laneAngle delineation, driveway 1 2 2 5 10 accessFront- Rearmanagement 3 2 24 29 Shape: MODE coordination,Sideswipe (same) and pedestrian 3 3 visibilitySingle Vehicle enhancements at 1 1 2 Color: SEVERITY crosswalks.Grand Total 1 5 5 33 44 35 W27th|AveB Severity 30 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 25 Inj-A 20 Angle 1 2 2 5 10 15 Inj-B Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 2 5 10 10 Inj-C 5 Dark - Lit 2 2 0 PDO Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Light 1 1 5 7 (same) Front-Rear 3 2 24 29 Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 2 24 29 Dark - Lit 1 12 13 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 2 2 10 14 West 27th Street & Avenue B 1 1 10-Year Rank: #10 | 5-Year Rank: #6 Sideswipe (same) 3 3 Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 3 Signalized – Commercial Arterial Intersection Dark - Lit 3 3 Forty-four crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, primarily rear-end Single Vehicle 1 1 2 and angle collisions. Injury crashes are present but represent a smaller Pedestrian 1 1 share of total crashes compared to property-damage-only events. Light 1 1 Curb 1 1 This signalized intersection connects two four-lane roadways with center Light 1 1 two-way left-turn lanes (TWLTL). West 27th Street operates as a four-lane Grand Total 1 5 5 33 44 commercial corridor with a TWLTL. Avenue B functions similarly north of the intersection but transitions south of the intersection to a two-lane residential street with on-street parking within one block, creating a notable operational shift in cross-section and driver expectation. The surrounding land use is heavily commercial, with restaurants located transition contributes to rear-end crashes associated with stopping to the east, west, and north, and a pharmacy on the northwest corner. behavior and angle crashes associated with turning conflicts. Pedestrian push-buttons and marked crosswalks are present, reflecting The residential transition south of the intersection introduces additional multimodal demand in the area. The combination of retail driveway variability in speed and turning expectations, particularly during peak density, frequent turning movements, signalized control, and cross-section commercial periods. 95 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 219 of 657 West 33rd Street / Avenue I Key Pattern Angle crash dominance at a complex, high-volume retail signalized intersection with multi-lane widening and lane-discipline challenges. Countermeasures Installation of painted turn arcs and enhanced lane-use markings, signal timing and protected-turn review,W33rd|AveI improved advanceSeverity lane-assignmentCrashes signage, PDO Inj-C Inj-B Inj-A Total andAngle queue/progression 12 5 1 1 19 optimizationFront-Rear to reduce rear- 4 3 7 Shape: MODE endSideswipe exposure. (same) 4 1 5 Color: SEVERITY Other 1 1 Grand Total 21 9 1 1 32 20 W33rd|AveI Severity 18 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 16 Angle 1 1 5 12 19 14 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 5 12 19 12 Inj-A Dark - Lit 1 1 2 10 Inj-B Light 1 1 4 11 17 8 Inj-C Front-Rear 3 4 7 6 PDO Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 4 7 4 Dark - Lit 1 1 2 2 Light 2 3 5 0 Sideswipe (same) 1 4 5 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Other (same) Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 5 Dark - Lit 1 1 Light 1 3 4 West 33rd Street & Avenue I Other 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 10-Year Rank: #11 | 5-Year Rank: #8 Light 1 1 Signalized – High-Volume Retail Node Grand Total 1 1 9 21 32 Thirty-two crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle crashes (19) representing the dominant crash type, followed by rear-end through, and right-only lanes) and transitions to a different configuration and sideswipe crashes. Injury crashes are present but the majority of on the south leg. events are property-damage-only. The sustained crash volume places this The intersection serves major commercial generators, including direct location among the higher-ranked signalized intersections in the 5-year access into Walmart to the west, a carwash on the northwest corner, severity analysis. commercial uses on the northeast, a restaurant on the southeast, and a This signalized intersection features complex multi-lane geometry and park on the southwest. The complexity of lane assignments and widening directional imbalance. West 33rd Street widens significantly at the movements—combined with heavy retail turning activity—creates driver intersection. The west leg provides three eastbound lanes (right-only, expectancy challenges. The lack of painted turn arcs across the intersection shared left/through, and left-only) and one westbound lane. The east further reduces lane discipline and may contribute to sideswipe and angle leg includes one eastbound lane and two westbound lanes (shared left/ conflicts. through and right-only). Avenue I carries six lanes on the north side (two The crash profile reflects high turning volumes, lane-transition complexity, northbound lanes and multiple southbound lanes including left-only, and queue variability typical of major retail signalized intersections. 96 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 220 of 657South Beltline / Avenue I Key Pattern Rear-end crash dominance at a high-volume, multi-lane signalized arterial with cross-section transitions and diverse land uses. Countermeasures Signal timing and progression optimization, queue detection evaluation, enhanced lane-use signing and pavement markings, protected turn-phase review, andSBelt|AveI intersection lighting Severity improvements.Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 1 2 6 9 Shape: MODE Front-Rear 1 4 21 26 Color: Single Vehicle 1 1 SEVERITY Sideswipe (opp.) 1 1 Grand Total 2 6 29 37 30 SBelt|AveI Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 25 Angle 1 2 6 9 20 Motor Vehicle in Inj-B 15 Transport 1 2 6 9 Inj-C Dark - Lit 1 1 10 Light 1 1 6 8 PDO 5 Front-Rear 1 4 21 26 0 Motor Vehicle in Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Sideswipe Transport 1 4 21 26 (opp.) Dark - Lit 1 1 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 1 4 19 24 Single Vehicle 1 1 Animal (Live) 1 1 South Beltline & Avenue I Dark - Lit 1 1 10-Year Rank: #12 | 5-Year Rank: #13 Sideswipe (opp.) 1 1 Signalized – Multi-Lane Arterial Intersection Struck by Falling, Shifting Cargo or Anything Set in Motion by Motor Vehicle 1 1 Thirty-seven crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with rear-end Light 1 1 crashes (26) representing the dominant crash type, followed by angle Grand Total 2 6 29 37 crashes (9). Injury crashes are present but not predominant relative to total crash volume. This signalized intersection includes complex lane configurations and commercial to the east, mixed use to the north, and access toward the cross-section transitions. South Beltline is divided with a median on the east zoo to the west. The crash profile—dominated by rear-end collisions— leg, providing two eastbound lanes and three westbound lanes (left-turn, is consistent with signalized arterial intersections experiencing queue through, right-turn). The west leg widens at the intersection from a two-lane formation, progression variability, and lane-assignment complexity. roadway to four lanes, with one lane in each direction plus dedicated turn Angle crashes reflect turning-phase exposure within the multi-lane lanes. Avenue I includes three northbound lanes on the south leg (left-turn, configuration. through, right-turn) and one southbound lane; on the north leg, southbound While the 5-year severity rank is lower than its 10-year position, the traffic expands to two lanes with a dedicated left-turn lane. sustained crash volume and geometric complexity warrant operational The intersection serves varied land uses: industrial activity to the south, refinement. 97 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 221 of 657 S Beltline / 21st Avenue Key Pattern Queue stacking and informal bypassing in an industrial, unsignalized environment with cross- section transition. Countermeasures Construction of a formal northbound left-turn lane, shoulder paving and delineation, channelization improvements, enhanced truck-turning geometry, and evaluation of rail-related queue management SBelt|21stAvestrategies. Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-C PDO Total Shape: MODE Angle 1 4 5 10 Color: SEVERITY Front-Rear 2 2 4 Sideswipe (same) 1 1 Single Vehicle 1 1 Grand Total 1 6 9 16 SBelt|21stAve Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-C PDO Total 12 Angle 1 4 5 10 10 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 4 5 10 Dark - Lit 1 1 8 Light 1 3 5 9 Inj-A Front-Rear 2 2 4 6 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 4 Inj-C Dark - Lit 1 1 2 4 PDO Dawn/Dusk 1 1 2 Light 1 1 Sideswipe (same) 1 1 0 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle N/S 1 1 (same) Single Vehicle 1 1 Other Post, Pole, or Support 1 1 Light 1 1 Grand Total 1 6 9 16 South Beltline & 21st Avenue dedicated left-turn lane results in vehicles informally bypassing queued traffic by using the shoulder or maneuvering around the median— 10-Year Rank: #13 | 5-Year Rank: #16 particularly when train activity causes vehicle stacking. The area is Unsignalized – Stop Control on East–West industrial in character with heavy truck traffic. South of the intersection, Approaches the roadway transitions to a two-lane section without paved shoulders, Sixteen crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle crashes while north of the intersection it transitions to a four-lane section. The (10) and rear-end crashes (4) comprising the majority of crash types. Injury southbound approach includes two lanes, one designated for right turns crashes are present but not dominant. and one for through movements. This intersection operates without signal control. The east–west The crash pattern reflects queue-related rear-end exposure and angle approaches are stop-controlled and include turn lanes. The south conflicts associated with stop-controlled approaches in a heavy truck approach carries two northbound lanes; however, the absence of a environment. Informal shoulder use and cross-section transition increase operational complexity beyond what crash counts alone indicate. 98 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 222 of 657US-26 / NE-71 Key Pattern High-speed divided-highway angle conflicts at a stop- controlled approach. Countermeasures Enhanced advance warning and high-visibility stop- control treatments on NE-71, intersection lighting, median channelization guidance, speed-transition signing, and evaluation of operational upgrades to reduce high- consequence crossing exposure. Shape: MODE Color: SEVERITY US26|HeartExp Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total US26|HeartExp Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 5 2 4 11 Angle 5 2 4 11 Front-Rear 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 5 2 4 11 Single Vehicle 1 2 3 6 Dark - Lit 1 1 Grand Total 6 4 8 18 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 12 Light 4 1 4 9 10 Front-Rear 1 1 8 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Inj-B Light 1 1 6 Inj-C Single Vehicle 1 2 3 6 4 PDO Overturn/Rollover 1 1 2 Light 1 1 0 Other Non-Collision 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Light 1 1 Other Fixed Object (wall, building, tunnel, etc.) 1 1 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 2 2 Dark - Lit 1 1 Light 1 1 Ditch 1 1 US-26 & Heartland Expressway (NE-71) Light 1 1 10-Year Rank: #14 | 5-Year Rank: #9 Grand Total 6 4 8 18 Unsignalized – Stop Control on Heartland Expressway intersection. Both highways include paved shoulders. The configuration Eighteen crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, with angle creates a high-speed, high-exposure crossing condition, where minor- crashes representing the dominant crash type and single-vehicle crashes approach drivers must judge gaps across multiple through lanes and a also present. Injury crashes occur within the dataset, though overall median. crash frequency is moderate relative to higher-ranked intersections. The crash pattern is consistent with high-speed angle conflicts at a US-26 operates as a divided four-lane facility (55 mph in this segment) stop-controlled approach crossing a divided highway. Given the speed with no stop control. Heartland Expressway (NE-71) operates as a environment and multi-lane geometry, even moderate crash frequency divided four-lane facility posted at 70 mph and is stop-controlled at the reflects elevated severity potential. 99 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 223 of 657 US-26 / 14th Avenue Key Pattern Stop-controlled crossing conflicts at a divided highway with angled approach and closely spaced frontage road access. Countermeasures Enhanced stop-control visibility and advance warning, intersection EOver|14thAve Severity lighting, frontage road accessCrashes spacing evaluation, PDO Inj-C Inj-B Total andSingle median Vehicle channelization 8 1 9 reviewFront- Rearto reduce high-speed 11 2 13 crossingSideswipe exposure. (same) 1 1 Shape: MODE Angle 1 1 Color: SEVERITY Other 1 1 Grand Total 22 2 1 25 14 EOver|14thAve Severity 12 Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Single Vehicle 1 8 9 10 Pedestrian 1 1 8 Inj-B Dark - Lit 1 1 6 Traffic Sign Support 4 4 Inj-C 4 Dark - Lit 2 2 2 PDO Light 1 1 0 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Other Post, Pole, or Support 2 2 Single Front-Rear Sideswipe Angle Other Light 2 2 Vehicle (same) Parked Motor Vehicle 1 1 Light 1 1 Tree (standing) 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Front-Rear 2 11 13 Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 11 13 Dark - Lit 2 2 Light 2 9 11 Sideswipe (same) 1 1 US-26 & 14th Avenue Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 10-Year Rank: #15 | 5-Year Rank: #25 Light 1 1 Angle 1 1 Unsignalized – Stop Control on 14th Avenue | Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Divided Highway with Frontage Road Interaction Other 1 1 Twenty-five crashes were recorded between 2019–2023, including Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 rear-end, angle, and single-vehicle crashes. Injury crashes are Grand Total 1 2 22 25 present, though frequency is moderate relative to higher-ranked HIN locations. US-26 operates as a divided four-lane highway with medians transitioning to left-turn lanes. Fourteenth Avenue is a two-lane stop- controlled approach that intersects the highway at a slight angle. A stop-controlled frontage road intersects 14th Avenue immediately north of US-26, creating closely spaced conflict points. Adjacent land The crash profile reflects stop-controlled minor-road conflicts uses include Target on the northeast corner and WNCC, a preschool, crossing a high-speed divided highway with frontage road and district offices to the south. interaction and elevated trip generation. 100 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 224 of 657W 20th St / Avenue I Key Pattern Rear-end crash dominance at a signalized arterial intersection with recreational and neighborhood pedestrian exposure.. Countermeasures Signal timing and progression review, queue detection or clearance interval evaluation, enhanced pedestrian visibility treatments near park approaches, improved lane-use signing and pavement markings, Shape: MODE and seasonal speed management strategies Color: SEVERITY during peak recreational use. 16 W20th|AveI Severity 14 Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total Angle 3 1 2 6 12 Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 1 2 6 10 Dark - Lit 1 1 2 Inj-B Light 3 1 4 8 Inj-C Front-Rear 1 14 15 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 14 15 PDO 6 Light 1 14 15 Single Vehicle 1 1 2 4 Pedalcycle 1 1 2 Light 1 1 Traffic Sign Support 1 1 0 Light 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Grand Total 5 1 17 23 West 20th Street & Avenue I volume urban arterial intersection with multiple turning movements and signal progression influence. 10-Year Rank: #16 | 5-Year Rank: #15 Land uses include the Westmoor swimming pool and park on the Signalized – Park and Neighborhood Context southwest corner, a convenience store on the northwest corner, Twenty-three crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this and residential neighborhoods on the east side of the intersection. signalized intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity Recreational activity associated with the park and pool increases by color) indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with rear-end crashes seasonal pedestrian exposure, while commercial activity contributes to (15) representing the dominant crash type, followed by angle crashes (6). turning movements and queue formation. Injury crashes are present but not at high frequency relative to total crash The crash profile—dominated by rear-end collisions—is consistent count. with signalized intersections experiencing queueing and progression Avenue I operates as a two-way roadway with a two-way left-turn lane variability along arterial corridors. Angle crashes indicate turning-phase (TWLTL). West 20th Street is also a two-way roadway with dedicated conflicts typical of left-turn operations within TWLTL configurations. left-turn lanes at the intersection. The configuration reflects a moderate- 101 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 225 of 657 E 20th St / 5th Avenue Key Pattern Balanced rear-end and angle crashes at a signalized intersection serving a school and park, with adjacent pullout activity near the intersection. Countermeasures Balanced rear-end and angle crashes at a signalized intersection serving a school and park, with adjacent pullout activity near the intersection. Shape: MODE Color: SEVERITY 9 8 E20th|5thAve Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 7 Angle 1 1 5 7 6 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 5 7 Inj-A Dark - Lit 1 1 5 Inj-B Dawn/Dusk 2 2 Light 1 3 4 4 Inj-C Front-Rear 1 7 8 PDO 3 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 7 8 2 Dark - Lit 3 3 Light 1 4 5 1 Single Vehicle 2 1 3 Pedestrian 2 1 3 0 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Dark - Lit 2 1 3 Grand Total 1 2 2 13 18 East 20th Street & 5th Avenue northeast corner of the intersection, and Centennial Park is located on the southwest corner. A small pullout on the south leg of 5th Avenue adjacent 10-Year Rank: #17 | 5-Year Rank: #18 to Centennial Park is positioned close to the intersection, introducing Signalized – School and Park Context additional turning and merging activity near the signalized approaches. Eighteen crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this signalized The intersection serves a residential area located several blocks east of intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) Broadway and west of the regional mall area, generating local traffic, indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with rear-end (8) and angle (7) school pick-up/drop-off activity, and pedestrian crossings associated with crashes occurring at similar frequency. Injury crashes are present across both the school and park. The crash profile is consistent with moderate- both crash types, and pedestrian involvement is documented within the volume signalized intersections experiencing queue-related rear-end dataset. crashes and turning-movement angle conflicts. Both East 20th Street and 5th Avenue operate as two-lane roadways Given the proximity of school-aged pedestrians and recreational users, with center left-turn lanes. Longfellow Elementary School occupies the exposure risk extends beyond vehicle-only crash frequency. 102 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 226 of 657W 27th St / Avenue I Key Pattern High-volume multi-lane signalized intersection with balanced angle and rear- end crash dominance in a commercial corridor with pathway interface. Countermeasures Signal timing optimization and phase review (including protected turn evaluation), queue detection and progression refinement, enhanced lane-use signing and pavement markings, pedestrian timing and visibility upgrades, and pathway crossing Shape: MODE improvements at the Color: SEVERITY signalized approaches. 20 W27th|AveI Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 15 Angle 1 17 18 Inj-B 10 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 17 18 Inj-C Dark - Lit 6 6 5 PDO Dawn/Dusk 1 1 0 Light 1 10 11 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Vehicle Front-Rear 1 3 13 17 (same) Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 3 13 17 Dark - Lit 1 1 2 West 27th Street & Avenue I Dawn/Dusk 1 1 Light 1 2 11 14 10-Year Rank: #18 | 5-Year Rank: #19 Sideswipe (same) 4 4 Signalized – Multi-Lane Commercial Intersection Motor Vehicle in Transport 4 4 Dark - Lit 1 1 Forty-two crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this signalized Light 3 3 intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) Single Vehicle 3 3 indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with angle (18) and rear-end Pedalcycle 1 1 Light 1 1 (17) crashes comprising the dominant crash types. Injury crashes are Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 present across both categories, reflecting sustained conflict exposure Light 1 1 rather than isolated events. Pedestrian 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 This intersection features a complex multi-lane configuration. The Grand Total 1 4 37 42 west leg of West 27th Street includes one westbound lane and three eastbound lanes (left-turn, through, and shared through/right). The east multi-use pathway runs along the west side of Avenue I, intersecting this leg includes two through lanes with dedicated left- and right-turn lanes. signalized location. Although pedestrian signals are present, pedestrian The south leg of Avenue I includes one southbound lane and three movements operate with lower priority relative to vehicular phases. northbound lanes (left-turn, through, and shared through/right). The The crash profile reflects a classic high-volume, multi-lane signalized north leg includes two northbound lanes and three southbound lanes commercial intersection with complex turning movements, high access (left-turn, through, and right-turn). density, and progression variability. Rear-end crashes likely reflect queue The intersection serves a high-activity commercial area, including a dollar formation and signal timing dynamics, while angle crashes indicate store to the west, Walmart and additional commercial uses to the north, turning-phase conflicts and lane-use decision complexity. The presence a restaurant on the southeast corner, and a convenience store on the of the pathway and commercial pedestrian generators introduces northeast corner. Mixed commercial uses exist to the east and south. A multimodal exposure even if pedestrian crash counts are limited. 103 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 227 of 657 W 42nd St / Avenue I (NE-71) Key Pattern Stop-controlled minor- road angle conflicts at a two-lane highway serving sensitive institutional land uses, with a fatal crash present. Countermeasures Enhanced intersection lighting, improved minor- approach signing and high-visibility stop-control treatments, evaluation of sight distance and turn- Shape: MODE lane channelization, and Color: SEVERITY consideration of speed management or access refinements on NE-71. 8 W42nd|AveI/NE71 Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Fatal Total 7 Angle 1 2 3 1 7 6 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 3 1 7 Dark - Lit 1 1 5 Light 1 1 2 1 5 Fatal Unknown 1 1 4 Inj-B Inj-C Front-Rear 1 2 3 3 PDO Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 3 Light 1 2 3 2 Grand Total 2 2 5 1 10 1 0 Angle Front-Rear West 42nd Street & Avenue I destinations to the south (including Walmart and US-26), and regional routes. West 42nd Street is stop-controlled at the intersection. The east 10-Year Rank: #19 | 5-Year Rank: #17 leg operates as a two-lane facility with a two-way left-turn lane, while the Unsignalized – Stop Control on West 42nd Street west leg is a two-lane roadway without paved shoulders. Ten crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this unsignalized Surrounding land uses include a hospital and residential development intersection, including one fatal crash. Crash mapping (mode by symbol to the east, a veterans home and agricultural/residential uses to the shape, severity by color) indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, west, a golf course and rural development to the north, and commercial with angle crashes representing the dominant severe crash type. While destinations to the south. These land uses introduce a mix of passenger total crash frequency is relatively low compared to higher-ranked HIN vehicles, service vehicles, and potentially vulnerable or older drivers. intersections, the presence of a fatal crash elevates this location within The crash pattern is consistent with minor-road stop-controlled angle the severity-weighted analysis. conflicts crossing a two-lane highway with turn-lane operations. Given the Avenue I (NE-71) operates as a two-lane highway with a center left- presence of sensitive land uses (hospital and veterans home) and a fatal turn lane and no stop control. It serves as a primary north–south crash history, even moderate crash frequency warrants focused attention. corridor, carrying traffic between rural areas north of town, commercial 104 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 228 of 657US-26 / CR 19 Key Pattern High-speed rural angle conflicts at a stop-controlled minor approach crossing a 70-mph divided highway with adjacent rail influence. Countermeasures Enhanced advance warning signage on CR 19 (including intersection and speed transition warnings), high-visibility stop-control treatments, intersection lighting, improved median channelization guidance, potential acceleration/ Shape: MODE deceleration lane evaluation, and assessment of sight Color: SEVERITY distance and rail-queue interaction. 3.5 US26|CR19 Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-C PDO Fatal Total 3 Angle 1 1 1 3 2.5 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 1 3 Light 1 1 1 3 2 Fatal Front-Rear 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 1.5 Inj-A Light 1 1 Inj-C 1 Single Vehicle 1 1 PDO Traffic Sign Support 1 1 0.5 Light 1 1 0 Other 1 1 Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 in Transport Light 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Other Grand Total 1 1 3 1 6 US-26 & CR 19 further east near an overpass. CR 19 is a two-lane rural roadway serving agricultural and residential land uses in both directions and operates 10-Year Rank: #20 | 5-Year Rank: #20 under stop control at the intersection. Unsignalized – Stop Control on CR 19 | High-Speed A railroad crossing is located immediately southwest of the intersection, Divided Highway Context with the rail line running parallel to US-26. The proximity of the rail Six crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this rural, unsignalized corridor introduces additional driver expectancy considerations and intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) potential queue interactions. indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, including one fatal crash The crash pattern is consistent with rural stop-controlled minor-road and one injury crash within the 5-year period. Although overall crash angle conflicts crossing a high-speed divided highway. At 70 mph, gap frequency is low, severity weighting elevates this location due to the high- acceptance errors and crossing misjudgments can result in severe consequence environment. outcomes even when crash frequency is limited. The combination of high US-26 operates as a divided highway at this location, with two lanes in operating speeds, divided highway geometry, and rail proximity increases each direction and a raised median with dedicated turn lanes. Posted systemic risk beyond what raw crash counts suggest. speeds are 70 mph in this segment, with a speed reduction occurring Key Pattern: High-speed rural angle conflicts at a stop-controlled minor approach crossing a 70-mph divided highway with adjacent rail influence. 105 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 229 of 657 W 27th Street / Avenue F Key Pattern Stop-controlled minor- road angle conflicts within a high-access commercial corridor featuring a TWLTL and frequent turning movements. Countermeasures Access management review, improved minor-approach signing and lighting, enhancedW27th|AveF intersection Severity delineation, evaluation of Crashes Inj-A Inj-B PDO Total Shape: MODE medianAngle channelization or 1 1 2 4 turnFront restrictions,-Rear and speed 2 2 Color: SEVERITY managementSingle Vehicle treatments 1 2 3 alongGrand West Total 27th Street. 1 2 6 9 4.5 W27th|AveF Severity 4 Crashes Inj-A Inj-B PDO Total 3.5 Angle 1 1 2 4 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 2 4 3 Dark - Lit 1 1 2 2.5 Inj-A Light 1 1 2 2 Inj-B Front-Rear 2 2 1.5 PDO Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 2 Dark - Lit 1 1 1 Light 1 1 0.5 Single Vehicle 1 2 3 0 Other Post, Pole, or Support 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Light 1 1 Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Other Fixed Object (wall, West 27th Street & Avenue F building, tunnel, etc.) 1 1 Light 1 1 10-Year Rank: #21 | 5-Year Rank: #22 Grand Total 1 2 6 9 Unsignalized – Stop Control on Avenue F Nine crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this unsignalized commercial corridor intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with angle and single-vehicle crashes comprising the majority of events. Injury crashes The crash pattern is consistent with minor-road stop-controlled angle are limited but present. conflicts typical of multi-lane commercial arterials with continuous left- West 27th Street operates as a four-lane facility with a two-way left- turn lanes. Frequent turning activity, driveway access points, and speed turn lane (TWLTL) and serves a commercial corridor characterized by variability contribute to driver expectancy challenges and potential rear-end restaurants, convenience stores, and frequent access driveways. Avenue or angle conflicts. F is a local street operating under stop control. The TWLTL and high While crash frequency and severity are moderate relative to higher-ranked driveway density create numerous turning movements and gap-selection intersections, the access density and commercial land use increase decisions along the corridor. systemic exposure risk along this segment of West 27th Street. 106 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 230 of 657L79G / CR 19 Key Pattern Rural single-vehicle roadway departure crashes with minor-road stop control and limited shoulder recovery .Countermeasures Enhanced intersection advance warning signage, stop-ahead pavement markings on CR 19, improved lighting or retro-reflective delineation, shoulder widening on CR 19 (if feasible), and evaluation of intersection sight distance. Shape: MODE Color: SEVERITY 7 6 L79G|CR19 Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-B PDO Total 5 Single Vehicle 1 2 3 6 Tree (standing) 1 1 4 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 Inj-A Fence 2 1 3 Inj-B Dark - Not Lit 2 1 3 3 PDO Animal (Live) 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 2 Ditch 1 1 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 1 Grand Total 1 2 3 6 0 Single Vehicle L79G & CR 19 intersection. The surrounding land use is rural in character, with agricultural-residential properties and a golf course located north along 10-Year Rank: #22 | 5-Year Rank: #24 CR 19. Unsignalized – Stop Control on CR 19 The absence of paved shoulders on CR 19 may contribute to limited Six crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this rural, unsignalized recovery area for drivers approaching the stop-controlled intersection. intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) The single-vehicle crash concentration suggests issues related to speed indicates single-vehicle crashes as the dominant crash type, including management, sight distance, edge drop-off conditions, or nighttime injury-level outcomes. The crash profile is consistent with rural roadway visibility rather than intersection angle conflicts. Rural intersections departure and loss-of-control events rather than multi-vehicle crossing such as this often experience lower crash frequency but higher severity conflicts. potential due to speed and roadway departure risk. L79G operates as a two-lane county highway with paved shoulders Although overall crash frequency is low relative to urban HIN locations, and no stop control at this location. CR 19 is a two-lane paved roadway the severity-weighted ranking reflects the elevated consequence without paved shoulders and operates under stop control at the potential typical of rural highway environments. 107 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 231 of 657 East Overland / 21st Avenue Key Pattern Industrial truck turning conflicts at a four-way stop with mid-block pedestrian exposure east of the intersection. Countermeasures Targeted pedestrian crossing enhancements east of the intersection (high-visibility crosswalks, RRFB if warranted), improved lighting, truck route signing reinforcement, and evaluation of mid- Shape: MODE block crossing demand Color: SEVERITY management strategies. EOver|21stAve Severity 12 Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 10 Angle 3 3 5 11 Motor Vehicle in Transport 3 3 5 11 8 Dark - Lit 1 1 Inj-B 6 Light 3 2 5 10 Inj-C 4 Front-Rear 4 4 PDO Motor Vehicle in Transport 4 4 2 Dawn/Dusk 1 1 0 Light 3 3 Angle Front-Rear Sideswipe Single Other Sideswipe (same) 1 1 (same) Vehicle Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 Single Vehicle 1 1 East Overland & 21st Avenue Pedestrian 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 10-Year Rank: #23 | 5-Year Rank: #14 Other 1 1 All-Way Stop Control – Industrial Corridor Context Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 Light 1 1 Eighteen crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this four-way Grand Total 4 3 11 18 stop-controlled intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with angle crashes representing the dominant crash type, followed by rear-end crashes. Injury severity is present but limited in frequency. Both East Overland Drive and 21st Avenue operate as four-lane facilities in this area. The intersection functions under all-way stop control, which pedestrian activity associated with sugar factory workers has been appears to moderate speeds and organize turning movements effectively observed mid-block east of the intersection, where crossing activity is not relative to corridor locations without control. Observations suggest the concentrated at the stop-controlled crossing. stop control is generally operating as intended. While crash frequency and severity do not place this location among the However, the intersection sits immediately west of the sugar factory, with highest-risk Tier 1 intersections, the combination of heavy industrial truck heavy truck traffic using both 21st Avenue and East Overland Drive east volumes, multi-lane cross-sections, worker pedestrian activity, and mid- of the intersection. Large vehicle turning movements, braking variability, block crossing behavior creates systemic exposure conditions not fully and queue formation contribute to operational complexity. Additionally, reflected in the crash data. 108 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 232 of 657E Overland / 14th Avenue Key Pattern Stop-controlled minor-road conflicts at a multi-lane arterial with adjacent residential and retail pedestrian generators. Countermeasures Installation of a high-visibility marked crosswalk with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB), enhanced lighting, advance pedestrian warning signage, and evaluation of median refuge potential to reduce multi- lane crossing exposure. Shape: MODE Color: SEVERITY 2.5 EOver|14thAve Severity Crashes Inj-A Inj-C PDO Fatal Total 2 Angle 1 1 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 1.5 Light 1 1 Fatal Front-Rear 1 1 2 1 Inj-A Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 2 Light 1 1 Inj-C 0.5 Dark - Lit 1 1 PDO Single Vehicle 1 1 0 Pedestrian 1 1 Motor Vehicle Dark - Not Lit 1 1 in Transport Sideswipe (same) 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Sideswipe Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 (same) Light 1 1 Grand Total 1 1 2 1 5 East Overland & 14th Avenue apartment complex on one side and a commercial retail destination (dollar store) on the opposite side. This land use pairing generates pedestrian 10-Year Rank: #24 | 5-Year Rank: #21 crossing demand across a multi-lane facility without enhanced crossing Unsignalized – Stop Control on 14th Avenue treatments. Five crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this unsignalized The crash profile reflects minor-road angle conflicts typical of stop- intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) controlled local approaches crossing a multi-lane arterial. However, the indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, including one fatal crash within adjacent residential and retail uses introduce elevated pedestrian exposure the 5-year period. Although overall crash frequency is relatively low, the not fully captured in crash counts alone. The combination of multi-lane presence of a fatal crash elevates the severity weighting of this location. crossing width, vehicle speed, and pedestrian demand increases systemic East Overland Drive operates as a four-lane uncontrolled arterial, while 14th risk. Avenue is a local street operating under stop control. The intersection is While crash volume is limited, the fatal crash history, land use context, and directly influenced by adjacent land uses, including a multi-unit residential documented pedestrian crossing need justify proactive intervention. 109 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 233 of 657 W Overland Drive / Broadway Key Pattern: Stop-controlled minor- road angle conflicts crossing a multi-lane arterial with nearby railroad median transition. Countermeasures Enhanced minor- approach signing and lighting, improved intersection visibility and delineation, evaluation of median channelization and left- Shape: MODE turn management, and Color: SEVERITY assessment of driver expectancy impacts associated with the rail WOver|Bdwy Severity median6 transition. Crashes Inj-A Inj-B PDO Total Angle 1 2 2 5 5 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 2 5 Light 1 1 2 4 4 Dark - Not Lit 1 1 Inj-A Sideswipe (same) 1 1 3 Inj-B Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 1 PDO Light 1 1 2 Single Vehicle 2 2 Curb 1 1 1 Dark - Lit 1 1 Utility Pole/Light Support 1 1 0 Dark - Lit 1 1 Angle Sideswipe (same) Single Vehicle Grand Total 1 2 5 8 West Overland & Broadway further influenced by the nearby railroad corridor; northbound Broadway transitions into a divided section with the quiet-zone rail median 10-Year Rank: #25 | 5-Year Rank: #23 immediately north of the intersection. This median division alters driver Unsignalized – Stop Control on West Overland expectancy and channelization conditions directly beyond the intersection. Drive The crash profile is consistent with minor-road stop-controlled angle Between 2019–2023, eight crashes were recorded at this unsignalized conflicts typical of multi-lane urban arterials with continuous left-turn intersection. Crash mapping (mode by symbol shape, severity by color) lanes. The presence of the TWLTL can increase turning exposure and gap- indicates primarily motor-vehicle crashes, with angle crashes representing acceptance complexity for vehicles entering or crossing Broadway. The the dominant crash type. Injury crashes are limited but present within the proximity of the railroad median division north of the intersection may also dataset. influence driver perception and maneuver selection. Broadway operates as the uncontrolled major roadway and functions as While overall crash frequency and severity are comparatively low relative to a four-lane facility with a two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). West Overland higher-ranked HIN intersections, the operational context reflects systemic Drive is a two-lane stop-controlled minor approach. The intersection is minor-road crossing risk at a multi-lane arterial with rail-adjacent influence. 110 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 234 of 657W 20th Street / Railway Key Pattern Minor-road stop-controlled angle conflicts in an industrial corridor with truck influence and rail-related queue dynamics. Countermeasures Enhanced minor-approach visibility, improved advance warning signage, intersection lighting, truck-turning geometry improvements, delineation upgrades, and evaluation of rail-queue influence on Shape: MODE driver behavior. Color: SEVERITY 3.5 W20th|Railway Severity Crashes Inj-B Inj-C PDO Total 3 Angle 1 2 3 2.5 Motor Vehicle in Transport 1 2 3 Light 1 2 3 2 Front-Rear 2 1 3 Inj-B Inj-C Motor Vehicle in Transport 2 1 3 1.5 PDO Light 2 1 3 Single Vehicle 2 2 1 Pedalcycle 1 1 1 1 0.5 Other Post, Pole, or Support 1 1 0 Unknown 1 1 Angle Front-Rear Single Vehicle Grand Total 1 2 5 8 West 20th Street & Railway counts are relatively low compared to other Tier 1 locations, operational observations indicate elevated conflict exposure. 10-Year Rank: #26 | 5-Year Rank: #26 This intersection sits within an industrial corridor with significant truck Unsignalized – Stop Control on Railway volumes. Cross-section transitions occur in the immediate vicinity, and Eight crashes were recorded between 2019–2023 at this unsignalized queueing associated with rail operations can influence driver decision- industrial-area intersection. Crash mapping (symbol = mode, color = making and gap acceptance. The presence of heavy vehicles increases severity) indicates predominantly motor-vehicle crashes, with angle and braking distances, turning radii requirements, and potential sight distance rear-end collisions comprising the primary crash types. Injury-level crashes constraints. are present but limited in frequency. While crash frequency alone does not elevate this location to the highest West 20th Street operates as the uncontrolled major roadway, while tier, the combination of stop-controlled minor approach, heavy truck Railway is stop-controlled. The crash pattern is consistent with minor-road turning movements, rail-related queue influence, cross-section transition, vehicles attempting to cross or turn onto West 20th Street in a context and industrial access density suggests systemic risk characteristics typical influenced by heavy truck traffic and nearby rail activity. Although crash of unsignalized industrial intersections. 111 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 235 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 112 Appendix 3 - Crash Maps Page 236 of 657 A4 findings 113 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 237 of 657 Appendix 4 Table of Contents A4.1 Purpose and Organization of A4 ...........................................................................115 A4.2 Key Findings from Data Analysis ...........................................................................115 A4.3 Summary of Risk Factors and Systemic Safety Issues ........................................116 A4.4 Overview of gaps in infrastructure, policy, or enforcement ...............................120 A4.5 Relationship of Adopted Plans, Policies, and Standards to Safety Findings .....122 2026 Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan ............................................................................................122 2016 Comprehensive Plan — Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ..................................126 East Overland Corridor Revitalization Plan – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ..........128 Downtown Streetscape Master Plan – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ...................130 School Safety Assessment Study (2020) Scottsbluff High School & Bluffs Middle School – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ..132 Scottsbluff Public Schools Safe Pupil Transportation Plan – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ............................................................................................................................................134 Economic and Demographic Trends (2021) – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ........136 Tri-City Sustainability Assessment (2009) – Transportation & Mobility Findings Summary .........138 United We GROW Regional Economic Development Strategic Plan – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary .............................................................................................................................140 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Program – Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ...............142 City of Scottsbluff Standards and Specifications (1996) Transportation & Safety Findings Summary ....................................................................................144 City of Scottsbluff Master Pathways Plan (2005) – Map Narrative Summary ...............................145 A4.6 Transportation Projects and Improvements Supported by the 2026 Comprehensive Plan ............................................................................................. 146 A4.7 Synthesis: Connection Between Findings and the SS4A Safety Action Plan .... 148 114 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 238 of 657 across the roadway network. with elevated turning move- A4.1 Purpose and While most reported crashes ments and access demand Organization of A4 result in property damage only, a Within the project limits, US-26 is Findings that informed relatively small number of corridors a four-lane divided facility with a development of the Scottsbluff and intersections account for a raised median, and all public street SS4A Safety Action Plan are disproportionate share of severe connections are stop-controlled documented, which included outcomes. or signalized. While pedestrian integrating crash analysis, High KSI crashes are most frequently countdown signals are present Injury Network identification, associated with: at major signalized intersections and review of adopted plans, (including Avenue B, Avenue I, policies, standards, and public • Higher-speed arterial roadways 5th Avenue, East 27th Street, 21st input. Systemic safety risks • Highway-adjacent corridors Avenue, and East Overland), the were identified, including gaps • Locations with complex turning corridor generally operates with: in infrastructure, policy, and movements and high traffic operations. How these findings • Permissive turning movements volumes directly informed the selection and • Long pedestrian crossing dis- prioritization of SS4A strategies These patterns indicate that crash tances severity in Scottsbluff is strongly and actions are also provided. • Limited pedestrian priority fea- influenced by roadway function, tures (e.g., leading pedestrian in- Detailed crash maps and operating speed, and conflict tervals or protected turn phases) intersection summaries are exposure, rather than isolated provided in Appendix A3 - Crash Maps, behavioral factors. The findings HIN intersections along and near with supporting methods in Appendix support a network-based, Safe US-26 include locations such A7 - Methods. System approach focused on as 14th Street near the Target/ Transportation safety objectives corridor- and intersection-level risk WNCC area and East 20th and multimodal priorities reduction, consistent with SS4A Street near Staples, where stop- embedded throughout the draft guidance. controlled side-street movements must cross high-volume, high- 2026 Scottsbluff Comprehensive High Injury Network (HIN) plan draft and related documents speed traffic. These locations Summary provide clear policy support present challenges for vehicles, for SS4A implementation. This High Injury Network (HIN) analysis pedestrians, and bicyclists appendix is organized to establish identified a limited number attempting to cross or access the a transparent, data-driven of corridors and intersections corridor. foundation linking documented that collectively represent a The HIN provides a defensible, risk, existing conditions, and concentrated share of fatal and data-driven basis for prioritizing community priorities to the Safety serious injury crashes. These safety investments where they Action Plan and its implementation locations form a connected are most likely to reduce fatal and framework, consistent with FHWA network of risk rather than serious injury crashes, directly SS4A program guidance. isolated hotspots, reflecting informing the SS4A project systemic design and operational prioritization process. A4.2 Key Findings from characteristics. Vulnerable Road User Trends Data Analysis Key HIN corridors and areas include: Pedestrian and bicyclist crash Crash History and Severity analysis indicates that vulnerable Patterns • US Highway 26, which functions road user risk is concentrated in Crash history analysis as a principal east–west arterial specific, predictable environments, demonstrates that fatal and serious through the community rather than dispersed evenly injury (KSI) crashes in Scottsbluff • Adjacent arterial corridors that throughout the city. Elevated risk are predictable and systemic, intersect or parallel the highway occurs where pedestrian demand rather than randomly distributed • Commercial and activity centers intersects with higher-speed traffic 115 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 239 of 657 and where crossing opportunities and coordinated signals support • Linking crash severity to speed, are limited or widely spaced. regional mobility but also create exposure, and conflict density environments where severe Key contributing conditions • Highlighting locations where crashes are more likely when include: pedestrian and bicyclist risk is conflicts occur. elevated • Long crossing distances on Intersection-level risk is elevated multi-lane arterials • Establishing the need for cor- at: ridor-scale solutions and inter- • Limited grade-separated pedes- agency coordination trian crossings • Locations with high turning vol- umes and permissive phasing By grounding project selection in • Land uses that generate pedes- crash history, HIN analysis, and trian activity without correspond- • Stop-controlled side streets crossing multi-lane facilities corridor-level risk factors, the ing crossing infrastructure SS4A Safety Action Plan creates US-26 illustrates this pattern • Areas with high commercial a clear, defensible line from clearly. While the corridor includes access demand and turning data → risk → strategy → projects, multiple signalized intersections conflicts consistent with FHWA SS4A NOFO with pedestrian countdown signals, These risks are evident at expectations and the Safe System pedestrian crossings are widely several US-26 intersections approach. This prioritization spaced, and only one pedestrian and commercial access points, structure is carried forward into bridge exists, located between particularly in the eastern portion the Action Plan project sheets and Avenue B and 5th Avenue serving of the city. While access is countermeasure crosswalk (Appendix the west side of the community. generally limited to public streets A8 - Projects and A9 - Countermeasures). No comparable grade-separated rather than private driveways, pedestrian crossing exists on the the combination of high speeds, A4.3 Summary of Risk east side of Scottsbluff near 14th turning movements, and long Factors and Systemic Street or East 20th Street, where pedestrian crossings creates commercial activity and pedestrian conditions where errors are more Safety Issues demand are present. likely to result in serious injury. Why SS4A Is Critical on State- Controlled Corridors These trends indicate that Importantly, US-26 is a Nebraska vulnerable road user risk is driven Department of Transportation Scottsbluff’s highest-risk corridor, primarily by system design and (NDOT)–controlled corridor. US Highway 26, is owned and exposure, not individual behavior. While the City performs routine controlled by the Nebraska The data support prioritizing maintenance activities, geometric Department of Transportation pedestrian safety improvements— design, signal phasing, speed (NDOT). While the City performs such as enhanced crossing management, and major safety routine maintenance within this treatments, pedestrian priority improvements require NDOT corridor, key safety decisions— features, and potential grade coordination and approval. This such as roadway geometry, signal separation—at locations identified jurisdictional structure is a critical phasing, speed management, and through HIN and activity-based factor shaping safety outcomes pedestrian priority treatments— analysis. and reinforces the need for require state coordination and interagency collaboration. approval. Corridor- and Intersection- Level Risk Link to Project Prioritization The SS4A Safety Action Plan provides a formal, data-driven Corridor-level analysis shows The findings in this section framework to document safety that crash severity increases directly inform the SS4A project needs on state-controlled facilities where roadway design prioritizes prioritization framework by: using FHWA-recognized methods, vehicular throughput over conflict • Identifying corridors and inter- including crash history analysis, reduction and speed management. sections where systemic risk is High Injury Network (HIN) mapping, On facilities such as US-26, wide highest and systemic risk assessment. This cross-sections, median separation, 116 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 240 of 657approach supports interagency operating environments, consistent environment for mixed-use collaboration, strengthens project with the Safe System approach corridors. justification, and improves eligibility and Vision Zero goals. Supporting evidence: High Injury for implementation funding. This section summarizes the Network corridors correspond By aligning local safety priorities primary risk factors and systemic closely with higher-speed with state-controlled infrastructure safety issues identified through facilities and highway-adjacent through SS4A, Scottsbluff can crash analysis, High Injury roadways (see Appendix A3 - Crash advance corridor-level safety Network (HIN) mapping, public Maps: HIN Corridor/Intersection improvements that reduce fatal engagement, and review of Maps). Severe crashes are highly and serious injury risk, even where adopted plans, ordinances, and concentrated on these corridors, direct local control is limited— standards. These findings explain with approximately 96.8% of KSI consistent with the Safe System the underlying causes of fatal and crashes occurring on just 12.3 principle of shared responsibility serious injury crashes in Scottsbluff miles (about 6%) of the roadway among system owners. and directly inform the strategies network, demonstrating a and priorities of the SS4A Safety disproportionate concentration of Why SS4A Is Critical for School Action Plan. risk. Zones and Rail Corridors Systemic Nature of Safety Risk 2. Intersection Conflict Density School zones and rail corridors Intersections along major corridors represent predictable, high-risk Crash data and network exhibit elevated risk due to: environments where exposure, screening demonstrate that complexity, and vulnerable road severe crashes are not randomly • High turning volumes users converge. In Scottsbluff, distributed, but instead cluster • Closely spaced access points these areas involve multiple along a limited number of corridors • Limited pedestrian crossing jurisdictions and stakeholders, and intersections with common opportunities including the City, school characteristics related to speed, • Complex signal or priority condi- districts, rail operators, and state exposure, and conflict density (see tions Appendix a6 - Maps: agencies, which can complicate A6.17, A6.18, A6.19). These environments increase the implementation of safety This pattern is consistent with likelihood of severe angle, turning, improvements. national research and supports a and pedestrian-involved crashes. Safe System approach. The SS4A Safety Action Plan Systemic issue: Intersection provides a coordinated framework Key Risk Factors design and spacing patterns to align engineering, education, 1. Speed and Speed Differential concentrate conflict points without enforcement, and operations corresponding safety treatments. across agencies. By using Higher operating speeds— particularly on arterial roadways Supporting evidence: A crash data, risk screening, and substantial share of fatal and systemic analysis, SS4A helps and highway corridors—are a dominant contributor to crash serious injury crashes occur at prioritize improvements near or near intersections, with angle schools and rail crossings—such severity. Wide cross-sections, long block lengths, and corridor designs crashes alone accounting for 1,841 as speed management, visibility crashes and 49 KSIs, representing enhancements, safer crossings, that prioritize vehicle throughput increase both actual and perceived one of the largest contributors to and access controls—where they severe outcomes in the system. can most effectively reduce fatal speeds. Speed differentials and serious injury risk. between through traffic, turning 3. Exposure of Vulnerable Road vehicles, and pedestrians further Users Through SS4A, Scottsbluff can elevate crash risk. Pedestrians and bicyclists face move beyond isolated, reactive Systemic issue: Roadway heightened risk in areas where: measures toward proactive, geometry and function often system-level safety strategies • Sidewalks or pathways are in- permit or encourage speeds that protect children, pedestrians, complete or discontinuous that exceed the safe operating bicyclists, and drivers in complex 117 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 241 of 657 • Crossings are long, unprotected, 5. Visibility and Nighttime 7. Enforcement and Behavioral or widely spaced Conditions Limitations • Land uses generate pedestrian Public input and crash While enforcement plays an activity without supporting infra- patterns indicate that limited important role in traffic safety, structure visibility—due to lighting gaps, existing conditions indicate that This risk is amplified near schools, roadway geometry, roadside enforcement alone cannot offset parks, commercial centers, and development, and parking close roadway designs that encourage transit access points. to intersections—contributes to speeding or risky behavior. Public conflicts involving both vehicles input reflects concern about Systemic issue: Infrastructure has and pedestrians. speeding and red-light running, not consistently evolved to match particularly in predictable locations. how people move within and Systemic issue: Visibility across the city. considerations have not been Systemic issue: Roadway consistently addressed as a safety design and operations require Supporting evidence: Crash priority across corridors and reinforcement through design- data indicates 51 pedestrian- intersections. based speed management rather involved crashes (including 3 Supporting evidence: Evening and than reliance on enforcement fatalities and 5 serious injuries) alone. and 36 bicycle crashes, with these nighttime periods account for a incidents concentrated along smaller share of total crashes but Public input highlights speeding, higher-speed corridors and areas a disproportionate share of severe red-light running, and failure to lacking continuous pedestrian crashes, with 25 KSIs occurring yield as persistent concerns. Data infrastructure. between 7 p.m. and 5 a.m. despite shows that enforcement alone has lower overall traffic volumes. limited long-term impact without 4. Corridor and Access supportive roadway design. Management Challenges 6. Railroad and Highway Interfaces Supporting evidence: Many high-risk corridors feature Rail crossings and highway Contributing factor analysis shows frequent driveways, closely spaced that behaviors such as speeding, intersections, and multiple conflict corridors create complex operating environments with: failure to yield, and distracted points. These conditions increase driving account for a majority crash likelihood and severity, • High speeds of severe crashes, but these particularly for turning and crossing • Limited crossing opportunities behaviors occur most frequently movements. • Competing vehicle, pedestrian, in consistent, high-risk corridor Systemic issue: Access and freight movements environments, indicating systemic management has not always been conditions rather than isolated These interfaces require coordinated with safety outcomes, incidents. especially along commercial coordinated, multi-agency safety corridors. strategies. These risk factors : Jurisdictional Supporting evidence: Corridors Systemic issue consistently identified on the HIN— complexity can delay or complicate overlap along the representing approximately 6% implementation of safety improvements. same corridors of the network—account for and intersections, Supporting evidence: nearly all (96.8%) KSI crashes, reinforcing that severe and commonly include areas Spatial analysis shows recurring with high access density and crash patterns near US-26 and rail- crash risk in Scottsbluff turning activity, reinforcing the adjacent corridors, where higher is driven by systemic relationship between corridor speeds and constrained crossing conditions related to design and crash risk. opportunities create concentrated speed, exposure, and areas of elevated risk. conflict density. 118 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 242 of 657Table A4-1. Risk Factor Matrix: Evidence and SS4A Response Purpose: The table below summarizes the primary systemic risk factors identified through crash data, High Injury Network analysis, and plan review, and documents how each risk factor is directly addressed through corresponding SS4A strategies and actions. SS4A Safety Action Plan Risk Factor Evidence from Data & Plans Representative SS4A Actions in This Plan Strategy HIN corridors align with higher- Speed management Corridor speed management treatments; speed arterials and highway through roadway design, Speed and speed entry/gateway enhancements; signal timing facilities; speed-related corridor reconfiguration, differential and progression review; targeted geometric crashes overrepresented in and targeted operational modifications on priority corridors KSI totals changes High concentration of KSI Systemic intersection Intersection safety upgrades; turn-lane and Intersection crashes at signalized and safety improvements; channelization concepts; signal timing/phasing conflict density unsignalized intersections on conflict reduction; evaluation; high-visibility crosswalk and the HIN pedestrian protection pedestrian signal improvements Pedestrian and bicycle crashes Sidewalk and pathway Sidewalk and ADA gap elimination; enhanced Vulnerable road clustered where sidewalks, gap closure; enhanced crossing treatments (RRFB/PHB where user exposure paths, and crossings are crossings; safer routes to warranted); pathway network completion; incomplete schools and parks school-area crossing improvements Access management Access management and driveway Commercial corridors with Corridor access strategies; consolidation consolidation concepts; improved turn frequent driveways align with density of driveways; improved controls; signing and striping to reduce conflict HIN segments turning controls points; corridor reconfiguration studies Lighting upgrades; Targeted lighting improvement program on Nighttime and low-visibility improved sight distance; Visibility and HIN corridors; intersection illumination crashes show parking and curb lighting upgrades; parking and sight-distance disproportionate severity management near management near high-conflict areas intersections Rail crossing surface and accessibility Railroad and Crash clustering near rail Targeted rail crossing upgrades; signing/marking improvements; highway crossings and highway safety improvements; coordination framework with NDOT and rail interfaces junctions interagency coordination operators; crossing prioritization program Repeated public concerns Design-based speed Targeted enforcement support aligned with Enforcement about speeding and red-light reduction paired with HIN locations; quick-build demonstration limitations running in predictable targeted, data-driven projects; school-zone standardization and locations enforcement compliance support Citywide network gap analysis; prioritized Discontinuous pedestrian and Systemic, network-based Network sidewalk and pathway implementation bicycle facilities across the prioritization rather than inconsistency program; integration of safety criteria into system isolated spot treatments capital planning Why These Risks Matter exposure—that shape how and anticipate errors and reduce the why severe crashes occur. likelihood that those mistakes Vision Zero recognizes that traffic result in fatal or serious injuries. deaths and serious injuries are Rather than focusing solely Addressing these risk factors preventable, not inevitable. The on individual behavior, a Safe through data-driven, systemic risk factors identified in this Safety System approach acknowledges strategies is essential to Action Plan reflect systemic that people will make mistakes achieving Scottsbluff’s long-term conditions—such as roadway and that the transportation goal of eliminating fatal and design, operating speeds, and system must be designed to serious injury crashes. 119 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 243 of 657 What the Data Tells Us What existing plans and Connection to SS4A goals Crash data and High Injury Network documents show These findings directly support analysis consistently show that: Across the Comprehensive SS4A goals related to: • Severe crashes cluster along spe- Plan, parks and trails planning, • Reducing fatal and serious injury cific corridors and at intersections corridor discussions, public input crashes through systemic corridor • Speed and conflict exposure are summaries, and related municipal and intersection improvements dominant severity factors documents, Scottsbluff’s • Improving safety for people walk- • Vulnerable road users experience transportation system has ing and bicycling higher risk in areas lacking protec- historically been designed • Prioritizing infrastructure invest- tive infrastructure primarily for vehicle mobility. While ments that address known risk These patterns confirm that recent projects demonstrate factors, not just isolated crash Scottsbluff’s safety challenges are progress toward pedestrian- locations oriented design, the broader predictable and preventable, aligning B. Policy and Planning with the Safe System approach. network reflects inconsistent accommodation of pedestrians, Gaps Summary Connection to SS4A Safety bicyclists, and other vulnerable Action Plan Goals What existing plans and users. ordinances show The SS4A Safety Action Plan responds directly to these systemic Key infrastructure gaps identified Scottsbluff’s planning risk factors by: include: documents consistently • Prioritizing corridor- and net- • Incomplete and discontinuous express support for walkability, work-level safety improvements sidewalk and pathway networks connectivity, Complete Streets • Addressing speed through design, • Limited safe pedestrian crossings concepts, and safer access to not just enforcement on wide, high-speed corridors parks, schools, and commercial areas. However, many of these • Improving pedestrian and bicycle • Inconsistent lighting and visibility, safety where exposure is highest particularly along arterial roadways goals are framed at a high and near activity centers level and are not consistently • Using data to guide investment to- translated into enforceable ward locations and treatments with • Corridor designs that prioritize standards, performance the greatest safety impact throughput over conflict reduction and speed management measures, or implementation • Supporting a long-term Vision Zero requirements. goal of eliminating fatal and serious • Railroad crossings and highway injury crashes interfaces that create complex, Identified policy gaps include: higher-risk environments • Limited codified requirements for A4.4 Overview of gaps What the data is telling us Complete Streets or multimodal design in infrastructure, policy, or Crash analysis and High Injury enforcement Network (HIN) results reinforce • Inconsistent linkage between land these observations, showing that use decisions and transportation A. Infrastructure Gaps safety outcomes Summary severe crashes are concentrated along major corridors and at • Lack of formalized, data-driven Corridor spot assessments (East intersections where exposure, safety prioritization criteria across Overland, North Broadway, school speed, and conflict points are departments areas, and railroad crossings) highest. Pedestrians and bicyclists • Minimal integration of safety per- provide location-specific are disproportionately affected formance measures into routine examples of these systemic gaps in locations lacking continuous capital planning and maintenance decisions (Appendix A8 - Projects). facilities, protected crossings, or context-sensitive design. These gaps are addressed through the Transportation Safety Ordinance Update Package and related imple- 120 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 244 of 657mentation processes (see Policy O1 • Limited coordination between density, and multimodal conflict in Appendix A8).” enforcement, engineering, and • Vulnerable road users face elevat- What the data is telling us education efforts ed risk in locations lacking contin- • Corridor designs that make speed uous infrastructure or protected Crash patterns indicate that compliance difficult without contin- crossings roadway context, land use uous enforcement intensity, and access density What this means • Few documented mechanisms to play a significant role in crash These patterns confirm that evaluate enforcement effective- severity. Without clear policy ness relative to crash outcomes Scottsbluff’s safety challenges direction tying safety outcomes to are systemic, not random. design and operational decisions, What the data is telling us Addressing them requires these risk factors persist even as Crash severity trends indicate moving beyond isolated spot development patterns evolve. that speed and conflict exposure fixes toward corridor-level Connection to SS4A goals are dominant contributors to strategies and policy-supported serious injuries and fatalities. investment decisions. The SS4A Safety Action Plan fills This suggests that enforcement this gap by: • Connection to SS4A goals must be paired with roadway The SS4A Safety Action Plan uses • Establishing a Vision Zero–aligned design, operational changes, these findings to: framework and education to produce lasting • Define a High Injury Network • Introducing measurable safety safety improvements. goals and performance metrics • Prioritize projects and programs Connection to SS4A goals based on risk and exposure • Providing a consistent methodol- ogy to prioritize projects based on SS4A emphasizes a Safe System • Align investments with the city’s risk, exposure, and equity approach, where enforcement long-term safety vision is one component of a broader • Creating a bridge between ad- E. Connection Between strategy that includes: opted planning goals and on-the- Findings and Plan Goals ground implementation • Speed management through design Collectively, the review of existing C. Enforcement and • Clear, predictable intersection plans, ordinances, standards, Operations Gaps operations and data demonstrates a strong foundation of community support Summary • Targeted enforcement informed by for safer streets, paired with clear What existing documents and crash and risk data gaps in infrastructure continuity, public input show • Education and outreach aligned policy implementation, and with documented safety challenges Public engagement results and systemic safety practices. supporting documents repeatedly D. Data and Analysis The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety cite concerns related to speeding, Findings Summary Action Plan responds directly to red-light running, and unsafe these conditions by: driver behavior along major What the data shows corridors and near schools. While Crash history analysis, HIN • Translating community priorities enforcement is recognized as mapping, and supporting into data-driven actions important, existing documents demographic and land use data • Bridging policy intent with measur- indicate that enforcement alone consistently indicate that: able safety outcomes has not been sufficient to address • A small subset of corridors and in- • Establishing a clear path toward persistent safety issues. tersections account for a dispropor- eliminating fatal and serious injury crashes Identified gaps include: tionate share of fatal and serious injury crashes • Providing an implementation • Reliance on reactive enforcement, • Higher-risk locations align with framework that complements and rather than proactive or systemic strengthens existing plans strategies areas of increased speed, access 121 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 245 of 657 Transportation perceptions Monument Valley Pathway and A4.5 Relationship of crossings of US Highway 26 Adopted Plans, Policies, (survey results): The public participation appendix • Riverside neighborhood goals and Standards to Safety includes quantified views on call for safe, accessible, and Findings roadway and safety conditions, attractive crossings and trail including: connections to Riverside Park • Roads in good condition: mixed • Corridor/entryway emphasis: (notably 44.25% Agree vs South Beltline Highway and 33.80% Disagree) Highway 26 should be safe, attractive, and reflect city • “Intersections are safe”: more character—with mentions of negative than positive (39.58% pedestrian infrastructure and Disagree, 23.61% Strongly right-of-way enhancements Disagree) • “Pathway system should be Transportation projects list expanded”: strong support (recommendations plus project (30.66% Strongly Agree, 35.19% ideas) Agree) A) Plan-supported improvements • “City is doing enough to address (described as desired transportation safety”: leans characteristics / needs) negative (29.51% Disagree, 15.97% Strongly Disagree) 1. Provide safe, accessible, 2026 Scottsbluff Policy direction that supports attractive crossings and trail Comprehensive Plan SS4A (even outside the missing connections to Riverside Park Transportation and traffic safety Transportation chapter): 2. Improve trail connections (noted as lacking) and create summary (not including Chapter 14 The plan ties transportation to safe, attractive crossings for Transportation, which has not been health and community design, Riverside Park users completed/available for review): explicitly pointing to: 3. Entryway/corridor What the community said the • Complete Streets policies, improvements on South priorities are: a robust sidewalk program, Beltline Hwy / Hwy 26 areas improved development Transportation concerns show up (landscaping and better requirements, shared-use as recurring “key improvement pedestrian infrastructure are agreements (schools), and items,” especially: specifically cited) support for transit as ways to • Road conditions and traffic safety make walking/biking easier 4. Highway 26 entryway as recurring issues enhancements in the • The idea that a connected street/ Southeast 26 district (e.g., • Highway 26 intersections block network helps create a monument signs, landscaping, repeatedly cited as unsafe— complete sidewalk system and “small right-of-way especially at/near 27th Street, improves bicycling/transit access Avenue I, and Target improvements”) Multimodal connectivity • Requests for expanded 5. Expand the pathway system and crossings (parks/trails + pedestrian infrastructure and citywide (survey-supported) corridors): better traffic control measures B) Completed/ongoing Several sections reinforce the • Broader public-safety themes transportation-relevant projects need for trail connections and tied to traffic: inadequate explicitly described safer crossings, including: lighting, and calls for traffic 6. 18th Street Plaza • Parks that connect to the enforcement pedestrianization (18th 122 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 246 of 657 Street closed/converted to Relationship of the 2026 Specific locations and themes a pedestrian plaza; opened raised through public input 2023) Scottsbluff Comprehensive include: Plan to the SS4A Safety Action C) Community-identified project • Safety concerns at and near US ideas and location-specific fixes Plan Highway 26, particularly at major (from the participation appendix) The 2026 Scottsbluff intersections and commercial These appear as specific Comprehensive Plan establishes access points. suggestions in the public a clear policy framework that • Requests for improved traffic participation appendix; they’re supports improved transportation control, turn lanes, and crossing useful to carry into the SS4A plan safety, multimodal connectivity, opportunities along high-volume as “community-identified needs”: and equitable access to the corridors. city’s street network. While 7. 2nd Ave safety/operations • The need for better lighting, the Transportation chapter is near schools: add a parking improved visibility, and safer pe- under separate development, lot east/north of the SBPS 81 destrian crossings in commercial transportation- and traffic building to reduce constrained and neighborhood areas. safety–related goals, needs, passing/parking conflicts on and recommendations are • Ongoing concerns related to 2nd Ave embedded throughout railroad crossings, especially on 8. Traffic signal need near Target/ the Comprehensive Plan’s the east side of the city. Staples to “cross safely” community engagement • Safety issues near schools, 9. Turn lanes at Hwy 26 signals results, neighborhood plans, including constrained roadways, and potentially additional traffic land use policies, parks and parking conflicts, and vehicle– lights by Target trail planning, and corridor and pedestrian interactions. 10. Intersection improvements entryway guidance. These These concerns align closely (Hwy 26 @ 27th St) elements provide strong policy with SS4A emphasis areas such justification for the Scottsbluff as systemic intersection safety, 11. Intersection improvements SS4A Safety Action Plan and its (Hwy 26 @ 14th Ave) pedestrian and bicyclist protection, recommended safety strategies. speed management, and roadway 12. Broadway pedestrian crossing Community-Identified Transportation visibility. upgrades (better crosswalk and Safety Needs identification and a “button to Multimodal Connectivity and Active press” crossing) Public engagement conducted Transportation 13. Lighting improvements on East as part of the Comprehensive The Comprehensive Plan Overland (visibility/safety) Plan consistently identified repeatedly emphasizes the transportation safety as a top 14. Railroad crossing condition/ importance of a connected, community concern. Residents walkable, and bikeable safety concerns, especially on frequently cited roadway the east side community. Policies and conditions, unsafe intersections, recommendations across 15. Apply “20th Street was and challenges for pedestrians multiple chapters highlight: incredible” style improvements and bicyclists. Survey results to 5th Avenue (commentary show that perceptions of • Expansion of the city’s pathway suggesting similar corridor intersection safety are notably and trail system, including im- investment) negative, while there is strong proved connections to parks, neighborhoods, and communi- 16. Speed/signage/enforcement community support for expanding ty destinations. focus on Hwy 26, including the city’s pathway and trail concerns about speeding and system and improving pedestrian • The importance of safe and red-light running and calls for infrastructure. accessible pedestrian cross- better warning signage and ings, particularly where trails speed enforcement intersect with major roadways 123 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 247 of 657 such as US Highway 26. Implementation Actions and Project intersection conflicts, pedestrian • Integration of sidewalk and Concepts visibility, and access manage- ment. pathway planning with land use Although the Comprehensive Plan decisions to support daily walk- does not include a standalone • Prioritizing projects and pro- ing, biking, and transit use. transportation project list in this grams that improve safety for all • Support for Complete Streets– version, it identifies or references users, with particular emphasis style approaches that balance a range of transportation-related on pedestrians, bicyclists, school- vehicular mobility with pedestri- actions and project concepts, aged children, and older adults. an, bicycle, and transit safety. including: • Providing an implementation These elements directly reinforce • Expansion and improvement of framework that complements SS4A goals related to creating pedestrian and trail connections, future transportation planning safer routes for people walking including safer crossings. efforts, including the forthcoming Transportation chapter of the and bicycling and reducing serious • Intersection improvements and Comprehensive Plan. injury and fatal crashes through traffic control enhancements design-based solutions. along US Highway 26. The 2026 Scottsbluff Comprehen- sive Plan Transportation Chapter, Corridors, Entryways, and High-Risk • Corridor upgrades that include which became available in Spring Locations pedestrian facilities, lighting, and 2026, provides an updated over- access management. The Comprehensive Plan view of the community’s transpor- identifies several key corridors and • Safety-focused improvements tation system, emphasizing the gateways where transportation near schools and community interconnected roles of regional function, safety, and community destinations. mobility, local access, safety, character intersect. These include: • Continued investment in pedes- freight movement, and multimodal • US Highway 26 and the South trian-oriented spaces, such as connectivity. The chapter identifies Beltline Highway, which are the completed 18th Street Plaza. US-26 as the community’s primary described as critical entryways These concepts provide east-west corridor and highlights that should be safe, attractive, documented community support Avenue I, 27th Street, Broadway, and supportive of multiple travel and policy backing for the SS4A 20th Street, East/West Overland, modes. Safety Action Plan’s recommended and South Beltline Highway as projects and countermeasures. key arterial routes supporting daily • Areas near commercial centers, travel, commercial activity, and schools, and parks where higher Relationship to the SS4A Safety Action regional connectivity. pedestrian activity creates in- Plan creased conflict potential. The chapter recognizes that The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Scottsbluff functions as a regional • Neighborhood access points to Action Plan builds directly upon employment and service center major parks, including Riverside the needs, priorities, and policy with significant inbound and out- Park, where safe crossings and direction established in the bound commuting patterns, rein- trail connections are needed. Comprehensive Plan. The SS4A forcing the importance of maintain- These corridor and area-based plan advances the Comprehensive ing reliable regional corridors and priorities are consistent with Plan’s goals by: efficient intersections. It also identi- SS4A’s focus on High Injury • Translating community-identified fies transportation affordability and Network corridors, systemic risk safety concerns into data-driven vehicle dependence as important reduction, and targeted safety analysis, including crash history community considerations, noting improvements at locations with and High Injury Network identifi- that transportation costs represent elevated exposure and conflict cation. a substantial share of household potential. expenses and that limited multi- • Advancing systemic safety strat- modal options reinforce reliance egies that address speeding, on personal vehicles. 124 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 248 of 657The major focus is improving multi- the Tri-City Roadrunner system is investments, including NDOT modal connectivity and addressing recognized as an essential mobil- improvements along US-26, barriers created by US-26, the ity resource, particularly for older implementation of the Heartland BNSF rail corridor, drainage fea- adults, individuals with disabilities, Expressway corridor, local One- tures, and wide arterial roadways. and households without reliable and Six-Year Street Improvement The plan notes that vehicle access. However, the plan Program projects, and corridor-fo- identifies limitations related to cused planning efforts such as the sidewalks, bicycle service frequency, stop amenities, East Overland Corridor Revitaliza- facilities, and shared- and first- and last-mile pedestrian tion Plan. use pathways remain access. Collectively, the 2026 fragmented, with gaps Transportation safety is identified Comprehensive Plan in ADA accessibility, as a major priority throughout the supports a long-term plan. The 2026 Comprehensive limited dedicated vision focused on bicycle infrastructure, Plan highlights recurring concerns related to intersection operations, balancing regional and constrained speeding, turning conflicts, visibil- mobility with local crossing opportunities ity, railroad crossings, pedestrian access, improving reducing comfort and safety, and school access. There safety and resilience, are specific references to the safety for pedestrians enhancing multimodal and bicyclists. ongoing Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan and the importance transportation options, The Monument Valley Pathway of corridor-based safety improve- and strengthening is identified as a major regional ments, intersection modernization, connections between asset, while future improvements access management, multimodal Scottsbluff, Gering, emphasize better connectivity upgrades, and systemic safety Terrytown, and between neighborhoods, schools, strategies to reduce fatal and seri- parks, transit stops, and regional ous injury crashes. surrounding regional destinations. The Comprehensive Plan also destinations. Transit service provided through summarizes current and planned 125 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 249 of 657 • Incomplete pedestrian and bicy- Education cle infrastructure, particularly in The plan emphasizes public school zones and underserved engagement, school zone neighborhoods awareness, and general traffic • Safety concerns at railroad cross- safety education. Community ings that regularly block arterial involvement is framed as traffic an important component of • The need for Complete Streets transportation planning. designs that support children, Gaps Identified older adults, and people with disabilities Education strategies are not targeted to specific risk groups or • Long-term strategies include behaviors, and there is no defined expanding active transportation mechanism for sustained safety options, improving intersection 2016 Comprehensive education tied to crash trends. safety, addressing storm water Plan — Transportation SS4A Relevance & Safety Findings impacts on roadways, and en- suring equitable access to public SS4A supports targeted, data- Summary amenities. informed education and outreach The 2016 Scottsbluff Transportation Safety Review efforts aligned with documented Comprehensive Plan establishes risk factors such as speeding, a long-term vision for a more Through the 5 E’s Framework pedestrian exposure, and school- connected, equitable, and Engineering area conflicts. multimodal transportation The Comprehensive Plan system. Transportation-related Enforcement supports multimodal roadway policies emphasize improving The plan recognizes the role of law design, pedestrian and bicycle safety, mobility, and access for all enforcement in maintaining traffic connectivity, traffic calming, and users, particularly pedestrians, safety, particularly in school zones safer streetscapes. It references bicyclists, seniors, and residents and along major corridors. tools such as traffic calming, without access to a personal improved crossings, and context- Gaps Identified vehicle. While the plan sensitive street design near strongly supports multimodal Enforcement strategies are schools and residential areas. transportation and Complete not clearly defined or tied to Streets principles, many Gaps Identified specific locations, behaviors, or recommendations remain high- performance measures. There is Engineering guidance remains level and lack implementation limited discussion of automated or largely conceptual, with limited specificity, creating gaps that systemic enforcement tools. corridor- or intersection-specific the SS4A Safety Action Plan is design direction. The plan does SS4A Relevance positioned to address. not establish clear standards for SS4A emphasizes enforcement school zone design, arterial road Key Transportation Themes as part of a broader Safe System diets, or shared street applications. The plan identifies several approach, pairing targeted recurring transportation and safety SS4A Relevance enforcement with roadway design challenges: and operational changes. SS4A provides the data-driven • Heavy reliance on personal prioritization, corridor focus, and vehicles and limited public transit systemic design strategies needed options to translate these goals into implementable safety projects. 126 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 250 of 657Encouragement limited operationalization: Summary of Key Gaps and The plan encourages walking, Strengths Opportunities biking, and transit use through • Supports multimodal networks Gaps Identified improved infrastructure and and accessibility reduced reliance on automobiles • Limited implementation-level • Acknowledges speed manage- engineering guidance Gaps Identified ment and traffic calming • Lack of targeted education and Few concrete incentive or • Prioritizes school routes and enforcement strategies encouragement programs are vulnerable users • Absence of performance metrics identified, and transit promotion • Recognizes equity and ADA and evaluation framework strategies are limited. considerations • Generalized equity language SS4A Relevance Key Gaps without data-driven prioritiza- SS4A supports encouragement • Limited focus on crash severity tion through safer, more comfortable reduction and forgiving infra- Opportunities for infrastructure and improved access structure Advancement to everyday destinations. • No explicit speed reduction • Systemic corridor safety im- Evaluation targets or systemic speed man- provements and road diets agement policies The plan references monitoring • School zone safety standards safety conditions using crash • Lack of detailed protective treat- and treatments data, traffic counts, and ments for vulnerable users • Design-based speed manage- community feedback. • No formal cross-departmental ment safety governance structure Gaps Identified • Data-driven equity and safety • Equity considerations not consis- prioritization There is no formal performance tently tied to data-driven risk framework or defined set of Why This Matters for SS4A safety metrics to evaluate Role of SS4A The 2016 Comprehensive outcomes over time. The SS4A Safety Action Plan Plan provides strong policy SS4A Relevance builds upon the Comprehensive support for safer, more equitable Plan’s vision by: transportation in Scottsbluff SS4A establishes measurable but lacks the tools needed to safety goals, performance • Applying data-driven analysis to systematically reduce fatal and tracking, and ongoing evaluation identify systemic risk serious injury crashes. The SS4A consistent with Vision Zero • Prioritizing corridors and inter- Safety Action Plan directly fills this principles. sections with the greatest safety gap by converting long-standing Safe System & Vision Zero need community goals into prioritized, • Advancing Safe System strate- data-supported actions aligned Alignment Review gies that reduce crash severity with Vision Zero and the Safe When reviewed through • Establishing a clear implementa- System approach. USDOT’s Safe System tion and evaluation framework framework, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan demonstrates strong intent but 127 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 251 of 657 mixed community support, the speed management or crash-se- plan establishes a clear policy verity–reduction treatments. foundation for future safety- Protected bike facilities, pedes- focused corridor improvements trian refuge islands, and forgiv- as funding and consensus allow. ing roadside elements are not consistently detailed. Key Transportation and Safety SS4A Relevance Themes SS4A provides the framework Primary transportation priorities to advance corridor-level safety identified in the plan include: treatments, including protected • Improving pedestrian safety and crossings, speed management, crossing conditions along East and context-sensitive roadway Overland design. East Overland Corridor • Addressing speeding and traffic Education and Revitalization Plan – operations near schools and Encouragement commercial uses Transportation & Safety Community engagement and Findings Summary • Enhancing the East Overland corridor branding are core and 9th Avenue intersection components of the revitalization The East Overland Corridor • Redesigning school pick-up and strategy, supported by improved Revitalization Plan addresses drop-off circulation at Roosevelt signage and wayfinding. long-standing safety, access, and Elementary Streetscape improvements are mobility challenges along one intended to encourage walking, of Scottsbluff’s most historically • Improving corridor walkability, biking, and use of public space. underserved commercial visibility, and access manage- corridors. ment Gaps Identified The plan reinforces the role of Public engagement consistently Targeted safety education and multimodal transportation as a tool identified pedestrian safety, encouragement programs—partic- for equity, economic vitality, and walkability, and transportation ularly for drivers, pedestrians, and community health. infrastructure deficiencies as school-related travel—are not fully priority concerns, particularly Transportation Safety Review – developed. near Roosevelt Elementary Integrated 5 E’s Summary SS4A Relevance School, where high vehicle SS4A supports targeted education speeds, narrow sidewalks, and Engineering and encouragement strategies unsafe crossings create elevated The plan proposes a pedestrian- aligned with documented risk fac- risk for vulnerable users. oriented streetscape with wider tors and school-area safety needs. The plan emphasizes sidewalks, curb extensions, corridor revitalization through improved crossings, driveway Enforcement multimodal infrastructure, consolidation, bike lanes, The plan acknowledges the need streetscape improvements, lighting, and public realm to manage speeding and improve and traffic calming strategies enhancements. These measures compliance with pedestrian right- intended to improve safety, are intended to reduce conflicts, of-way laws through traffic calming support local businesses, and slow traffic, and improve comfort and corridor design. promote reinvestment in the for pedestrians and bicyclists. Gaps Identified Southeast Neighborhood. Gaps Identified Enforcement strategies are not While some proposed roadway operationally defined, and there reconfigurations—such as a Engineering recommendations is limited discussion of automated potential road diet—received stop short of defining specific 128 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 252 of 657enforcement or sustained corri- targets or systemic calming • Data-driven evaluation of corri- dor-focused enforcement efforts. strategy dor safety outcomes SS4A Relevance • Incomplete protection for Why This Matters for SS4A pedestrians and bicyclists in SS4A emphasizes pairing de- The East Overland Corridor higher-risk segments sign-based speed management Revitalization Plan establishes with targeted, data-informed en- • Lack of formal, multi-agency strong policy support for safer, forcement strategies. safety coordination more walkable streets in a Evaluation Role of SS4A high-risk, underserved area. The SS4A Safety Action Plan The plan includes intent to monitor The SS4A Safety Action Plan provides the data, prioritization, pedestrian and bicycle activity and builds on the corridor plan by: and implementation framework collect community feedback to • Using crash and HIN data to needed to advance these goals guide future adjustments. prioritize East Overland safety and reduce fatal and serious injury Gaps Identified improvements crashes along the corridor. There is no comprehensive data- • Advancing Safe System strat- driven evaluation framework tied egies that reduce speed and to safety performance measures conflict severity such as crash reduction, speed • Supporting phased implementa- compliance, or pedestrian tion of corridor safety treatments exposure. • Aligning equity-focused revital- SS4A Relevance ization with measurable safety outcomes SS4A establishes measurable safety outcomes and ongoing Summary of Key Gaps and performance tracking consistent Opportunities with Vision Zero principles. Gaps Identified Safe System & Vision Zero • Limited protected facilities for Alignment pedestrians and bicyclists Strengths • Underdeveloped enforcement • Supports multimodal corridor and education strategies design and pedestrian safety • Lack of defined safety perfor- • Recognizes the role of speed mance metrics management on a high-speed • Dependence on future funding arterial and consensus for major road- • Improves access for vulnerable way changes users and transit riders Opportunities for • Advances equity and reinvest- Advancement ment goals in an underserved • Corridor-level speed manage- area ment and access control Key Gaps • School-area safety improve- • Limited emphasis on forgiving ments near Roosevelt Elemen- infrastructure and crash severi- tary ty reduction • Enhanced pedestrian crossings • No explicit speed reduction and lighting 129 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 253 of 657 Key Transportation and Safety protected intersections) or define Themes cycling protection levels needed in higher-traffic areas. Primary transportation priorities include: SS4A Relevance Widened sidewalks, enhanced SS4A can strengthen downtown curb ramps, and pedestrian-scale implementation by prioritizing amenities systemic safety treatments, defining bikeway protection Curb extensions and other design approaches, and aligning phased measures to shorten crossing projects with crash and risk data. distances and calm traffic Downtown Streetscape Improved lighting and visibility to Education and Master Plan – support safe use during evening Encouragement Transportation & Safety hours The plan reflects strong Findings Summary Bicycle accommodations, community engagement and supports downtown as a walkable The Downtown Streetscape bicycle parking, and improved destination. Wayfinding and Master Plan establishes a connections within downtown signage improvements are long-term vision to transform Parking and circulation refinements intended to help users navigate downtown Scottsbluff into to reduce conflicts and improve safely and comfortably. a safer, more walkable, and access to businesses more inviting district through Gaps Identified The plan’s emphasis on comfort, Complete Streets design and accessibility, and phasing Targeted education for new phased implementation. The aligns well with a Safe System downtown circulation patterns, plan emphasizes pedestrian approach when paired with pedestrian priority areas, and comfort and accessibility measurable safety outcomes and bicycle interactions is not fully while maintaining downtown implementation prioritization. defined, and encouragement function for motorists, deliveries, strategies are largely indirect and transit. Recommended Transportation Safety Review – (design-based). improvements focus on Integrated 5 E’s Summary streetscape design, safer SS4A Relevance crossings, ADA compliance, and Engineering SS4A can support targeted safety multimodal accommodations that The plan advances a strong set education and behavior campaigns support downtown activity and of downtown safety-supportive paired with infrastructure economic vitality. design strategies, including changes (e.g., yielding, crosswalk compliance, downtown speed Rather than relying on full wider sidewalks, curb extensions, expectations). reconstruction, the plan enhanced crossings, lighting, recommends incremental, ADA improvements, and bicycle Enforcement opportunity-driven facilities. These elements reduce The plan relies heavily on design implementation aligned with pedestrian exposure and improve to influence behavior (lane maintenance schedules and comfort and visibility. narrowing, curb extensions, utility upgrades. This approach Gaps Identified crossing upgrades), but supports steady progress toward enforcement approaches are not a people-centered downtown While the plan uses design operationalized. while acknowledging funding concepts that can reduce speed, and construction realities. it does not consistently specify Gaps Identified proven speed management No detailed strategy is provided treatments (e.g., raised crossings, for managing speeding, parking 130 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 254 of 657compliance, or pedestrian right-of- Key Gaps Opportunities for way enforcement, and automated • Limited explicit linkage Advancement enforcement is not addressed. between design choices and • Systemic downtown speed SS4A Relevance crash severity reduction management using proven SS4A can define a downtown- • Lack of defined downtown design treatments focused enforcement approach speed management targets • Enhanced pedestrian crossings aligned with crash patterns and and enforcement approach (including visibility and supported by design-based speed • Bicycle safety treatments could compliance improvements) management. be strengthened through • Stronger bicycle separation Evaluation physical separation where and conflict reduction at key needed locations The plan supports monitoring and feedback to guide future • No formal safety governance • Formal monitoring framework improvements. structure for ongoing to track outcomes and guide downtown oversight phased investments Gaps Identified Role of SS4A Why This Matters for SS4A There is no defined performance framework for downtown safety The SS4A Safety Action Plan The Downtown Streetscape outcomes (e.g., speed compliance, strengthens and implements the Master Plan provides clear policy yielding behavior, conflict rates, downtown vision by: support for a safer, people- crash reduction, and pedestrian • Prioritizing downtown safety centered downtown. The SS4A counts). treatments based on risk and Safety Action Plan complements exposure this vision by supplying data-driven SS4A Relevance prioritization, Safe System–aligned SS4A provides measurable • Advancing Safe System countermeasures, and measurable safety performance metrics and strategies that reduce speed performance tracking to ensure evaluation methods consistent and crash severity phased downtown investments with Vision Zero and Safe System • Pairing phased streetscape deliver meaningful reductions in principles. work with measurable safety fatal and serious injury crash risk. Safe System & Vision Zero outcomes Alignment • Coordinating education and enforcement with infrastructure Strengths changes • Strong emphasis on pedestrian safety, ADA access, and Summary of Key Gaps and improved crossings Opportunities • Streetscape design elements Gaps Identified that can reduce conflicts and • Incomplete definition of improve visibility bicycle protection and crossing • Supports multimodal travel treatments and downtown vitality through • Limited enforcement and Complete Streets principles education implementation • Phased approach supports detail implementability and continuous • Lack of performance measures improvement to evaluate safety outcomes over time 131 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 255 of 657 Key Transportation and Safety SS4A relevance Themes Supports design-based speed Primary safety challenges management, including road diets identified include: and lane reconfiguration. • Excessive vehicle speeds on Pedestrian Safety and Crossing 27th Street despite reduced Behavior school-zone speed limits Students frequently cross at • Unsafe pedestrian crossings unsignalized or informal locations, and frequent crossing at often ignoring pedestrian signals. School Safety non-designated locations This behavior was observed • Insufficient on-campus parking consistently and is directly tied to Assessment Study contributing to unsafe off-cam- crossing placement, convenience, (2020) pus crossings and perceived safety. Scottsbluff High School • Congestion and operational Systemic issue conflicts caused by school & Bluffs Middle School Pedestrian behavior reflects driveway access and circula- infrastructure layout rather than – Transportation tion noncompliance alone. & Safety Findings • Over-reliance on signage and Summary enforcement without comple- SS4A relevance The 2020 Final School Safety mentary design measures Aligns with consolidating Assessment Study provides a These issues are concentrated crossings, installing pedestrian- focused, data-driven evaluation along a small number of corridors activated signals (e.g., of pedestrian and vehicular safety and intersections, aligning with HAWKs), and using fencing or conditions surrounding Scottsbluff SS4A principles of systemic risk channelization to guide safe High School, Bluffs Middle School, identification. crossings. Bear Cub Preschool, and St. Agnes Systemic Risk and Safety Parking and Pedestrian School. Conducted in response to Exposure documented pedestrian crashes Findings Insufficient on-campus student near Scottsbluff High School, the Speed and Roadway Design study identifies systemic safety parking forces off-campus deficiencies along 27th Street, 2nd Traffic counts and speed studies parking on 3rd and 4th Avenues, Avenue, and adjacent roadways showed that average vehicle increasing pedestrian exposure and recommends targeted speeds on 27th Street exceeded and unsafe midblock crossings. the posted 20 mph school-zone infrastructure, operational, and Systemic issue policy improvements. limit. The four-lane roadway configuration creates a visual Parking availability directly The study reinforces the need to and operational environment influences pedestrian risk and address school-area safety as a that encourages speeding and route choice. system, where roadway design, produces the “shadowing” effect, SS4A relevance parking availability, circulation reducing pedestrian visibility. patterns, and behavior interact to Recognizes parking management Systemic issue create predictable risk during peak as a safety strategy, not just a land- school travel times. Roadway geometry undermines use issue. posted speed limits and pedestrian safety. 132 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 256 of 657Traffic Circulation and Access Safe System & Vision Zero Summary of Key Gaps and Management Alignment Opportunities The primary high school driveway Strengths Gaps Identified on 27th Street creates congestion and queues that spill into nearby • Grounded in observed behav- • Roadway design encourages intersections. Multiple pickup/drop- ior and crash history speeding off points further increase conflicts • Prioritizes speed reduction and • Unsafe pedestrian crossings between vehicles and pedestrians. exposure management driven by layout and access Systemic issue • Emphasizes design solutions • Parking shortages increase over education or enforcement pedestrian exposure School access points are not alone aligned with current traffic volumes • Fragmented coordination and or safety needs. • Identifies school zones as limited evaluation predictable, high-risk environ- Opportunities for SS4A relevance ments Advancement Supports access relocation, Key Gaps • Design-based speed manage- circulation redesign, and conflict • Limited discussion of protect- ment and road diets reduction strategies. ed bicycle or micro-mobility • Protected and consolidated Recommended Safety Strategies facilities pedestrian crossings Identified in the Study • No formal automated speed • Integrated parking and circula- enforcement strategy Key recommended improvements tion strategies include: • Lack of institutionalized moni- • Data-driven monitoring and toring framework • Road diet on 27th Street (four continuous improvement lanes to three with center turn Role of SS4A Why This Matters for SS4A lane) The SS4A Safety Action Plan The 2020 Final School Safety • Consolidated, signalized pe- advances this study by: Assessment Study provides destrian crossings, including • Embedding school-area im- clear, actionable evidence that HAWK signals provements within a citywide school-area safety challenges • Pedestrian fencing to reduce High Injury Network in Scottsbluff are predictable, unsafe midblock crossings • Pairing design changes with systemic, and preventable. • Standardized, flashing school- performance monitoring and The SS4A Safety Action Plan zone signage evaluation supplies the structure and funding pathway needed to implement • Expanded student parking • Formalizing cross-agency these recommendations through reallocation of un- coordination and Safe System comprehensively and equitably, derutilized lots implementation advancing the city’s Vision Zero • Relocation of school access to • Supporting equity-focused goals. reduce congestion and con- prioritization of school safety flicts investments These recommendations are directly implementable and align closely with SS4A eligible project types. 133 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 257 of 657 • Mechanical breakdowns and Gaps Identified unsafe drop-off conditions Education efforts are focused • Communication and coor- internally and are not explicitly tied dination with dispatch, law to broader community education enforcement, and emergency for drivers traveling near school responders buses and bus stops. • Incident reporting, documenta- SS4A Relevance tion, and accountability SS4A supports expanded The plan emphasizes clear education and outreach roles, rapid communication, and addressing driver behavior near Scottsbluff Public consistent procedures to minimize school buses, stops, and routes. risk during transportation-related Schools Safe Pupil incidents. Enforcement Transportation Plan – Transportation Safety Review The plan establishes enforcement Transportation & Safety mechanisms through reporting Findings Summary – Integrated 5 E’s Summary requirements, coordination with Engineering law enforcement, and defined The Scottsbluff Public Schools disciplinary processes. Safe Pupil Transportation The plan indirectly supports Plan establishes operational safety through procedures that Gaps Identified procedures to protect students require safe stopping locations, controlled loading and unloading, Enforcement related to roadway and staff during school behavior near bus stops (e.g., transportation activities. The plan and coordination with authorities during roadway-related incidents. speeding, illegal passing of focuses on emergency response, stopped buses) is not explicitly student behavior management, Gaps Identified integrated with citywide traffic communication protocols, and enforcement strategies. incident documentation to The plan does not include ensure consistent and safe pupil guidance on roadway or SS4A Relevance infrastructure design near bus transportation operations across SS4A strengthens enforcement the district. stops, nor does it address physical treatments that reduce crash risk by aligning school transportation While the plan is primarily or severity around pupil loading safety needs with data- operational in nature, it provides zones. driven, location-specific traffic an important policy and procedural enforcement. SS4A Relevance foundation that complements Encouragement infrastructure-based safety efforts SS4A provides the framework to addressed in the SS4A Safety connect operational safety needs Encouragement is implicit through Action Plan. with engineering solutions such procedures designed to promote as safer bus stop design, traffic orderly, predictable behavior Key Transportation and Safety calming, lighting, sidewalks, and and safe decision-making during Themes pedestrian refuge areas. transport. The plan addresses safety risks Education Gaps Identified associated with: The plan clearly defines The plan does not include • Student behavior and prohibit- expectations for drivers and incentive-based or encouragement ed items on school vehicles students and outlines training strategies for safe behavior by motorists near school • Emergency situations, includ- and communication requirements transportation routes. ing severe weather, medical related to safety, emergency incidents, hazardous materials, response, and incident handling. and security threats 134 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 258 of 657SS4A Relevance • Equity considerations not • Formalized multi-agency co- SS4A supports encouragement explicitly tied to prioritization of ordination and performance through safer system design that safety improvements monitoring makes correct behavior easier for Role of SS4A Why This Matters for SS4A all users. The SS4A Safety Action Plan The Scottsbluff Public Schools Evaluation enhances the Safe Pupil Safe Pupil Transportation Plan Transportation Plan by: establishes strong operational The plan requires incident safeguards for student documentation and reporting, • Linking operational safety transportation. The SS4A Safety providing a basic mechanism for needs to physical infrastructure Action Plan complements this tracking safety events. improvements work by addressing the systemic Gaps Identified • Using crash and incident data roadway, speed, and infrastructure to prioritize safety investments conditions that influence safety Incident data is not clearly near bus stops and routes integrated into a broader, data- outside the vehicle, ensuring that driven evaluation framework • Supporting cross-agency coor- students are protected not only to identify trends, hotspots, or dination between schools, city during transport, but throughout recurring risk locations. departments, and law enforce- their entire trip to and from school. ment SS4A Relevance • Advancing Vision Zero goals SS4A establishes performance through a Safe System ap- monitoring and data integration proach that reduces exposure across agencies to guide and crash severity continuous safety improvement. Summary of Key Gaps and Safe System & Vision Zero Opportunities Alignment Gaps Identified Strengths • Lack of engineering standards • Clear operational protocols for for safe bus stop environments managing risk and emergen- • Limited speed management cies and enforcement integration • Strong emphasis on commu- near routes and stops nication, documentation, and • Incident data not systematically accountability analyzed for safety planning • Focus on protecting vulnerable • Equity considerations not users during boarding, alight- explicitly embedded in prioriti- ing, and transport zation • Alignment with state and fed- Opportunities for eral pupil transportation stan- Advancement dards • Safer bus stop design with Key Gaps traffic calming and pedestrian • Limited integration with road- protections way design and infrastructure • Data-driven identification of safety high-risk routes and stops • No formal process to link inci- • Integrated enforcement strat- dent data with engineering or egies targeting bus-related enforcement actions safety risks 135 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 259 of 657 Short, local trip patterns: A large SS4A relevance share of the workforce lives and Supports prioritizing systemic works within the region, with most corridor and intersection daily commutes under 10 miles. improvements rather than This results in frequent, short trips isolated spot fixes. concentrated on local streets and arterials, increasing interaction Regional Retail and between vehicles, pedestrians, Employment Traffic and bicyclists. As a regional destination, Regional traffic draw: Scottsbluff Scottsbluff experiences elevated functions as a regional traffic volumes that are not employment and retail hub. A solely driven by local residents. retail pull factor nearly double This intensifies conflict points the state average generates along commercial corridors, higher traffic volumes along key particularly where pedestrian commercial corridors and access activity is present. routes. SS4A relevance Economic and Aging population: The county’s Reinforces the need for Demographic Trends median age exceeds the state safety treatments on corridors average, indicating a growing with high exposure, turning (2021) – Transportation proportion of older adults who movements, and mixed user types. & Safety Findings may experience increased Summary vulnerability to crashes and Aging Population and mobility challenges. Accessibility Scottsbluff, Scotts Bluff County, Lower household incomes: An aging population increases the and Surrounding Area Median household income trails importance of: The Economic and Demographic state averages, suggesting • Shorter crossing distances Trends analysis provides a higher reliance on walking, important context for biking, shared transportation, • Longer signal timing understanding transportation and older vehicles, with • Improved lighting and visibility safety needs in Scottsbluff equity implications for safety investment. • ADA-compliant sidewalks and and the surrounding region. crossings Travel behavior, population characteristics, and economic Transportation Safety Older adults are more vulnerable conditions identified in this Implications to serious injury in crashes, even at lower speeds. analysis directly influence Travel Patterns and exposure, vulnerability, and Exposure SS4A relevance equity considerations within Short trip lengths and high the transportation system Aligns with Safe System principles internal commuting mean and reinforce the need for a that emphasize reducing crash residents regularly use the same data-driven, context-sensitive severity and designing for the most corridors, intersections, and approach to safety planning. vulnerable users. commercial access points. This Key Transportation and Safety increases cumulative exposure Equity and Economic Context to risk, particularly on arterial Considerations streets that serve both local and Lower median household incomes Several regional trends regional traffic. have direct implications for indicate that a significant portion transportation safety: of residents may depend on non- driving modes or older vehicles 136 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 260 of 657with fewer safety features. Role of SS4A Opportunities for Advancement Transportation investments The SS4A Safety Action Plan • Context-sensitive corridor de- therefore have a direct equity and responds to these conditions by: sign that balances mobility and public health dimension. safety • Using crash and exposure data SS4A relevance to identify a High Injury Net- • Improved pedestrian and ADA Supports equity-focused work infrastructure prioritization of safety investments • Prioritizing corridors that serve • Equity-driven prioritization of and improvements to walking, both local and regional traffic safety projects biking, and transit access. • Advancing equitable, multi- • Systemic speed and conflict Safe System & Vision Zero modal safety improvements management on high-exposure routes Alignment • Aligning safety investments with the needs of an aging Why This Matters for SS4A Key Takeaways population Economic and demographic • Travel behavior and demo- • Summary of Key Gaps and conditions shape who is exposed graphics shape where and how Opportunities to traffic risk and where severe safety risk occurs Gaps Identified crashes are most likely to occur. • Vulnerable users—older adults, By grounding safety strategies pedestrians, and lower-income • Transportation system histor- in local and regional trends, the households—face dispropor- ically oriented toward vehicle SS4A Safety Action Plan ensures tionate risk mobility over accessibility that investments address real- • Regional traffic patterns -in • Limited accommodation for world travel behavior, protect crease exposure on specific aging users and those reliant vulnerable populations, and corridors and intersections on active modes advance Scottsbluff’s long-term • Elevated exposure on commer- Vision Zero goals. cial corridors serving regional traffic 137 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 261 of 657 Key Transportation and Mobility SS4A relevance Themes Supports shifting from vehicle- The assessment identifies several only mobility toward safer, transportation-related strengths multimodal networks that reduce and deficiencies with direct safety exposure and conflict. implications: Walkability, Bicycling, and • High reliance on personal Connectivity Gaps vehicles, with limited cohesive Streets and corridors are strategies to reduce single-oc- generally not designed to cupancy vehicle travel support walking or biking as • Underdeveloped walkability everyday transportation. Trail and bicycle networks, with systems are underutilized for streets rarely designed for safe mobility purposes and lack walking or biking integration with destinations and street networks. • Limited use of trail systems for transportation, despite their SS4A relevance potential to support active trav- Tri-City Sustainability Aligns with SS4A emphasis on el and connectivity Assessment (2009) filling sidewalk and bikeway • Minimal integration of land use gaps, improving crossings, and – Transportation & and transportation planning, creating connected networks for Mobility Findings resulting in dispersed develop- vulnerable users. Summary ment patterns and increased vehicle trips Land Use and Transportation Scottsbluff, Gering, and Terrytown • Emerging but limited alterna- Coordination The Tri-City Sustainability tive transportation options, The assessment identifies limited Assessment provides an including carpooling, handi-bus use of compact development, early regional evaluation of service, and remote work building clustering, and transportation, land use, and The Buildings & Transportation connectivity strategies, which infrastructure conditions across subtest score of 19 out of 50 contributes to longer trips and Scottsbluff, Gering, and Terrytown. reflects the need for significant increased traffic volumes. Developed by the Tri-City improvement in mobility design, Sustainability Task Force, the SS4A relevance connectivity, and sustainability assessment identifies systemic practices. Reinforces the importance of transportation and mobility context-sensitive corridor design challenges that continue to Transportation Safety and and coordination between land influence safety, access, and Systemic Risk Implications use and transportation safety sustainability outcomes in the planning. region. Vehicle Dependency and While the assessment predates Exposure Environmental Conditions and more recent planning efforts, its The assessment highlights a Roadway Design findings remain highly relevant regional transportation system Impervious surfaces, limited to understanding long-standing oriented primarily toward storm water treatment, and patterns of vehicle dependency, vehicle travel. This dependency corridor design practices limited multimodal infrastructure, increases exposure to traffic risk contribute to runoff and and the need for coordinated, by concentrating travel on arterial environmental degradation in context-sensitive transportation roadways and limiting safer street environments. These planning. alternatives for short, local trips. conditions can also affect 138 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 262 of 657roadway condition, visibility, and Role of SS4A Opportunities for pedestrian comfort. The SS4A Safety Action Plan Advancement SS4A relevance advances the assessment’s • Expansion of connected pe- sustainability goals by: destrian and bicycle networks Supports incorporating green infrastructure and corridor design • Translating mobility and sus- • Corridor redesign to balance improvements that enhance safety, tainability concerns into safe- safety, access, and sustainabil- comfort, and resilience. ty-focused actions ity • Integration of green infrastruc- Safe System & Vision Zero • Prioritizing corridors and loca- tions with elevated crash risk ture in roadway projects Alignment • Supporting multimodal infra- • Regional coordination on multi- Strengths structure that reduces vehicle modal and safety investments • Early recognition of the need dependence and exposure Why This Matters for SS4A to reduce vehicle dependency • Aligning safety improvements The Tri-City Sustainability • Acknowledgement of the with long-term sustainability Assessment underscores that importance of walkability and and equity goals many of today’s transportation alternative transportation Summary of Key Gaps and safety challenges stem from long-standing system design • Regional perspective across Opportunities multiple jurisdictions choices. The SS4A Safety Action Gaps Identified Plan provides the mechanism to Key Gaps • Persistent vehicle dependency address these legacy conditions • Limited implementation mech- by advancing safer, more anisms for multimodal infra- • Limited walkable and bikeable sustainable, and more equitable structure street design transportation networks consistent • Minimal focus on traffic safety • Underutilized trail systems for with Vision Zero and Safe System outcomes or crash severity transportation principles. • No data-driven prioritization of • Weak integration of land use, high-risk corridors or users transportation, and safety planning 139 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 263 of 657 Key Transportation and Mobility particularly where local access and Themes multimodal activity occur. The plan identifies several SS4A relevance transportation-related priorities Supports prioritizing systemic with direct safety implications: safety improvements on high- • Regional connectivity and cor- exposure regional corridors within ridor function: Major corridors the High Injury Network. linking Scottsbluff, Terrytown, Workforce Mobility and and Gering are critical for Reliability freight movement, commuter travel, and economic integra- Safe and predictable travel tion. conditions are essential for workforce retention and access. • Cross-jurisdictional workforce Crash-related delays, unsafe access: A large share of the conditions, and limited multimodal workforce commutes from sur- options can create barriers to rounding counties in Nebras- employment and training. United We GROW ka and Wyoming, increasing Regional Economic reliance on regional highways SS4A relevance and arterials. • Aligns safety investments with Development Strategic • Freight and industrial access: economic resilience and work- Plan – Transportation Target industries require safe, force access goals. & Safety Findings efficient truck access to indus- • Freight Movement and Conflict trial sites and regional highway Management Summary connections. • Industrial and agribusiness ac- City of Scottsbluff and • Access to education and tivity requires truck access that Regional Labor Shed training: Career Academies, is compatible with surrounding The United We GROW Regional technical schools, and job land uses. Poorly managed Economic Development Strategic training facilities must be safely access points and mixed-use Plan highlights the essential role accessible for students, young corridors increase conflict risk. workers, and underserved that transportation systems play SS4A relevance in supporting economic growth, populations. workforce development, and • Equity and inclusion: Trans- Reinforces the need for access regional competitiveness across portation barriers dispropor- management, intersection safety Scotts Bluff County and the tionately affect low-income, improvements, and context- surrounding labor shed. The plan transit-dependent, and young- sensitive corridor design. emphasizes that safe, reliable, er populations, limiting access Youth, Education, and Equity and connected transportation to economic opportunity. Safe access to Career Academies, infrastructure is a foundational Transportation Safety and training centers, and employment requirement for attracting sites is especially important employers, supporting key Systemic Risk Implications for youth and underserved industry sectors, and connecting Regional Corridors and populations who may rely on residents to jobs and education. Exposure walking, biking, transit, or shared Corridors that support freight and rides. commuter travel carry higher traffic volumes and heavier vehicles, increasing crash severity risk— 140 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 264 of 657SS4A relevance Role of SS4A Opportunities for Advancement Supports equity-focused safety The SS4A Safety Action Plan • Systemic safety improvements investments and multimodal strengthens the United We GROW on key regional corridors access improvements. framework by: • Safer access to industrial and Safe System & Vision Zero • Embedding safety as a core employment centers Alignment criterion in regional mobility • Multimodal connectivity for investments workforce and youth access Strengths • Using crash and risk data to • Equity-driven transportation • Strong linkage between trans- prioritize corridor and intersec- safety investments portation performance and tion improvements economic success Why This Matters for SS4A • Advancing multimodal access • Emphasis on regional coordi- to jobs and education Economic vitality depends on safe, nation and corridor investment reliable transportation. The United • Aligning economic develop- We GROW Strategic Plan confirms • Recognition of workforce ac- ment goals with Vision Zero that reducing crash risk, improving cess and equity considerations and Safe System principles access, and strengthening corridor Key Gaps Gaps Identified safety are not only transportation • Limited focus on crash risk and • Safety not consistently inte- goals but economic imperatives. safety outcomes within eco- grated into economic corridor The SS4A Safety Action Plan nomic corridors planning provides the framework to ensure transportation safety investments • No explicit safety performance • Elevated exposure on regional directly support regional growth, measures tied to mobility in- commuter and freight routes vestments workforce development, and • Limited multimodal access to equitable access to opportunity. • Multimodal access discussed employment and training sites conceptually but not operation- alized 141 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 265 of 657 • Targeted investment in under- focused design, these changes served areas, where infrastruc- can increase conflict points. ture deficiencies often contrib- SS4A relevance ute to elevated safety risk • Alignment with Comprehensive Aligns with access management, Plan goals, including Complete intersection redesign, and Streets, walkability, and multi- multimodal safety strategies modal access identified in the SS4A Safety Action Plan. • Improved site access and circulation, supporting both ve- Equity and Community hicular operations and non-mo- Reinvestment torized safety Because TIF districts are often • Leveraging private investment located in underserved areas, Tax Increment to deliver public safety ben- transportation improvements Financing (TIF) Program efits that may otherwise be funded through TIF can improve cost-prohibitive safety, accessibility, and mobility – Transportation By directing reinvestment toward for residents who may rely more & Safety Findings areas with aging or inadequate heavily on walking, biking, or Summary infrastructure, the TIF Program transit. can help address long-standing City of Scottsbluff SS4A relevance transportation safety gaps. The City of Scottsbluff’s Tax Supports equity-focused Increment Financing (TIF) Program Transportation Safety and prioritization and investment is a critical implementation tool Systemic Risk Implications consistent with Vision Zero for addressing infrastructure principles. Infrastructure Deficiencies in deficiencies and advancing Safe System & Vision Zero redevelopment in blighted or Redevelopment Areas Alignment substandard areas. Transportation Blighted and redevelopment areas and public infrastructure frequently exhibit outdated street Strengths geometry, incomplete sidewalks, improvements are eligible • Provides a dedicated funding poor lighting, and substandard TIF expenditures, positioning mechanism for infrastructure intersections—all of which the program as a key funding improvements mechanism to support mobility, contribute to increased crash risk accessibility, and traffic safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and • Encourages integration of improvements in areas with drivers. transportation upgrades into redevelopment projects documented need. SS4A relevance • Aligns redevelopment with Key Transportation and Mobility Supports directing safety Comprehensive Plan mobility Themes investments to locations with goals systemic infrastructure deficiencies The TIF Program supports • Enables public–private part- and elevated risk. transportation safety and mobility nerships that advance safety through several core functions: Access, Circulation, and Conflict outcomes • Funding for public infrastruc- Reduction Key Gaps ture improvements, including Redevelopment projects often • Safety performance outcomes streets, sidewalks, utilities, involve changes to site access, are not explicitly required as public parking, and right-of- driveway configuration, and part of TIF project evaluation way enhancements internal circulation. Without safety- 142 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 266 of 657• Transportation improvements • Ensuring redevelopment • Advance equitable infrastruc- may vary in quality without projects contribute to citywide ture improvements in under- consistent safety standards Vision Zero objectives served neighborhoods Role of SS4A Gaps Identified Why This Matters for SS4A The SS4A Safety Action Plan • Safety outcomes not consis- Achieving lasting reductions in strengthens the TIF Program by: tently embedded in redevelop- fatal and serious injury crashes ment decision-making requires both strong planning • Providing data-driven prioriti- and reliable implementation tools. zation to guide TIF investments • Variable application of multi- Scottsbluff’s TIF Program provides toward high-risk locations modal and pedestrian safety standards a practical pathway to fund and • Establishing safety perfor- deliver transportation safety mance goals that can be Opportunities for Advancement improvements identified in the integrated into redevelopment • Use TIF to fund SS4A-priority SS4A Safety Action Plan, ensuring agreements safety projects in redevelop- that redevelopment contributes • Identifying specific counter- ment areas not only to economic revitalization measures eligible for TIF • Integrate safety criteria into TIF but also to safer, more accessible funding (e.g., ADA upgrades, project selection and design streets for all users. crossings, lighting, quick-build • Leverage private investment to treatments) deliver public safety benefits 143 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 267 of 657 Key Strengths Relevant to Speed Management and Traffic Transportation Safety Calming Limited design guidance for Engineering managing speeds through context- Robust specifications for materials, sensitive geometry and traffic construction methods, inspections, calming treatments. and maintenance support long-term Speed setting is not explicitly linked infrastructure performance and to crash severity and Safe System consistent delivery. principles. Traffic signal provisions include pedestrian signalization elements Pedestrian and Crossing Safety consistent with common national Minimal specifications for crosswalk practices. visibility, pedestrian refuge islands, curb extensions, lighting, or reduced City of Scottsbluff Accessibility is addressed through crossing distances. Standards and sidewalk, curb ramp, and related placement standards. No routine requirement for Specifications (1996) pedestrian safety assessments Landscaping and streetscape Transportation & Safety during design review. elements support corridor comfort, Findings Summary visibility, and maintainability. Equity and Data-Driven Safety City of Scottsbluff Standards and Enforcement and Evaluation Accessibility is addressed, but Specifications (1996) equity-driven prioritization and Transportation & Safety Findings Clear authority for the City Engineer safety outcomes for underserved Summary (SS4A Review) and inspectors supports permitting, populations are not embedded. inspection, and compliance. The City of Scottsbluff’s Crash data, High Injury Network Standards and Specifications Defined testing, inspection, and analysis, and safety performance (Sections 100–800) establish warranty requirements provide measures are not routinely the technical foundation for the quality control and post-construction integrated into design and design, construction, testing, and accountability. investment decisions. acceptance of public infrastructure, These strengths provide a solid including streets, traffic signals, technical baseline upon which Safe System and Vision Zero sidewalks, landscaping, and major modern safety practices can be Alignment utility systems within the public built. right-of-way. As the City’s primary Strengths design and construction reference, Key Gaps and Systemic • Strong construction quality and these standards influence roadway Limitations inspection framework geometry, pedestrian environments, Despite their technical rigor, the • Clear accountability for infrastruc- operating conditions, and long- standards reflect an era when ture delivery term maintenance practices across roadway design often prioritized Scottsbluff. • Pedestrian signal elements al- vehicle operations over multimodal ready present This review considers the standards safety and injury prevention. through the lens of the SS4A Key Gaps framework, the 5 E’s, and the Multimodal and Complete • Limited explicit tolerance for hu- USDOT Safe System Approach, Streets Integration man error in roadway design identifying core strengths that Limited explicit requirements to • Speed management not ad- support infrastructure reliability design for pedestrians, bicyclists, dressed as a system-level safety and opportunities to modernize transit users, or micro-mobility. function provisions that affect multimodal No consistent requirement • Safety outcomes not explicitly safety, speed management, equity, to document how projects prioritized or measured and data-driven decision-making. accommodate vulnerable users. 144 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 268 of 657Strategic Opportunities for the incomplete or fragmented. As a SS4A Safety Action Plan result, pedestrians and bicyclists are often required to navigate high- The Standards and Specifications speed roadways, indirect routes, or represent a high-impact leverage discontinuous facilities, increasing point for institutionalizing safety exposure to traffic conflicts. Several improvements citywide. Key of the corridors shown as pathway opportunities include: gaps on the 2005 map correspond • Integrating Complete Streets and with locations now identified multimodal design requirements through crash analysis and High into street projects City of Scottsbluff Injury Network mapping as higher- risk areas for vulnerable road users. • Embedding traffic calming and Master Pathways Plan speed management criteria into (2005) – Map Narrative Relationship to SS4A Findings design standards Summary The pathway gaps illustrated on • Requiring pedestrian-focused in- The City of Scottsbluff Master the 2005 map reinforce broader tersection and crossing treatments Pathways Plan (2005) map findings from crash data, public • Establishing safety performance illustrates a long-standing vision input, and corridor studies that metrics tied to fatal and serious for a connected, citywide network Scottsbluff’s pedestrian and injury reduction of shared-use paths, on-street bicycle network lacks continuous, routes, and trail corridors intended protected, and intuitive routes. The • Using HIN mapping and equity to support walking, bicycling, and persistence of these gaps over time data to guide design and invest- recreational travel throughout the underscores that safety challenges ment decisions community. The map identifies for people walking and bicycling are • Formalizing coordination across both existing pathways and systemic rather than isolated. engineering, enforcement, educa- proposed future connections linking Connection to SS4A Goals tion, and emergency response neighborhoods, schools, parks, The SS4A Safety Action Plan builds Why This Matters for SS4A commercial areas, and regional destinations. upon the intent of the Master Lasting reductions in fatal and Pathways Plan by: serious injury crashes require As shown on the Master Pathways • Prioritizing completion of missing more than individual projects— Plan map, the envisioned network pedestrian and bicycle links in they require institutional change. emphasizes east–west and north– high-risk corridors Updating Scottsbluff’s Standards south connectivity, trail connections and Specifications to reflect Safe along natural corridors, and linkages • Aligning pathway investments System principles helps ensure that between residential areas and with crash risk, exposure, and future maintenance, reconstruction, community activity centers. The equity considerations and development-driven projects map also highlights gaps where • Shifting from recreational connec- advance Vision Zero goals by pathways were proposed but not tivity alone toward safe, everyday default, not by exception. constructed, particularly along transportation routes arterial corridors, near highway and rail crossings, and at transitions • Integrating pathway planning with intersection safety, speed man- Many pathways between neighborhoods and major destinations. agement, and crossing improve- identified in 2005 ments remain incomplete, 2005 Master Pathway 05-03-05 By revisiting the Master Pathways reinforcing current Relevance to Current Safety vision through a Safe System SS4A findings Conditions lens, the SS4A plan advances a more targeted, safety-focused related to network While the Master Pathways Plan approach to closing network gaps gaps and exposure reflects a strong early commitment and reducing serious injury and to active transportation, many of risk. fatal crash risk for pedestrians and the proposed connections remain bicyclists. 145 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 269 of 657 • Lighting and visibility • Parking and circulation A4.6 Transportation improvements improvements to reduce Projects and • South Beltline Highway Safety & conflicts Improvements Entryway Improvements • Speed management and visibility Supported by the 2026 • Pedestrian accommodations improvements Comprehensive Plan • Corridor safety and access D. Lighting, Visibility, and Speed Management The following transportation enhancements projects and improvement • Target / Major Commercial Area • Corridor and Neighborhood concepts are explicitly Crossing Improvements Lighting Improvements identified or supported • Enhanced pedestrian crossings • Focus on areas with documented visibility and safety within the adopted • Signalization or crossing control concerns Comprehensive Plan through improvements • Speed Management and public engagement results, B. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Enforcement Support neighborhood and corridor Projects guidance, parks and pathway • Corridor-specific speed • Citywide Pathway and Trail planning, and implementation mitigation strategies System Expansion discussions. These projects • Enhanced signage and warning form a policy-supported • New shared-use paths treatments foundation for SS4A • Connections between E. Railroad Crossing Safety implementation. neighborhoods, parks, schools, and commercial areas • Railroad Crossing Safety A. Intersection & Corridor Safety Enhancements Improvements • Riverside Park Access & Crossing Improvements • Evaluation and prioritization of • US Highway 26 Intersection crossings • Safer roadway crossings Safety Improvements • Warning device and visibility • Improved trail connections to • Turn lane additions or improvements surrounding neighborhoods modifications • Coordination with rail operators • Pedestrian Crossing • Signalized intersection and state partners Improvements on Major Streets enhancements F. Pedestrian-Oriented Street • High-visibility crosswalks • Improved pedestrian crossings Projects • Pedestrian warning signage • Access management where • 18th Street Plaza (Completed feasible • Signalized or user-activated Project) crossings where warranted • US Highway 26 Corridor • Demonstrates community Enhancements C. School-Area Safety Projects support for pedestrian-oriented • Safety-focused entryway • School Area Traffic & Pedestrian street design improvements Safety Improvements • Serves as a precedent for future • Pedestrian facilities and • Intersection and crossing safety-focused, people-first crossings upgrades near schools street projects 146 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 270 of 657Table A4-2. Comprehensive Plan → SS4A Policy & Action Crosswalk Purpose: This table documents how transportation- and traffic safety–related policies, needs, and recommendations in the 2026 Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan directly support and inform the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan strategies, projects, and programs. Comprehensive Plan Policy / Source within Comp Plan SS4A Safety Action Plan Alignment Direction Systemic intersection safety analysis; Improve safety at major Community engagement prioritization of high-risk intersections; intersections, particularly results; key countermeasures such as turn lanes, signal along high-volume corridors improvement items; timing, access management, and enhanced such as US Highway 26 corridor discussions pedestrian crossings Address public concerns Community survey related to unsafe High Injury Network (HIN) identification and results and written intersections and traffic targeted intersection improvements comments operations Community survey SS4A pedestrian and bicycle network safety Expand the citywide support for pathway improvements; closing sidewalk and pathway pathway and trail system expansion; parks and gaps; safer trail-roadway crossings open space policies Improve pedestrian Public comments; park Pedestrian crossing safety countermeasures crossings on major streets access and corridor (high-visibility markings, RRFBs, refuge and near activity centers guidance islands, improved signage) Improve safety and Neighborhood plans and Focused pedestrian safety improvements near accessibility near parks, parks/trails sections parks and recreational destinations including Riverside Park Improve visibility, lighting, Public input and Lighting upgrades, visibility improvements, and streetscape conditions corridor/entryway and speed management as SS4A emphasis along key corridors guidance areas School-area safety audits, traffic calming, Improve safety near schools Public comments and crossing improvements, and Safe Routes to and school travel routes neighborhood concerns School–style strategies Public input identifying Railroad crossing safety evaluation, data- Address railroad crossing east-side railroad driven prioritization, and coordination with safety concerns crossings rail agencies Promote Complete SS4A emphasis on designing streets for all Streets–style development Land use and health- users and reducing crash severity through and connected street related policy sections context-sensitive design networks Enhance corridor entryways Corridor-level SS4A projects combining safety, to be safe, functional, and Entryway and corridor access management, and pedestrian reflective of community planning sections improvements character Note: This crosswalk will be updated to incorporate specific Transportation chapter policies once that chapter is adopted. 147 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 271 of 657 Crash history and HIN analysis facilities using federally A4.7 Synthesis: confirm that severe crashes recognized methods, including Connection Between are not isolated incidents but crash analysis and HIN mapping. Findings and the SS4A instead occur in repeatable This strengthens interagency environments shaped by coordination and supports Safety Action Plan roadway geometry, operating advancement of projects The review of crash data, High speeds, turning movements, requiring shared jurisdiction Injury Network (HIN) analysis, land use context, and and approval. Similarly, the public engagement, adopted multimodal exposure. Vulnerable SS4A framework enables plans, municipal standards, and road users—especially coordinated safety strategies supporting studies demonstrates pedestrians—face elevated risk in complex environments such that Scottsbluff’s traffic safety in locations with long crossing as school zones, rail corridors, challenges are systemic, distances, limited pedestrian and commercial activity centers predictable, and preventable. priority features, incomplete where multiple stakeholders Fatal and serious injury crashes networks, and widely spaced influence outcomes. are concentrated along a crossing opportunities. These limited number of corridors and conditions are especially Action Plan Response intersections where speed, pronounced along US Highway Summary exposure, and conflict density 26, near commercial centers, The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety converge—particularly along and in school- and rail-adjacent Action Plan translates these major arterials, state-controlled environments. findings into a coordinated highways, commercial activity package of capital projects centers, school areas, and rail The SS4A Safety Action Plan (J-series), programs (P-series), interfaces. directly responds to these findings by applying a Safe and policy actions (O-series) Across multiple planning System approach, recognizing (see Appendix A8 - Projects) documents—including the that human error is inevitable designed to reduce fatal and Comprehensive Plan, corridor and that the transportation serious injury risk across the and streetscape guidance, system must be designed transportation system. school safety discussions, to prevent those errors from Collectively, the plan advances pathway planning efforts, resulting in fatal or serious injury. the following strategic response economic and demographic Rather than relying on isolated areas: analyses, and engineering spot fixes or enforcement alone, standards—there is consistent the plan prioritizes corridor- and A. Reduce Severe Crashes at recognition of the need for safer network-level strategies that High-Risk Intersections and pedestrian crossings, improved manage speed, reduce conflict Corridors multimodal connectivity, exposure, improve visibility, speed management, and and strengthen protection for The plan prioritizes intersection- stronger coordination between vulnerable road users. and corridor-level safety infrastructure design and improvements along the High safety outcomes. However, Importantly, some of Injury Network. These strategies these documents also reveal Scottsbluff’s highest-risk focus on managing speed, persistent gaps between policy corridors—including US Highway reducing turning conflicts, intent and implementation, 26—are controlled by external improving signal operations, particularly where roadway agencies such as the Nebraska clarifying lane guidance, and design standards, jurisdictional Department of Transportation strengthening pedestrian authority, or funding constraints (NDOT). The SS4A framework protection at locations where limit the City’s ability to address provides a formal, data-driven crash severity and exposure are risk proactively. structure to document safety highest. needs on state-controlled 148 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 272 of 657data → risk → strategy → implementation B. Improve Pedestrian, operating environments reflect the City’s Vision Zero– Bicycle, and ADA involving vehicle, pedestrian, aligned safety goals. and freight movements. The plan Connectivity as a Safety Direct Line from Findings to Strategy establishes a prioritized, data- informed approach to crossing Implementation Recognizing that network surface improvements, visibility These findings provide a gaps contribute directly to enhancements, and coordinated crash risk, the plan advances foundation for project prioritization implementation with rail and action selection by: targeted sidewalk, ADA, and operators and state partners. pathway improvements that • Identifying corridors and inter- reduce exposure on high-speed E. Deliver Near-Term Safety sections with the highest con- corridors. Enhanced crossings, Gains While Building Long- centration of fatal and serious improved accessibility, and safer Term Implementation Capacity injury crashes connections to parks, schools, The plan incorporates quick- • Linking crash severity to neighborhoods, and commercial build and phased implementation speed, exposure, visibility, and destinations are prioritized concepts to allow the City conflict density where demand and risk overlap. to test, refine, and advance • Highlighting locations where C. Address School Circulation, safety treatments efficiently. It vulnerable road users are dis- School-Zone Consistency, and also establishes performance proportionately affected Youth Safety monitoring, prioritization criteria, and coordination mechanisms • Documenting infrastructure, School-area findings identified that support long-term progress policy, and operational gaps recurring congestion, visibility, toward eliminating fatal and that contribute to systemic risk and crossing challenges. The serious injury crashes. By translating documented risks plan supports structured school- into coordinated, prioritized area safety improvements, F. Align Ordinances, actions, the Scottsbluff SS4A circulation refinements, Standards, and Operational Safety Action Plan establishes consistent school-zone Practices with Safe System a clear, transparent line treatments, and Safe Routes– Principles from data → risk → strategy → style strategies that reduce Policy and implementation gaps implementation. This approach conflict exposure during peak identified in these findings are is consistent with FHWA SS4A travel periods. addressed through ordinance Notice of Funding Opportunity D. Improve Rail Crossing updates, standardized safety (NOFO) expectations and reflects Safety and Accessibility review processes, and a long-term commitment to Through Coordinated integration of safety performance eliminating fatal and serious injury crashes across the Upgrades considerations into capital planning and maintenance community. Railroad crossings and adjacent decisions. This ensures that corridors present complex future investments consistently 149 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 273 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 150 Appendix 4 - Findings Page 274 of 657 A5 baseline data 151 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 275 of 657 Appendix 5 Table of Contents A5.1 Purpose of Baseline Data ........................................................................153 A5.2 Community Demographics .....................................................................153 A5.3 Travel Modes and Travel Patterns ..........................................................153 A5.4 Roadway Network and Functional Classification ..................................154 A5.5 Traffic Volumes and Exposure ................................................................154 A5.6 School Enrollment and Student Travel ...................................................154 A5.7 Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Infrastructure ......................................154 A5.8 Developed Layers and Features ............................................................155 A5.9 Crash Data Baseline ................................................................................155 A5.10 Comparative Context ..............................................................................156 A5.11 Role of Baseline Data in Future Evaluation ...........................................156 A5.12 Data Sources List .....................................................................................156 A5.13 Relationship to Other Appendices..........................................................156 152 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 276 of 657A5.1 Purpose of Baseline project boundary—often This approach allowed the extending beyond the ETJ— project team to: Data demographic data were ● Confirm broad geographic used primarily to understand Baseline Data documents the representation across the demographic, transportation, general patterns rather than community and infrastructure baseline to assign precise values to ● Identify differences in conditions that provide context specific areas within the perceived safety concerns by project limits. for the Scottsbluff SS4A area Safety Action Plan. These data To support the public establish a reference point ● Ensure that priorities engagement process, the reflected citywide conditions for understanding existing project area was divided rather than isolated conditions, interpreting crash into five geographic regions viewpoints risk, and tracking progress (Northwest, Northeast, over time as safety actions are ● Incorporate input from Central, Southeast, and regional users who regularly implemented. Southwest) based on interact with Scottsbluff’s The baseline data summarized recognizable neighborhood transportation system here support: patterns and major corridors. This engagement-based • Crash and risk analysis These regions were aligned geographic framework (Appendices A2–A4) with block group boundaries complements traditional within the corporate limits • Project and countermeasure demographic analysis and and as closely as practical selection (Appendices A8–A9) aligns with SS4A guidance with Census block group for small communities, where • Performance tracking for future boundaries outside corporate community input, lived SS4A implementation grants limits; however, because block experience, and observed A5.2 Community groups extend beyond the safety concerns provide critical project area, responses could context alongside crash data Demographics not be assigned as exact and Census information. percentages of population by Demographic analysis for geography. the Scottsbluff Safety Action A5.3 Travel Modes and Plan utilized U.S. Census and Instead, survey responses Travel Patterns American Community Survey and comments were tracked Transportation in Scottsbluff (ACS) data at the census by general location within is predominantly auto- tract and block group level these five regions to ensure oriented, consistent with rural to understand community that input was received from community travel patterns. characteristics across the across the community. A However, walking, bicycling, project area. For consistency sixth category was used to and school-related travel across datasets, the study capture input from adjacent remain important daily modes area included both the communities, including for many residents. Scottsbluff corporate limits Terrytown and Gering, as well and the City’s extraterritorial as individuals who live outside Observed and reported travel jurisdiction (ETJ). the project area but work, patterns include: shop, or travel regularly within • Daily walking trips to schools, Because Census geographies Scottsbluff. parks, downtown, and do not align exactly with the community facilities 153 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 277 of 657 • Limited but meaningful bicycle • Downtown streets with on-street use, including recreational and parking, limited sight distance, A5.6 School Enrollment youth travel and mixed user activity and Student Travel • Heavy reliance on personal • Residential streets with lower Scottsbluff Public Schools and vehicles for commuting, speeds but limited traffic calming two additional private schools shopping, and services features represent a major generator of • Seasonal variation in travel • Railroad corridors intersecting daily travel activity. patterns related to agriculture, major routes and affecting recreation, and weather access and operations Baseline considerations include: Public survey input and Roadway centerline data were • Student arrival and dismissal peaks with concentrated vehicle, stakeholder engagement sourced from the City’s GIS pedestrian, and bus activity indicate that perceived datasets and reviewed for exposure risk for pedestrians consistency and completeness. • Limited walking and bicycling and students exceeds what relative to potential demand due to perceived safety concerns crash history alone reflects, A5.5 Traffic Volumes and reinforcing the need to consider • Parent drop-off, bus circulation, non-motorized travel in safety Exposure and student parking contributing planning. Traffic volume data were to operational conflicts and available for limited locations, congestion The Monument Valley Pathway primarily along state highways • Event-related traffic surges provides an important shared- and select corridors. during sporting and school use corridor for walking activities and bicycling, supporting Key considerations: School locations, routes, and both recreational use and • AADT data were used where operational patterns were connectivity across the available to provide context for incorporated into safety community. exposure, with 2024 providing analysis, project prioritization, the most complete data. and countermeasure selection. A5.4 Roadway Network • Traffic volumes (2024 AADT) are highest along US-26, Avenue I, and Functional 27th Street, Broadway, Avenue A5.7 Pedestrian, Bicycle, Classification B, 5th Avenue, and 20th Street. and Transit Infrastructure The Scottsbluff roadway network • Volume data were Sidewalk and ADA Infrastructure supplemented with functional includes: Sidewalk conditions are not classification, land use context, • Local residential streets and observed activity patterns. completely mapped in City • Collector streets serving GIS data but field verification • Exposure risk was evaluated confirms gaps in the sidewalk neighborhoods and schools using a combination of volume, network throughout residential • State highways (US-26, NE-71, speed environment, and NE-92) that function as regional pedestrian activity rather than areas, near schools, and along corridors traffic counts alone. key corridors. Key characteristics of the Given limited count coverage, Baseline conditions include: roadway system include: the plan emphasizes context- • Sidewalk gaps on local streets • State highways serving both based and systemic risk and near schools regional through traffic and local assessment rather than volume • Inconsistent ADA curb ramp access thresholds. coverage 154 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 278 of 657• Variable sidewalk condition and documented in Appendix A6 – Maps Transportation (NDOT) for the continuity and were incorporated into the period 2014–2023 establish the • Locations where pedestrians safety analysis. baseline safety record for the routinely walk in the roadway Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan. due to infrastructure gaps See transit stakeholder These data include all reported Appendix A1 - crashes within the City of A comprehensive sidewalk summary in Engagement Scottsbluff and its extraterritorial inventory has not been . jurisdiction (ETJ) and provide the completed; however, observed foundation for identifying trends, conditions and community input A5.8 Developed Layers risk factors, and priority locations. consistently identify gaps as a and Features Between 2014 and 2023, key safety concern. Baseline spatial datasets Scottsbluff experienced5,361 Bicycle Facilities developed for this plan include: reported crashes, including 93 crashes resulting in fatal or serious • Limited sign inventory Scottsbluff does not currently injury (KSI). These data reflect have a dedicated on-street • Project boundary (3-mile reporting practices consistent bicycle network. Bicycle travel extraterritorial jurisdiction) with NDOT and Model Minimum occurs: • Generated intersection locations Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) standards, including updates • On shared-use pathways where for analysis implemented in 2021. available • Railroad crossings and rail • On local streets corridors (signage, lighting, Key baseline characteristics decision point, sight line, sight include: • Along shoulders of state obstruction) highways in limited locations ● A concentration of fatal and • Land use data The Monument Valley Pathway serious injury (KSI) crashes provides the primary off-street • School sites and related safety along a limited number of bicycle and pedestrian facility in features (beacons, lighting, corridors and intersections, the community, connecting the crosswalk centerlines) forming the basis of the High YMCA area along South Broadway • Public transit routes and stops Injury Network (HIN) and South Beltline Highway to the • Traffic signal locations ● A strong relationship west side of the city, continuing between crash severity and • Public engagement locations east along the south side of US-26, roadway speed, corridor and comment data crossing via a pedestrian bridge, function, and intersection and extending to the Western • Crowdsource safety comment control, particularly along Nebraska Community College point layer higher-speed, multi-lane (WNCC) campus. This facility These datasets supported: facilities serves both recreational and ● Recurring contributing transportation functions. • Visibility and night-condition analysis factors, including speeding, Transit failure to yield, distraction, • Intersection-based safety and impairment Transit service is provided screening by Tri-City Roadrunner, • Understanding of access density ● Elevated risk for vulnerable including fixed-route and and turning conflicts road users, especially near demand-response services schools, activity centers, and within Scottsbluff, Gering, and A5.9 Crash Data Baseline key crossing locations Terrytown. Crash data obtained from ● Crash patterns influenced by time of day, lighting Transit routes and stops are the Nebraska Department of 155 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 279 of 657 conditions, and roadway Baseline conditions • Stakeholder coordination environment, including documented here may be meetings including schools, increased severity during revisited and updated as new transit, business leaders, public nighttime conditions data become available. safety and public health: Crash data were analyzed in • Elementary & Middle Schools detail in Appendices A2–A4 and A5.12 Data Sources List • Roosevelt Elementary, • Longfellow Elementary are summarized here to establish • US Census Bureau 2024 (ACS baseline conditions that inform • Lincoln Heights Elementary 5-Year Estimates): Census Tracts, • Westmoor Elementary the plan’s strategies, priorities, Census Blocks, Demographics, and performance measures. • St Agnes Catholic School Population • Community Christian School A5.10 Comparative • TIGER/Line shapefiles: road • Bluffs Middle School centerlines and administrative • Tri-City Roadrunner public Context boundaries transit leadership To provide regional • NDOT crash database (2014- • Rotary context, crash data from 2023): cities of Scottsbluff, • Public safety officers (City four comparable Nebraska Beatrice, Gering, North Platte, South Sioux City Police and Fire Departments, communities were reviewed. Nebraska State Patrol, EMS) This comparison helped: • NDOT AADT data (2024) • Panhandle Public Health • City GIS datasets: road • Validate Scottsbluff’s crash District (PPHD) centerlines, landmarks, signs, profile corporate limits, extraterritorial A5.13 Relationship to • Support the emphasis on jurisdiction, public spaces, preventive and systemic safety public facilities, pathways, other Other Appendices strategies reference layers This appendix supports: • Reinforce the appropriateness of • sUAS imagery acquired by MCS • Appendix A2 – Collisions SS4A planning approaches for family of companies the community of Scottsbluff. • Appendix A3 – Crash Maps • Scottsbluff City Police citation A5.11 Role of Baseline and crash data (2024-2025, • Appendix A4 – Findings where available) • Appendix A6 – Maps Data in Future Evaluation • BNSF railroad crossings • Appendix A7 – Methods The datasets documented conditions and crash data in Baseline Data establish a • 4 Task Force meetings foundation for: • 12 open house / pop-up events • Monitoring changes in crash severity • 4 targeted information sharing sessions with Scottsbluff teens • Evaluating effectiveness of implemented projects • Public pop-up and online surveys (499 responses) • Supporting future SS4A Implementation Grant • Online map commenting survey applications (2,066 mapped responses) • Updating the Safety Action Plan over time 156 Appendix 5 - Baseline Data Page 280 of 657A6 maps 157 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 281 of 657 Appendix 6 Table of Contents A6.1 Community Context & Key Destinations ....................................................... 159 A6.2 Community Input & Engagement Maps ........................................................160 A6.3 Infrastructure & Accessibility Map ..................................................................161 A6.4 School, Library, Parks & Youth Safety Maps ................................................. 163 A6.5 Posted Speed Limit ......................................................................................... 164 A6.6 Road Surface ................................................................................................... 165 A6.7 Road System Classification ............................................................................ 166 A6.8 Road Ownership ..............................................................................................167 A6.9 Adjacent Land Use .......................................................................................... 168 A6.10 Road Travelway Width .................................................................................... 169 A6.11 Parking ............................................................................................................. 170 A6.12 Road Lanes ....................................................................................................... 171 A6.13 Truck Route ......................................................................................................172 A6.14 Snow Route ......................................................................................................173 A6.15 Annual Average Daily Traffic 2024 .................................................................174 A6.16 Tri-City Roadrunner Transit ..............................................................................175 A6.17 Posted Speed and the High Injury Network ..................................................176 A6.18 Exposure (Travelway Width and the HIN) ......................................................178 A6.19 Adjacent Land Use and the HIN .....................................................................179 A6.20 Citations Mapping 2024 - Speeding Hotspots ...............................................181 158 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 282 of 657A6.1 Community Context & Key Destinations Community context provides foundational orientation and highlights locations where safety concerns and exposure are concentrated. 159 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 283 of 657 A6.2 Community Input & Engagement Maps Public input was distributed geographically and community feedback informed plan development. Survey areas coincided with 2020 US Census Block boundaries, labeled in the map. 160 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 284 of 657 A6.3 Infrastructure & Accessibility Map Existing conditions and gaps affecting pedestrian and multimodal safety. 161 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 285 of 657 This map shows school properties, parks, the library, and school speed zone centerlines, along with West of Broadway school-related signage. School speed limits vary across Scottsbluff, including 20 MPH zones (e.g., East 27th Street near the high school), 15 MPH flashing zones (e.g., North Broadway at Bluffs Middle School), and 15 MPH when-students-present zones with posted times and days. Some schools and youth- serving locations—such as Roosevelt Elementary, Lincoln Heights Elementary, Bluffs Middle School (beyond Broadway), St. Agnes, the preschool, college, and Harms Center—do not have designated school speed zone signage. These variations highlight opportunities for improved consistency and safety. 162 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 286 of 657 A6.4 School, Library, Parks & Youth Safety Maps School- and park-focused map highlights areas with elevated pedestrian exposure and daily travel activity. East of Broadway East This map shows school properties, parks, the library, and school speed zone centerlines. School speed lim- its and signage vary across the community, including 20 MPH zones, 15 MPH flashing zones, and 15 MPH when-students-present zones. Several schools and youth-serving locations do not currently have desig- nated school speed zone signage. 163 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 287 of 657 A6.5 Posted Speed Limit Roadways are symbolized by posted speed limit, representing the regulatory speed for each segment. Speed is a key factor influencing crash severity and is used to identify higher-risk corridors. 164 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 288 of 657 A6.6 Road Surface Roadways are classified by surface type, including asphalt, bituminous, concrete, and gravel. The Monument Valley Pathway is also shown to provide context for non-motorized travel and connectivity within the network. 165 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 289 of 657 A6.7 Road System Classification Roadways are classified by functional system, including State (US) Highways, Federal- Aid Urban (FAU), Federal-Aid Secondary (FAS), County roads, and Local streets. This classification reflects roadway function, funding eligibility, and the role each facility plays in the transportation network. 166 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 290 of 657 A6.8 Road Ownership Roadway ownership is classified as City (blue), County (yellow), State of Nebraska (red), and Private (white). Ownership influences who is responsible for maintenance, design, and operations, and identifies where coordination with external agencies—such as NDOT or the County—is required to implement safety improvements. 167 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 291 of 657 A6.9 Adjacent Land Use Adjacent land use is based on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, as the 2026 land use dataset was not yet available at the time of analysis. This map is intended to provide general context for roadway surroundings. 168 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 292 of 657 A6.10 Road Travelway Width Travelway width reflects the paved driving surface only and excludes paved shoulders. For divided highways (e.g., US routes), the centerline dataset represents each direction separately; therefore, widths are shown per direction and do not represent the total roadway width across both directions. 169 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 293 of 657 A6.11 Parking Road centerlines are symbolized based on available parking, including no parking, parallel parking on one or both sides, and diagonal parking on one or both sides. 170 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 294 of 657 A6.12 Road Lanes The roadway centerline dataset represents each direction of travel separately for divided roadways. As a result, lane symbology for divided roadways reflects the number of lanes in a single direction rather than the total lanes across both directions. 171 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 295 of 657 A6.13 Truck Route Roadways are classified by truck route designation: blue represents City Delivery Truck Routes, red represents Commercial Truck Routes, and white roadways do not have a designated truck route. 172 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 296 of 657 A6.14 Snow Route Roadways shown in dark blue represent designated snow routes. 173 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 297 of 657 A6.15 Annual Average Daily Traffic 2024 The 2024 AADT dataset is shown, as it provides the most complete coverage. Black labels represent total traffic volumes, while blue labels indicate truck volumes for the same segment. Values range from 230 to 15,425 vehicles per day and are symbolized using six classes with graduated color and line width. 174 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 298 of 657 A6.16 Tri-City Roadrunner Transit Public transit routes and stops are concentrated along higher-speed arterial corridors, where stakeholder input identified challenges with safe boarding, visibility, and access—highlighting the need for targeted stop and corridor safety improvements. 175 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 299 of 657 A6.17 Posted Speed and the High Injury Network High Injury Network corridors closely align with higher posted speed roadways, reinforcing that increased operating speeds are a primary driver of crash severity and a defining characteristic of systemic safety risk. 176 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 300 of 657 While many HIN segments occur on 30 mph city streets, higher-speed corridors are disproportionately associated with severe crashes. Roadways posted at 45 mph account for more than one quarter of all HIN segments, and corridors with speeds of 50 mph or greater account for nearly one-fifth of the network. These results emphasize the importance of addressing both speed management and corridor design along Scottsbluff’s higher-speed arterial routes. HIN and Posted Speed Limit carry both neighborhood er account for approximately traffic and access to major 17% of HIN segments. These Analysis of the High Injury destinations. However, high- findings reinforce the rela- Network (HIN) also highlights er-speed corridors are also tionship between speed and the role that roadway speed strongly represented, with 45 crash severity and highlight environments play in severe mph segments accounting for the importance of targeted crash risk. The largest share 26% of the HIN despite rep- speed management, corridor of HIN segments occur on resenting a smaller portion of design improvements, and roadways with posted speeds the city’s roadway network. intersection safety treatments of 30 mph (35%), reflecting Additional HIN segments oc- along higher-speed corridors the large number of crashes cur on roadways posted at 55 such as US-26 and other ma- occurring on city streets that mph and above, which togeth- jor arterials. 177 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 301 of 657 A6.18 Exposure (Travelway Width and the HIN) High Injury Network corridors correspond with wider travelway sections, where increased roadway width contributes to higher operating speeds, longer crossing distances, and greater conflict exposure for all users. 178 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 302 of 657 A6.19 Adjacent Land Use and the HIN High Injury Network corridors align with areas of higher-intensity land use, where commercial, institutional, and mixed-use activity increases access points, pedestrian activity, and overall conflict density along key roadways. 179 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 303 of 657 Corridors identified on the High Injury Network consistently exhibit a combination of higher posted speeds, wider roadway cross-sections, and more intense adjacent land uses (see A6.17, A6.18, A6.19). This overlap reinforces that severe crash risk in Scottsbluff is driven by systemic conditions—where speed, exposure, and conflict density converge—rather than isolated locations. These conditions are most prevalent along arterial corridors such as US-26, Avenue I, Broadway, and East Overland, where roadway design and surrounding land use create the highest-risk environments. Speeding hotspots shown in the A6.20 Citations Mapping (right) are developed using all 2024 citation and warning data points from stops along the following corridors only: Broadway, 5th Avenue, Avenue B, Avenue I, 27th Street, 20th Street, East and West Overland, and South Beltlione Highway The highest concentration of stops in this dataset occurs along the 20 mph, four-lane school zone segment of East 27th Street between Broadway and 5th Avenue. Additional hot spots occur on Broadway and Avenue. Notable notable clusters are also shown on north 5th Ave, E 27th and E 20th Streets, and South Beltline Highway. This dataset offers valuable insight for the Police Department, helping align enforcement strategies with recurring high-risk locations and complementing crash-based analysis. 180 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 304 of 657 A6.20 Citations Mapping 2024 - Speeding Hotspots Citation and warning data for speeding-related traffic stops (2,522 total stops) provide a new, behavior-based perspective on safety risk. The heat map shows primary concentrations along the north–south Broadway corridor and the east–west 27th Street corridor, with additional hotspots along Avenue I between West Overland and W 20th Street. This dataset introduces a valuable new tool for the Police Department, helping align enforcement strategies. 181 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 305 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 182 Appendix 6 - Maps Page 306 of 657 A7 methods 183 Appendix 7 - Methods Page 307 of 657 Appendix 7 Table of Contents A7.1 Data Sources and Year Ranges .....................................................................185 A7.2 GIS Analysis Steps ..........................................................................................185 A7.3 Metadata for Spatial Layers ...........................................................................186 A7.4 Notes on Assumptions, Limitations, and Quality Checks ............................186 A7.5 Description of Prioritization Methods ............................................................186 184 Appendix 7 - Methods Page 308 of 657A7.1 Data Sources and a data-driven, systemic evaluation of avoid unassigned roadway gaps. The transportation safety risk across the selected segment length balances Year Ranges Scottsbluff roadway network. sensitivity to localized crash patterns Traffic safety analysis for the while maintaining sufficient crash aggregation for meaningful systemic Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan A7.2 GIS Analysis Steps screening. was based on multiple data sources, Spatial analysis was conducted with an emphasis on completeness, using ArcGIS Pro, following FHWA- • Divided roadways were analyzed as separate directional segments to consistency, and relevance to fatal recommended practices for systemic preserve geometric and operational safety analysis and High Injury and serious injury risk. characteristics. Network (HIN) development. The primary dataset used for crash High Injury Network (HIN) analysis was Nebraska Department Crash Data Processing Development of Transportation (NDOT) crash data • Crash records were spatially joined to • KSI crashes were aggregated to both covering the period 2014–2023, the roadway network and intersections. corridor segments and intersection inclusive. Only complete calendar • Only fatal and serious injury (KSI) buffers. years were included; no partial-year crashes were included in HIN • Density and frequency measures data were used. Crash severity was development. were used to screen for elevated risk classified using MMUCC-compliant • Duplicate records and invalid locations locations. definitions, with analysis focused on were reviewed and corrected as part of fatal and serious injury (KSI) crashes, • The High Injury Network (HIN) was quality control. defined as the subset of roadway consistent with FHWA SS4A guidance. Intersection Analysis corridors and intersections accounting Additional supporting datasets • Intersections were represented as for a disproportionate share of fatal and included: point features derived from roadway serious injury (KSI) crashes relative to • Traffic volumes, using the most recent centerlines. the overall transportation network. and complete NDOT traffic counts • A 40-meter (~131-foot) buffer was Modifiers and Contextual Factors available (primarily 2023 data) applied to each intersection to capture The HIN analysis was refined • Pedestrian counts at select locations, crashes associated with intersection using additional contextual modifiers including the South Beltline Highway influence areas, including turning, developed specifically for the and Broadway signalized intersection crossing, and approach-related crash Scottsbluff SS4A effort, including: • Citation and enforcement data, where activity. • Roadway classification and function available, for limited time periods and • On divided roadways, each directional locations (2024: Broadway, 5th Avenue, carriageway was represented as • Traffic volume context Avenue B, Avenue I, 27th Street, 20th a separate centerline. As a result, • Presence of vulnerable road user Street, East & West Overland, and intersections where divided highways activity generators (schools, parks, South Beltline Highway) cross divided streets were represented commercial centers) • Roadway centerlines, intersections, rail by multiple intersection points (up to • Jurisdictional considerations (e.g., corridors, and jurisdictional boundaries four), allowing more precise attribution state-controlled corridors) of crash risk by movement and • School locations, parks, land use approach. • Land use and access characteristics context, and demographic data used These modifiers were used to support for qualitative context and equity Corridor Segmentation considerations prioritization and interpretation, not to • Roadway corridors were segmented exclude locations from consideration. • Adopted plans, ordinances, standards, using a fixed-length approach of 100 and studies, reviewed qualitatively meters (~328 feet). Additional shorter to inform risk interpretation and segments were retained between implementation feasibility adjacent intersection buffers to ensure continuous network coverage and Together, these datasets supported 185 Appendix 7 - Methods Page 309 of 657 A7.3 Metadata for Spatial • Jurisdictional constraints affect From this process, the top 26 implementation feasibility, particularly intersections were identified based Layers on state-controlled corridors such as on cumulative risk, crash severity, All spatial analysis was performed US Highway 26. and contextual importance. Corridors using Nebraska State Plane • Citation and enforcement data were and intersections were then grouped Coordinates, NAD 1983, U.S. Feet. available only for limited periods and into priority tiers to guide project locations and were used for contextual Key spatial layers included: development rather than assigned a understanding rather than quantitative single numeric score. • Crash point layer (2014–2023, NDOT) modeling. This approach emphasizes: • Roadway centerline network Quality assurance and quality control • Reducing fatal and serious injury risk • Intersection point layer (derived) measures included: • Addressing systemic safety challenges • High Injury Network (HIN) corridor • Verification of crash severity coding segments • Review of spatial joins and intersection • Supporting corridor-level solutions • High Injury Network (HIN) intersections assignments • Aligning projects with documented data and adopted policy • City of Scottsbluff corporate limits • Visual inspection of HIN outputs for consistency with known roadway The prioritization framework • Rail corridors conditions establishes a clear, defensible • School locations and community • Cross-checking results against public connection between analysis facilities input and documented safety concerns results and recommended safety Spatial layers were reviewed for These steps ensured that analysis projects, consistent with FHWA SS4A completeness, spatial alignment, results are reasonable, repeatable, expectations. and projection consistency prior to and appropriate for SS4A planning analysis. Attribute fields relevant purposes. to safety analysis (severity, year, roadway type, etc.) were verified A7.5 Description of to ensure consistency with source documentation. Prioritization Methods Project prioritization for the Scottsbluff A7.4 Notes on SS4A Safety Action Plan followed Assumptions, Limitations, a risk-based, systemic approach, consistent with FHWA SS4A guidance and Quality Checks and Safe System principles. As with all transportation safety Using the GIS analysis described analyses, several assumptions and above, the project team: limitations apply: • Identified a High Injury Network of • Crash data underreporting is possible, corridors and intersections particularly for minor crashes and non- • Applied contextual modifiers reflecting motorized incidents. roadway function, exposure, and • Exposure data (e.g., pedestrian and vulnerable road user risk bicycle volumes) were limited to select • Evaluated jurisdictional feasibility and locations and were not available implementation considerations citywide. 186 Appendix 7 - Methods Page 310 of 657 A8 projects Appendix 8 - Projects 187 Page 311 of 657 Appendix 8 Table of Contents A8.1 Purpose and Structure of Projects ............................................................................... 189 A8.2 Action Categories and Organization ........................................................................... 189 A8.3 Project Prioritization Framework ................................................................................. 189 A8.4 Planning-Level Cost Estimates ..................................................................................... 190 A8.5 Project & Countermeasure Alignment Framework .................................................... 190 A8.6 How the Implementation Framework Works Together ............................................. 190 Table A8-1. Initial Priority & Alignment Matrix ������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 Table A8-2. Weighted Priority & Alignment Matrix ���������������������������������������������������������� 192 A8.7 Project Support and Alignment Matrix ........................................................................ 193 A8.8 Project Implementation Notes ..................................................................................... 193 A8.9 Project Support & Alignment Matrix ............................................................................ 193 Table A8-3. Capital PROJECTS Table (J Projects) .......................................................... 194 Table A8-4. PROGRAMS Table (P Programs) ................................................................. 195 Table A8-5. POLICIES Table (O Policies) ........................................................................ 195 A8.10 From Prioritization to Project Development ............................................................... 199 J1 – US-26 Signal & Intersection Modernization (NDOT) �����������������������������������������������202 J2 – Targeted Corridor & Intersection Safety Corrections .............................................206 J3 – East Overland Targeted Improvements �������������������������������������������������������������������210 J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety Improvements ����������������������������������������� 214 J5 – Active Transportation Network Completion ������������������������������������������������������������ 218 J6 – School Circulation & Access Safety Improvements ............................................... 226 J6a – Scottsbluff High School Access & Parking Optimization ������������������������������������� 232 J7 – Transit Stop Upgrade Program �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 236 J8 – Rail Corridor Safety & Accessibility Upgrades ........................................................ 240 J8a – In-Town Rail Grade Separation Feasibility Study �������������������������������������������������� 242 J8b – Pedestrian/Bicycle Rail Separation Feasibility (SE Pathway Connection) ...........244 J9 – Pathway Master Plan Project Overview ������������������������������������������������������������������ 246 J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination Program ����������������������������������������������������������� 248 J11 – Southeast Neighborhood Safety Improvements ��������������������������������������������������� 254 P1 – School Zone Standardization Program ������������������������������������������������������������������� 258 P2 – Targeted HIN Lighting Program .............................................................................. 262 P3 – Quick-Build Demonstration Program ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 266 P4 – Safety Performance Monitoring & Implementation Program ............................... 268 P5 – Transportation Safety Education & Outreach Program ������������������������������������������270 O1 – Transportation Safety Ordinance Update Package �����������������������������������������������272 A8.11 detailed planning level cost estimates .............................................................................274 188 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 312 of 657A8.1 Purpose and A8.2 Action A8.3 Project Structure of Projects Categories and Prioritization Appendix A8 - Projects translates Organization Framework the findings of this planning The Safety Action Plan actions Priority levels reflect a structured, effort (seeAppendix A4 - Findings) are organized into three primary multi-factor evaluation process into a coordinated, data-driven categories: incorporating: implementation framework. The policies, programs, and capital • Policy Actions (O-series) • Crash severity and frequency projects included in this plan Citywide ordinances, • High Injury Network were developed through crash standards, and governance designation analysis, High Injury Network (HIN) frameworks that institutionalize • Exposure of vulnerable road mapping, public and stakeholder safety practices. users engagement, Task Force input, • Program Actions (P-series) and review of adopted local and Education, enforcement, • Proximity to schools, parks, regional plans. operational coordination, transit, or activity centers Together, these actions form a and evaluation efforts that • Stakeholder and Task Force comprehensive Safety Action Plan support behavior and system input aligned with the Safe System and management. • Alignment with the 2026 Vision Zero approaches. Rather • Capital Projects (J-series) Comprehensive Plan than addressing safety concerns Location-based infrastructure • Readiness for implementation through isolated treatments, the improvements with defined or funding plan organizes improvements safety intent and documented This framework ensures projects across corridors, neighborhoods, crash-reduction rationale. school areas, rail interfaces, and are: Each action includes systemwide needs to reduce fatal • Data-driven documentation of: and serious injury crashes. • Community-supported • Geographic focus or Projects and Cost Estimates systemwide applicability • Policy-consistent provided in Appendix A8 - Projects serve • Realistic for a community of two primary functions: • Primary safety issues addressed approximately 15,000 residents • Supporting day-to-day • Countermeasures applied Projects are grouped to support implementation planning and bundled implementation, capital programming • Relative priority level funding strategies, and phased Providing a defensible, grant- • Implementation timeframe construction. ready framework aligned with (Short / Mid / Long) FHWA SS4A expectations • Lead partner or coordinating • Detailed location-based agency assessments are provided • Planning-level cost information Appendix A12 - Supplemental in (for capital projects) Assessments, and the countermeasure toolbox is included in Appendix A9 - countermeasures. Appendix 8 - Projects 189 Page 313 of 657 2. Implementation Matrix → Crash Data & HIN Analysis: A8.4 Planning-Level Chapter 3, Appendices A2-A3 Cost Estimates Provides a comprehensive overview of all projects, → Systemic Risk Factors Identified: Planning-level cost estimates programs, and policies, Appendix A4 - Findings are provided for capital projects including location, safety issues to support capital improvement addressed, countermeasures, → Countermeasures Selected: programming, grant readiness, modes, timeframe, partners, Appendix A9 - Countermeasures and implementation sequencing. and funding alignment. This Projects & Programs Defined: matrix clarifies responsibilities → Cost estimates: Appendix A8 - Projects and supports coordinated • Reflect typical Midwest and implementation. → Cost Basis Developed: NDOT-appropriate unit pricing Appendix A8 - Projects 3. Priority & Alignment Matrix • Include construction and typi- Synthesizes crash data, Priorities Established: cal soft costs where applicable → stakeholder input, and policy Chapter 4 - Findings • Distinguish between base and alignment to support defensible Coordinated Implementation optional elements prioritization. This matrix → • Allow for substitution of updat- represents an early step in Roadmap Created: ed Nebraska bid data the prioritization process and Chapter 5 These estimates are intended informs the development of final This structure ensures the for order-of-magnitude planning implementation tiers. Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action purposes and provide the The results of this prioritization Plan is: basis for prioritization and process are reflected in the final • Systemic rather than reactive implementation tiers presented funding strategy development. • Multimodal rather than vehi- Costs will be refined during in Chapter 4. cle-only preliminary engineering and • Collaborative across agencies implementation. A8.6 How the • Scalable and realistic for the A8.5 Project & Implementation City’s capacity Countermeasure Framework Works • Consistent with FHWA Safe Together System principles Alignment Framework Implementation strategies, Taken collectively, the project funding approaches, and per- The implementation framework sheets, cost estimates, formance monitoring are further includes three key reference crosswalks, and matrices create tables that demonstrate a layered implementation defined inChapter 5. transparency and defensibility: structure. 1. Countermeasure Crosswalk This progression connects Table technical analysis to Documents how each action actionable projects, which aligns with the adopted Appendix are then prioritized in Chapter A9 - Countermeasures, ensuring 4 and advanced through consistency with proven safety implementation strategies in strategies and clear linkage to Chapter 5. identified risk factors. 190 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 314 of 657 Table A8-1. Initial Priority & Alignment Matrix Purpose: Summarizes early-stage project, program, and policy alignment based on crash data, High Injury Network (HIN), stakeholder input, Comprehensive Plan alignment, and equity considerations. A8-1.This matrix Initial informed initialPriority prioritization & and Alignment refinement of the Matrix final recommended actions. (Initial Project / Program / Policy Evaluation Framework) Overall Initial Crash & HIN Stakeholder / Task Comp Plan Equity / Health Priority Project / Program / Policy Alignment Force Support Alignment Alignment Tier Directly Tier 1 – High KSI High – affects US-26 Signal & Intersection Strong (Task Force supported concentration on multimodal users on Tier 1 Modernization + survey themes) (major corridor HIN principal corridor safety) Tier 1 – Recurring Supported Intersection Visibility & Stop- intersection crash Strong (intersection Moderate Tier 1 Bar Upgrades (Citywide) types safety emphasis) Tier 1 – Nighttime Supported Lighting Upgrades & Visibility Strong public High – improves severity (corridor lighting Tier 1 Program concern safety for VRUs overrepresented & visibility) Tier 1 – School- Very strong School Zone Ordinance + Direct school area exposure + (school sessions + High – youth-focused Tier 1 Operational Improvements safety support congestion Task Force) Supported High-Visibility Crosswalks & Tier 1 – VRU crash High – ADA + Strong (pedestrian Tier 1 ADA Ramp Upgrades clustering vulnerable users safety policies) Supported Neighborhood Traffic Calming Tier 2 – Moderate Moderate– Strong (neighborhood Moderate Tier 2 & One-Way Evaluations crash alignment safety) Tier 2 – HIN Pedestrian Signal Functionality High – pedestrian intersections with Moderate Supported Tier 2 Assessment & Upgrades benefit ped demand Direct pathway Sidewalk Gap & ADA Tier 2 – Network Strong public expansion High – ADA equity Tier 2 Compliance Program exposure issue support support Pathway Loop Completion Tier 2 – Exposure Strong pathway High – youth & Moderate Tier 2 (WNCC—YMCA—Zoo) reduction benefit policy alignment recreation Systemic – Strong policy Speed Management Policy Citywide speed Moderate Moderate Tier 3 alignment risk factor Systemic Task Force Aligns with long- High – systemwide Vision Zero Resolution governance Tier 3 supported term goals safety action Enforcement & Education Systemic Moderate Supported Moderate Tier 3 Campaigns behavioral risk Systemic – Internal / Aligns with supports Data & Evaluation Policy administrative measurable Moderate Tier 3 performance support outcomes tracking How This Matrix Works Crash & HIN Alignment reflects objective severityAppendix concentration 8 - Projects and systemic risk. 191 Stakeholder Support reflects Task Force ranking, popup voting, school input, and survey themes. Page 315 of 657 Comp Plan Alignment shows policy consistency. Equity / Health Alignment captures ADA, youth, vulnerable users, and multimodal exposure. Overall Priority Tier reflects composite judgment, not a single factor. Table A8-2. Weighted Priority & Alignment Matrix Purpose: Builds on the initial matrix (Table A8-1) by applying weighted scoring to key factors—including crash risk, stakeholder support, policy alignment, equity, and implementation readiness—to support final tieringWeighted and project Priority prioritization. & Alignment Matrix Initial Crash & HIN Stakeholder Comp Plan Equity / Total Score Readiness (10) Priority Tier Project / Program / Policy (35) Support (20) (15) Health (20) (100) US-26 Corridor Intersection 35 18 15 18 8 94 Tier 1 & Signal Enhancements Intersection Visibility & Stop- 32 16 14 15 9 86 Tier 1 Bar Upgrades Lighting Upgrades & 33 17 13 18 7 88 Tier 1 Visibility Program School Zone Ordinance + 30 20 15 20 8 93 Tier 1 Operational Improvements High-Visibility Crosswalks & 31 18 14 20 8 91 Tier 1 ADA Ramp Upgrades Neighborhood Traffic Calming & One-Way 22 15 12 12 7 68 Tier 2 Evaluations Pedestrian Signal 25 14 13 16 6 74 Tier 2 Functionality Assessment Sidewalk Gap & ADA 26 17 15 20 6 84 Tier 2 Compliance Program Pathway Loop Completion 20 14 15 18 5 72 Tier 2 Speed Management Policy 24 13 15 12 9 73 Tier 3 Vision Zero Resolution 18 15 15 15 10 73 Tier 3 Enforcement & Education 20 14 13 12 9 68 Tier 3 Campaigns Data & Evaluation Policy 16 12 15 10 10 63 Tier 3 Tier Thresholds • Tier 1: 85–100 (Highest readiness + highest severity alignment) • Tier 2: 70–84 (Strong systemic benefit, moderate severity alignment) • Tier 3: <70 (Foundational / enabling / policy backbone actions) Scoring Framework • Each project/program/policy is evaluated using a 100-point scale: • Crash & HIN Alignment – 35 pts • Stakeholder / Task Force Support – 20 pts • Comprehensive Plan Alignment – 15 pts • Equity / Health / VRU Impact – 20 pts • Implementation Readiness – 10 pts • Total Possible = 100 Points 192 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 316 of 657 Together, these matrices A8.7 Project Support A8.8 Project demonstrate that the final and Alignment Matrix Implementation Notes set of recommended actions The Support and Alignment The following notes provide reflects a convergence of Matrix in Table A8.2 important context for crash data, High Injury Network summarizes how potential interpreting project-level analysis, stakeholder and public projects, programs, and policies information: input, policy alignment, and practical considerations for were evaluated during the | Timeframes are planning- development of the Safety level estimates and may implementation. This approach Action Plan using multiple, shift based on funding and ensures that the Safety Action independent lines of evidence. coordination Plan is both data-driven and For each action, the matrix actionable. | are order- documents alignment with Cost estimates of-magnitude and will be Support Rating Definitions crash data and High Injury refined during design | Very Strong—Directly Network (HIN) analysis, Task addresses a Top 10 high- Force input, public engagement | Final design and severity intersection or findings, and the City’s implementation of certain corridor Comprehensive Plan Update projects are subject to Survey. coordination with NDOT and | Strong—Addresses a other partners Top 11–26 high-severity Table A8.2 represents an intersection, high-risk early step in the prioritization | Projects may be corridor, or consistently process, ensuring that potential implemented individually or cited community concern actions reflected both technical bundled to support corridor- analysis and community- level improvements and | Moderate—Addresses identified needs. Projects funding opportunities feeder streets, systemic demonstrating strong alignment risks, or widely supported across multiple inputs were A8.9 Project Support & strategies carried forward for further Alignment Matrix | Systemic—Citywide policy evaluation, refinement, and final The following matrices or program addressing prioritization. document how recommended known crash factors policies, programs, and projects See Table A8-5: Support & Final were evaluated and refined Alignment Matrix. recommendations through a structured, multi- The resulting set of prioritized reflect a convergence step prioritization process. projects, programs, and of crash data, Building on the initial alignment policies is presented in Tables review, the weighted matrix A8-3 through A8-5. These High Injury incorporates additional factors Network analysis, tables represent the final such as implementation recommended actions and form community input, readiness to support final tiering the basis for implementation, and implementation decisions. funding, and phasing described readiness. in Chapter 4. Appendix 8 - Projects 193 Page 317 of 657 Table A8-3. Capital PROJECTS Table (J Projects) Purpose: Summary of capital projects, including location, safety focus, delivery partners, and implementation timing to support phased construction. Key Counter- Time- Funding ID Project Name Location Primary Safety Issues Modes Lead Partners measures frame Alignment US-26 corridor (Ave I; US-26 Signal & Ave B; 5th Ave; E High-speed arterial KSI CM-1; Pedestrian; SS4A; City; J1 Intersection 27th; 21st Ave; E crashes; signal visibility; CM-3; Bicycle; Mid NDOT HSIP; SBPS Modernization Overland; 14th Ave; turning conflicts CM-5 Vehicle NDOT E 20th) Targeted Corridor Avenue I; 27th St; Intersection conflict CM-1; Pedestrian; NDOT Short SS4A; J2 & Intersection 20th St; Tier 1 & 2 density; signal timing; lane- CM-3; Bicycle; City (coord.); –Mid HSIP Safety Corrections HIN corridors use confusion CM-7 Vehicle Police East Overland School access conflict; CM-1; 9th Ave; 14th Ave Pedestrian; SBPS; SS4A; J3 Targeted pedestrian crossing gaps; CM-2; Short City midblock; 21st Ave Vehicle Police HSIP Improvements truck activity CM-7 North Broadway CM-1; School zone speeding; SS4A; & Bluffs Middle North Broadway near CM-2 (add- Pedestrian; J4 multilane crossing Short City SBPS Safe Safety Bluffs Middle alt); Vehicle exposure Routes Improvements CM-7 SE neighborhood Active spine; South Beltline; Pedestrian exposure; lack CM-2; NDOT SS4A; Transportation US-26 east parallel; Pedestrian; Mid– J5 of separated facilities; Tier CM-7; City (as needed); TAP; Network perimeter bikeways; Bicycle Long 1 HIN segments CM-8 PPHD HSIP Completion Monument connectors Roosevelt; School Circulation Longfellow; Lincoln Drop-off congestion; CM-4; SS4A; Pedestrian; SBPS; J6 & Access Safety Heights; Bluffs pedestrian conflicts; Tier 1 CM-1; Short City Safe Vehicle PPHD Improvements Middle; St. Agnes; HIN adjacency CM-7 Routes Community Christian Scottsbluff High Scottsbluff High Dismissal congestion; Tier SS4A; School Access & CM-7; Pedestrian; J6a School (2nd Ave / 1 corridor adjacency; Mid SBPS City Local Parking CM-4 Vehicle 27th St) student driver risk Capital Optimization Ave I; 27th; 20th; Bus loading in traffic CM-10; SS4A; Transit Stop Transit; Short Transit J7 East/West Overland lanes; ADA gaps; lighting CM-5; City FTA; Upgrade Program Pedestrian –Mid Provider (HIN stops) deficiency CM-8 HSIP Rail Corridor CR 19; Ave I; Rail surface condition; CM-9; Vehicle; SS4A; Safety & Broadway/Overland; Rail J8 ADA gaps; lighting; Tier 1 CM-5; Pedestrian; Mid City Rail Safety Accessibility W 20th; 5th Ave; Operator HIN crossings CM-8 Rail Funds Upgrades South Beltline In-Town Grade Rail delay; emergency Feasibility Rail; SS4A J8a Separation To be determined All Modes Long City access; system resilience Study NDOT Planning Feasibility Study Pedestrian/ Bicycle Rail SE pathway near 9th Pathway connectivity; Feasibility Pedestrian; SS4A J8b Mid City — Separation Ave safe crossing of rail Study Bicycle Planning Feasibility Planning & Pathway Master Lack of comprehensive Pedestrian; SS4A J9 Citywide Network Short City PPHD Plan pathway strategy Bicycle Planning Analysis Sidewalk & ADA HIN corridors; school Pedestrian exposure; ADA CM-8; Short SS4A; J10 Gap Elimination Pedestrian City — routes noncompliance CM-1 –Mid CDBG Program Southeast Neighborhood E 15th St; 12th Ave Tier 1 & 2 local HIN; CM-7; CM- Pedestrian; J11 Short City — SS4A Safety area pedestrian exposure 1 Vehicle Improvements 194 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 318 of 657Table A8-4. PROGRAMS Table (P Programs) Purpose: Summarizes ongoing programs and initiatives that support safety through education, coordination, and system-wide improvements across all tiers. Primary Safety Key Counter- Funding ID Program Name Location Modes Timeframe Lead Partners Issues measures Alignment School Zone Inconsistent Citywide Pedestrian; P1 Standardization school zone CM-4 Short City SBPS SS4A schools Vehicle Program operations Nighttime Targeted HIN HIN corridors NDOT SS4A; P2 visibility; CM-5 All Short–Mid City Lighting Program & crossings (as needed) HSIP KSI severity Quick-Build Speed; Tier 1 HIN P3 Demonstration intersection CM-6; CM-7 All Short City — SS4A corridors Program exposure Safety Performance Need for Monitoring & Data P4 Citywide ongoing HIN & All Ongoing City PPHD SS4A Implementation Monitoring crash review Program Driver behavior; Transportation PPHD; youth safety; Education SS4A; P5 Safety Education & Citywide All Ongoing City SBPS; micromobility Campaigns HSO Outreach Program WNCC awareness Table A8-5. POLICIES Table (O Policies) Purpose: Outlines policy actions that guide long-term decision-making, institutionalize safety practices, and support implementation of projects and programs. Key Counter- Time- Funding Policy ID Policy Name Location Primary Safety Issues Modes Lead Partners measures frame Alignment Gaps in regulatory Transportation authority; micromobility Legal; Safety Regulatory O1 Citywide rules; bus stop All Short City Police; SS4A Ordinance Framework clearance; work zone Transit Update Package compliance The projects are organized to reflect a logical progression from immediate safety needs to long-term system improvements. The sequence begins with high-severity corridor priorities, including US-26, where crash risk is greatest, followed by school safety improvements that address concentrated pe- destrian activity and community-sensitive environments. It then advances to pedestrian comfort and accessibility, transit and multimodal connections, and rail-related safety considerations. Bicycle network improvements are grouped to reflect system continuity, and the list concludes with longer-range invest- ments that support future network expansion. This structure helps align project development with both risk reduction and community priorities, while programs and policies provide ongoing support across all phases of implementation. Appendix 8 - Projects 195 Page 319 of 657196 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 320 of 657 Table A8-6. Project <—> Countermeasure Crosswalk CAPITAL PROJECTS CROSSWALK CM-1 CM-2 CM-3 CM-4 CM-5 CM-6 CM-7 CM-8 CM-9 CM-10 Crossings RRFBs Signals School Lighting Quick- Traffic Sidewalk Rail Transit ID Project Name & Stop & Ops Zones Build Calming & ADA Safety Stops Bars J1 US-26 Signal & Intersection Modernization ● ○●○ ○ ○ Targeted Corridor & Intersection Safety J2 Corrections ● ○● ○ ○ ○ ○ J3 East Overland Targeted Improvements ● ●○ ○ ○ ○ ○ North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety J4 Improvements ● ○ ●○○● ○ Active Transportation Network J5 Completion ○ ○ ○○○ ● School Circulation & Access Safety J6 Improvements ● ○○● ○ ○ ○ ● Scottsbluff High School Access & Parking J6a Optimization ○ ○● ○ ○ ○ J7 Transit Stop Upgrade Program ● ○ ●○ ● ● Rail Corridor Safety & Accessibility J8 Upgrades ○ ○○ ● ● ● In-Town Rail Grade Separation Feasibility J8a Study ●● Pedestrian/Bicycle Rail Separation J8b Feasibility (SE Pathway Connection) ●○ ● ●● J9 Pathway Master Plan ○○ ● J10 Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination Program ○ ○● Southeast Neighborhood Safety J11 Improvements ● ○○ ○ ● ● ● PROGRAMS CROSSWALK ID Program CM1 CM2 CM3 CM4 CM5 CM6 CM7 CM8 CM9 CM10 P1 School Zone Standardization Program ● ○○● ○ ● ○ P2 Targeted HIN Lighting Program ● P3 Quick-Build Demonstration Program ○ ○○ ● ● ○ Safety Performance Monitoring & P4 Implementation Program Transportation Safety Education & P5 Outreach Program ○● ○ ○ POLICY CROSSWALK ID Policy CM1 CM2 CM3 CM4 CM5 CM6 CM7 CM8 CM9 CM10 Transportation Safety Ordinance Update O1 Package ○ ○○● ● ● ○ ● ● = Primary / Core Countermeasure — Recommended as an essential component of the project ● = Secondary / Optional / As-Warranted — Used where site conditions justify Blank = Not applicable Countermeasure details are provided in Appendix A9 - Countermeasures. COUNTERMEASURES CM3 Signal Visibility CM6 Quick-Build CM8 Sidewalk & ADA & Operations / Interim Improvements CM1 High-Visibility CM4 School Zone Measures CM9 Rail Crossing Crossings & Treatments CM7 Traffic Calming Improvements Stop Bars CM5 Lighting & Speed CM10 Transit Stop CM2 RRFBs Improvements Management Improvements Appendix 8 - Projects 197 Page 321 of 657198 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 322 of 657A8.10 From ● US-26 Corridor Tier 3 — Policy and Intersection & Signal Program Foundations Prioritization to Project Enhancements Tier 3 actions establish the Development ● Intersection Visibility policies, programs, and long- The following section builds & Stop-Bar Upgrades term strategies that support on the countermeasures (Citywide) sustained safety outcomes. framework and prioritization ● Lighting Upgrades & These actions are implement- process to present the City’s Visibility Program ed continuously and provide highest-priority, implementa- the institutional framework ● School Zone Ordinance tion-ready projects. These needed to guide future invest- and Operational projects reflect the strongest ment, decision-making, and Improvements alignment between crash system performance. ● High-Visibility Crosswalks data, High Injury Network ● Speed Management Policy and ADA Ramp Upgrades (HIN) analysis, public and Vision Zero Resolution stakeholder input, and imple- Tier 2 — Corridor and mentation readiness. Togeth- ● Enforcement and er, they form a coordinated set System Expansion Education Campaigns of improvements designed to Tier 2 projects build on Tier ● Data and Evaluation reduce fatal and serious injury 1 investments by expanding Policyand planning-level crashes across Scottsbluff’s safety improvements across cost estimates for each highest-risk locations. corridors and the broader capital project. transportation network. These Tier 1 — Immediate projects typically require Implementation Priorities additional coordination, Tier 1 projects represent design development, or the highest-priority safety funding, and address system- investments, addressing level needs that support long- locations where crash term safety performance. risk is most concentrated ● Neighborhood Traffic and improvements can be Calming and One-Way implemented in the near Evaluations term. These projects reflect strong alignment with crash ● Pedestrian Signal data, High Injury Network Functionality Assessment (HIN) analysis, and public and and Upgrades stakeholder input, and are ● Sidewalk Gap and ADA well-positioned for near-term Compliance Program funding and delivery. ● Pathway Loop Completion (WNCC—YMCA—Zoo)) Appendix 8 - Projects 199 Page 323 of 657 J1 corridor Modernizing high-risk highway intersections to reduce severe crashes 200 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 324 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 201 Page 325 of 657 corridor Modernizing high-risk highway intersections to reduce severe crashes J1 – US-26 Signal Pedestrian Crossing Modernization Crash Snapshot • Reconstruct high-visibility crosswalks (continental style) & Intersection • Corridor accounts for highest Modernization (NDOT) share of KSI crashes citywide • Refresh and restripe refuge islands • Severe crashes concentrated • Evaluate slip-lane pedestrian conflicts (NDOT-Controlled Corridor) at signalized intersections (E 27th St) HIN Tier: Tier 1 Corridor (All 10 signalized • Rear-end and angle crashes • Review pedestrian clearance intervals intersections rank in Top 19) dominate Unsignalized Tier 1 Intersections • Pedestrian exposure pres- Primary KSI Locations: Ave I (#1), Ave B (14th Ave & E 20th St) (#2), E 27th St (#4), 21st Ave, 5th Ave, E ent but crossings are widely • Evaluate signal warrants Overland spaced • Top 3 KSI intersections city- • Evaluate enhanced control or Project Purpose wide are along US-26 operational improvements Modernize and improve signal visibility, • Review pedestrian accommodation phasing, and pedestrian crossing needs • Unsignalized Tier 1 intersections at 14th treatments at high-injury intersections Ave and E 20th St with stop control for Jurisdiction & Coordination along US-26 within Scottsbluff city limits. side streets • Nebraska Department of Transportation US-26 is a 45-mph divided, four-lane state • Pedestrian signals present, but visibility (Lead Agency) highway controlled by NDOT that runs and operations do not reflect current • City of Scottsbluff (Coordination) through the center of the community and best practices represents the highest concentration of • FHWA (if federal funding pursued) fatal and serious injury crashes in the city. Scope of Improvements All design and construction decisions remain under NDOT authority. This project focuses on upgrading existing Signal Visibility & Hardware signalized and high-risk unsignalized Modernization Why This Project Matters intersections to current safety standards • Replace diagonal cage-mounted US-26 is the primary KSI corridor in consistent with the Safe System Approach. structures (E 27th St & 21st Ave) Scottsbluff and divides the community Existing Conditions • Install mast-arm mounted signal heads east to west. Because it is state-controlled, per current NDOT standards local design influence is limited. This plan • 45 mph divided highway with median provides the data-driven justification and turn lanes • Add reflective backplates where war- ranted needed to advance corridor modernization • All signalized intersections are on Tier 1 within NDOT programming. HIN and rank in top 19 citywide • Install clearly visible stop bars on US-26 approaches Without corridor-level improvements, • Two skewed intersections (E 27th St and severe crash patterns are likely to persist. 21st Ave) use diagonal cage-mounted Signal Operations & Phasing Review signal structures • Evaluate protected/permissive left-turn Performance Metrics • Limited visibility of signal heads from phasing • Reduction in angle and rear-end KSI some stop locations • Review short protected left-turn intervals crashes • No stop bars on US-26 approaches at (e.g., SB Ave I) • Improved signal compliance rates certain locations • Evaluate need for LPIs where warranted • Improved pedestrian visibility and • Minimal protected left-turn phasing at • Conduct corridor-wide signal timing yielding select intersections review • Corridor-wide consistency in signal • Some Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) • Evaluate NRTOR conditions where safety operations potentially in use (i.e. 5th Ave & US-26) concerns exist • Faded or outdated crosswalk markings (notably at E 27th St) 202 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 326 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J1 Planning-Level cost components are provided at Phasing Strategy Cost Summary the end of Appendix A8 - Projects. Phasing is dependent on NDOT Estimated Range: Project Scale programming and may be advanced by intersection priority. $1.6M – $2.6M Major Corridor Modernization (Multi-Intersection, NDOT-Led) Countermeasures Primary Cost Drivers: Implementation Timing Referenced • CM-1 High-Visibility Crosswalks • Signal structure replacement at Short to Mid-Term • CM-3 Signal Visibility & skewed intersections (Dependent on NDOT Operations • Corridor-wide signal hardware programming and funding and visibility upgrades cycles) • CM-5 Lighting Improvements • Signal timing and phasing Potential Funding Sources Expected Safety Outcomes evaluation • NDOT Highway Safety • Improved signal visibility and • Pedestrian crossing and refuge Improvement Program (HSIP) driver compliance improvements • Federal SS4A Implementation • Reduced angle and rear-end • Evaluation of Tier 1 Funds crashes at intersections unsignalized intersections • NDOT Signal Modernization • Improved pedestrian visibility Implementation Notes: Programs and crossing safety • Costs reflect planning-level • Local match participation • More consistent signal assumptions based on NDOT (if required) operations along the corridor standards • Final scope and cost will be refined through NDOT-led design • Improvements may be phased by intersection priority These improvements include a combination of signal modernization, operational Addresses the highest adjustments, pedestrian safety concentration of fatal and enhancements, and targeted serious injury crashes in intersection evaluations. Detailed Scottsbluff. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – Corridor $ | NDOT District 5 Safety & Access | City of Scottsbluff | High Injury Network (Tier 1 Corridor) | Public Works | Public input identifying US-26 safety concerns Cost Estimate | Scottsbluff Police Department | Law enforcement input (speed and $2.6 M | School District red-light running) Based on 2025 costs | Adjacent businesses Scottsbluff SS4A 203 Page 327 of 657 J2 204 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 328 of 657 intersections Correcting systemic conflict points across priority corridors Appendix 8 - Projects 205 Page 329 of 657 intersections Correcting systemic conflict points across priority corridors J2 – Targeted Corridor 20th Street & 11th Avenue • Lack of overhead lane-use arrows (SB Crash Snapshot approach) & Intersection Safety • Multiple Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN Corrections • Unclear turn alignment contributing to segments affected last-second maneuvers (City-Controlled Network • High proportion of – Includes Avenue I Corridor) Tier 2 HIN Neighborhood intersection-related crashes • Rear-end and turning conflicts Project Type: Capital Improvement Intersections common HIN Tier: Tier 1 & Tier 2 Locations • Inconsistent stop/yield control • Visibility limitations • Documented driver confusion Primary Focus: Systemic signing, striping, and lane-use inconsistency signal, and operational corrections • Signing and pavement marking Project Overview deficiencies Avenue I Corridor Enhancements J2 addresses targeted, high-impact safety Additional HIN-Based Corrections • Missing or faded stop bars • Intersection-by-intersection safety audit corrections on city-controlled corridors • HIN-based refinements and intersections identified through crash • Outdated or inconsistent signing analysis, HIN mapping, stakeholder input, • Limited advance warning treatments • Minor operational geometry adjustments and field review. • Minor geometric clarity issues (as feasible) Unlike J1 (NDOT-controlled corridor), J2 Safety Problems Addressed Tier 2 Neighborhood Stop/Yield focuses on improvements the City can • Inconsistent lane-use control Review • Data-driven control type review directly implement. The project emphasizes • Driver confusion at multi-lane correcting operational deficiencies, intersections • Sight distance evaluation improving driver clarity, and addressing • Inadequate turning guidance • Signing upgrades systemic Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN conditions • Consistency improvements through signing, striping, phasing, and • Stop/Yield control inconsistencies targeted intersection improvements. • Rear-end and angle crash patterns Why This Project Matters • Signal clarity limitations at city-controlled J2 focuses on small but systemic Existing Conditions / Priority locations corrections that: Locations Scope of Improvements • Improve driver clarity and expectancy Avenue I Corridor (Tier 1 HIN) • Address documented HIN locations • Double left-turn striping needs Signing & Striping Corrections • Reduce crash likelihood through low- clarification (Ave I & W 33rd St, EB) • Overhead lane-use arrows cost treatments • NRTOR conditions require review (WB) • Pavement arrows and directional markings • Deliver high benefit-cost safety out- • Pedestrian signal timing results in comes excessive delay and non-compliance • Stop bar installation / refresh Operational Concern Identified: • Yield line adjustments Performance Metrics • Reduction in angle and rear-end crashes At select Avenue I intersections, pedestrian Targeted Signal Operations Review phases are perceived as low priority within (City Signals) • Improved lane-use compliance the signal cycle, resulting in long wait times • Phasing review • Reduced turning conflicts and increased non-compliance. A signal • Protected/permissive turn evaluation • Measurable crash reduction on Tier 1 timing review will evaluate:: • Signal timing consistency review and Tier 2 HIN segments • Pedestrian phase priority • Cycle length adjustments • Clearance timing • Coordination impacts 206 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 330 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J2 Planning-Level Project Scale Phasing Strategy Cost Summary Targeted Systemwide Retrofit Phasing may be organized by Estimated Range (Multi-Location, City-Led) Tier 1 locations, followed by Tier 2 corridor and neighborhood $300,000 – $600,000 Implementation Timing improvements. Short-Term to Mid-Term Primary Cost Drivers: (Phased implementation based Countermeasures • Corridor and intersection on priority locations and available Referenced striping updates funding) • CM-1 High-Visibility Crosswalks • Signing and lane-use control Potential Funding Sources • CM-3 Signal Visibility & Operations improvements • Highway Safety Improvement • CM-6 Quick-Build / Interim • Targeted signal timing and Program (HSIP) Measures phasing adjustments • SS4A Implementation Funds • Avenue I corridor refinements • CM-7 Traffic Calming & Speed • Local capital improvement funds Management • Engineering and traffic analysis Alignment & Coordination Implementation Notes: Expected Safety Outcomes • Improved lane-use clarity and • Costs reflect planning-level driver expectancy assumptions based on recent Nebraska bid data • Reduced turning and rear-end conflicts • Improvements are scalable and may be phased by corridor or • Increased consistency in intersection intersection control • Many elements are compatible • Measurable crash reduction with quick-build implementation across Tier 1 and Tier 2 locations See detailed cost estimates at the end of Appendix A8 - Projects. Addresses widespread intersection safety issues through targeted, high- impact corrections across city-controlled corridors. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – $ | City Public Works Corridor Safety | Scottsbluff Police Department | SS4A Risk Factor Matrix – | City Engineer Intersection conflict density Cost Estimate | Transit Provider | High Injury Network prioritization $392 K | Schools (as applicable) | Stakeholder input Based on 2025 costs (schools, transit, enforcement) Scottsbluff SS4A 207 Page 331 of 657 J3 access Safer crossings and conflict reduction near schools and commercial activity 208 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 332 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 209 Page 333 of 657 access Safer crossings and conflict reduction near schools and commercial activity J3 – East Overland • Difficulty crossing N-S for vehicles and pedestrians Crash Snapshot • School exploring southbound one-way Targeted Improvements • Tier 1 HIN corridor segment option on east side Project Type: Corridor Safety • Pedestrian exposure concentrated at : Operational imbalance + school (Targeted Locations) Risk key nodes HIN Tier: Tier 1 Corridor exposure + skewed geometry. • Truck volumes influence crash severity Primary Risk Factors: Speed, truck J3b. Mid-Block Crossing - East of 14th volumes, skewed geometry, pedestrian • Crossing demand not matched with Avenue; and protection exposure, signal operations J3d. Mid-Block Crossing - East of 21st Improves safety at high-risk crossings Avenue where pedestrian activity, truck traffic, • Median refuge evaluation • Heavy pedestrian demand (apartment and skewed geometry create elevated north side / Dollar Store south side; Location 3 – 21st Avenue & East crash risk. Sugar Factory) Overland (J3c) Project Overview • No enhanced crossing treatment • High-visibility crosswalk enhancements J3 addresses three specific high-risk • Tier 1 corridor segment • RRFB or enhanced warning signage locations along the East Overland corridor • High-speed exposure • Truck turning path review where crash risk is driven by truck traffic, Risk: Mid-block pedestrian crossing on • Stop control visibility upgrades skewed intersection geometry, pedestrian multilane arterial without active warning. • Industrial access coordination crossings, and operational conflicts. Rather than full corridor reconstruction, this J3c. 21st Avenue & East Overland Location 4 – East Overland, east of project delivers targeted safety corrections • 4-way stop currently functioning 21st Avenue (Sugar Factory crossing) at the highest-risk nodes. • Sugar factory on NE & SE corners (J3d) • Heavy truck volumes • RRFB installation or enhanced warning Locations include: • Pedestrian activity just east of signage • 9th Avenue & East Overland (Roosevelt intersection • High-visibility crosswalk enhancements School Area) • Gateway into East Overland corridor • Advance stop/yield bars • Mid-block crossing east of 14th Avenue • Crossing illumination (apartment / commercial crossing Risk: Truck turning conflicts + pedestrian demand) exposure + industrial driveway density. Why This Project Matters • 21st Avenue & East Overland (industrial Proposed Safety Treatments J3 targets a small number of high-risk gateway / truck interface) locations where multiple risk factors Locations are presented west to east, overlap. These improvements: • Mid-block crossing east of 21st Avenue with mid-block crossings grouped for (industrial gateway / truck interface) • Reduce pedestrian exposure on high- clarity. This project directly responds to crash speed corridors analysis, school stakeholder input, transit Location 1 – 9th Avenue & East • Improve driver awareness at crossings input, and public comments. Overland (J3a) • Address truck–pedestrian conflict points • Signal phasing and operational review Existing Conditions & Risk Factors • Provide cost-effective safety improve- • Pedestrian timing review ments without full reconstruction J3a. 9th Avenue & East Overland • Evaluate southbound one-way option Performance Metrics • Skewed geometry • Skew geometry feasibility review • Reduction in severe angle crashes • Signal favors east-west flow • School circulation coordination • North-south movements controlled by • Reduction in pedestrian-involved crashes Location 2 – Mid-Block Crossing stop signs • Improved pedestrian compliance (East of 14th Ave) (J3b) • Increased driver yielding rates • Pedestrian push-button signal use • RRFB installation • Reduced delay-related risk-taking • Roosevelt Elementary located on NW • High-visibility crosswalk markings corner • Advance stop/yield bars • Crossing guards present • Crossing illumination 210 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 334 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J3 Planning-Level Cost Summary Project Scale Countermeasures Referenced Estimated Range Targeted Corridor Retrofit (Multi- CM-1 High-Visibility Crosswalks Location, High-Risk Nodes) CM-2 RRFB $150,000 – $600,000 CM-3 Signal Visibility & Operations Implementation Timing CM-5 Pedestrian-Scale Lighting Primary Cost Drivers: Short to Mid-Term CM-6 Quick-Build Measures (if • RRFB installations and crossing (Phased implementation by interim geometry adjustments) enhancements location and funding availability) CM-7 Traffic Calming (context- • Pedestrian lighting sensitive application) improvements Potential Funding Sources Expected Safety Outcomes • Signal timing and operational • SS4A Implementation Funds • Improved driver yielding at review • HSIP (if NDOT coordination pedestrian crossings • Striping and signing updates applies) • Reduced pedestrian exposure at • School safety funding programs • Truck turning and geometry mid-block review • Local capital improvement funds • Reduced angle and turning Implementation Notes: Phasing Strategy conflicts • Costs reflect targeted Phasing may be organized by • Improved operational improvements at select locations individual locations, prioritizing predictability at skewed signal • Improvements may be phased highest-risk crossings and • Reduced truck–pedestrian by location priority intersections. I.E. interaction severity risk • RRFB installation type (solar vs Phase 1: RRFB & high-visibility hard-wired) affects cost crossing improvements See detailed cost estimates at the Phase 2: Signal timing & operational Appendix A8 - Projects corrections end of . Phase 3: Long-term geometry or one-way circulation evaluation Improves safety at high- risk crossings where pedestrian activity, truck traffic, and skewed geometry create elevated crash risk. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – Corridor $ | City of Scottsbluff & pedestrian safety | Roosevelt Elementary School | High Injury Network (Tier 1 corridor) | Scottsbluff Police Department | School stakeholder input Cost Estimate | Industrial property owners (Sugar | Public input (crossing difficulty, truck $427 K Factory) traffic concerns) Based on 2025 costs | Transit provider | Safe System alignment | NDOT (as applicable) Scottsbluff SS4A 211 Page 335 of 657 J4 protection Reducing multilane crossing exposure in a school environment 212 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 336 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 213 Page 337 of 657 protection Reducing multilane crossing exposure in a school environment J4 – North Broadway • High-visibility continental crosswalk markings Crash Snapshot • Advance stop bars and “Yield Here to & Bluffs Middle Safety • Tier 1 HIN corridor segment Pedestrians” markings Improvements • Pedestrian exposure concen- • Curb extensions (if feasible within medi- Project Type: Corridor & School-Area trated during school travel an configuration) Safety Improvement periods • School zone signing review and consis- Location: North Broadway (Bluffs Middle • Speed-related crash patterns tency check School vicinity) along North Broadway HIN Tier: Tier 1 Corridor Segment • Speed feedback sign review / reposition- • Direct proximity to Bluffs Primary Risk Type: Speed-related ing (if warranted) Middle School and primary pedestrian exposure • Pedestrian signal timing review on walking routes Implementation Horizon: Short–Mid nearby corridors affecting school access Term routes Proposed Improvements Project Overview Add-Alternate (Supplemental Enhanced / Raised Pedestrian J4 addresses systemic safety risk along Enhancement – If Warranted): Crossing (Priority Action) North Broadway adjacent to Bluffs Middle • Evaluate and install Rectangular Rapid • Evaluate feasibility of raised crosswalk School, a Tier 1 High Injury Network Flashing Beacon (RRFB) at the raised near school frontage corridor with documented pedestrian crossing to enhance driver yielding • Upgrade to high-visibility striping during school travel periods. exposure and recurring speed concerns. • Ensure clear pedestrian refuge within • Review solar vs. hard-wired options North Broadway is a four-lane roadway median where appropriate with landscaped boulevard medians. The • Confirm MUTCD compliance and sight • Evaluate curb extensions or crossing corridor is within a designated school distance narrowing treatments reduced-speed zone requiring drivers to • Coordinate with School Zone Standard- Median Configuration Review slow during specified hours when students ization Program • Evaluate selective median adjustments are present. However, compliance outside Problem Statement to improve operational predictability visible enforcement periods has been North Broadway functions as a high- inconsistent. • Maintain or enhance pedestrian refuge capacity corridor while also serving as a function Morning operations often require police primary frontage for Bluffs Middle School. • Assess turning movement clarity presence in the median to reinforce speed Identified issues include: School Zone Speed Reinforcement compliance. • Speeding within a reduced-speed school • Speed feedback reinforcement within zone This project focuses on: school zone limits • Pedestrian crossing safety enhance- • Wide crossing distance for students • Pavement markings reinforcing school ments • Pedestrian exposure across multiple speed area • Speed management reinforcement lanes • Quick-build narrowing treatments if within the school zone • Reliance on enforcement presence to warranted • Median configuration review manage speeds • Visibility and lighting improvements • Median configuration that may limit Lighting & Visibility Enhancements • Pedestrian-scale lighting at crossing • Operational clarity improvements turning flexibility and predictability Design-based reinforcement is needed to • Improved nighttime illumination of Project Scope (Capital median and crossing zone Improvements) support consistent speed compliance and safer pedestrian crossings. Base Scope (Core Improvements): • Raised pedestrian crosswalk at primary school-route crossing on North Broad- This project addresses a high-risk school crossing along a Tier 1 way corridor where speed and multilane exposure create elevated risk for students. 214 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 338 of 657 J4 Planning Level Cost Basis Planning-Level Cost Summary Performance Metrics Implementation Phasing/Notes Estimated Total: $473,000 • Target: ≥50% reduction in pedestrian Short-Term exposure risk at crossing Add-Alternate (RRFB): $95,000 • High-visibility crossing refresh • Target: ≥85% driver yielding compliance • Speed reinforcement treatments • Raised crosswalk (asphalt or concrete during school travel periods table) Includes grading, markings, • Lighting upgrades • Supports Tier 1 HIN corridor mitigation signage: $110,000 • Reduction in school-zone speed Mid-Term • High-visibility striping exceedance • Raised crossing (if feasible) Continental pattern: $3,000 – $6,000 • Increase in pedestrian yielding rates • Median adjustments (if justified) • Advance stop bars + signage • Reduction in crash frequency/severity Additional operational and school-zone Both approaches: $1,500 – $4,000 along corridor improvements (e.g., speed feedback • Minor curb extensions (if feasible) • Before/after speed study documentation signs, signal timing adjustments, and curb extensions) may be implemented as part of Quick-build or concrete Safe System Alignment $5,000 – $25,000 broader corridor or programmatic efforts. • Addresses speed as a severity driver Expected Safety Outcomes • Speed feedback sign relocation/upgrade • Reduces pedestrian exposure through • Reduced pedestrian exposure across (if needed) Radar unit: $5,000 – $12,000 crossing design multilane crossing • Reinforces existing school zone require- Base Planning-Level Estimate Range • Increased driver yielding at school $124,000 – $157,000 ments through engineering crossing • Reduces reliance on enforcement-only Additional operational and school-zone • Improved speed compliance within strategies improvements may be implemented as school zone part of broader programmatic or corridor- Primary Cost Drivers • Reduced crash severity along corridor level efforts. • Raised crosswalk construction method (asphalt vs concrete) Potential Funding Sources Add-Alternate: RRFB Installation • SS4A Implementation Funds • RRFB system (two-sided crossing) • Median modification complexity • Highway Safety Improvement Program Includes signs, poles, flash units • Lighting extent and electrical require- (HSIP) $25,000 – $45,000 ments • School safety funding programs • Power (solar typical) • Traffic control during construction • Local capital improvement funds Included in above range— Implementation Phasing Strategy Hard-wired option (if needed) Improvements may be implemented in Related Countermeasures Conduit + electrical phases based on funding and coordination. • CM-1 High-Visibility Crossings + $5,000 – $15,000 Initial efforts focus on visibility, striping, and • CM-4 School Zone Safety Treatments Add-Alternate Estimate school zone compliance, followed by raised • CM-5 Lighting Improvements $25,000 – $60,000 crossing and median modifications as • CM-7 Traffic Calming & Speed Total Potential Range (Base + RRFB) design and feasibility are confirmed. Management $60,000 – $145,000 Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – School $ | City of Scottsbluff and corridor safety priorities | Scottsbluff Public Schools | School Safety Assessment findings Cost Estimate | Bluffs Middle School Administration | High Injury Network (Tier 1 corridor) prioritization $473 K | Scottsbluff Police Department | Community and law enforcement input Based on 2025 costs | Public Works Department | Adjacent property owners Scottsbluff SS4A 215 Page 339 of 657 connectivity J5 Expanding safe multimodal connections 216 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 340 of 657 connectivity Expanding safe multimodal connections J5 Active Transportation Network Program — A coordinated system of pathway, bikeway, and connector improvements designed to reduce exposure along high-risk corridors and connect key destinations. Appendix 8 - Projects 217 Page 341 of 657 connectivity Expanding safe multimodal connections • South Beltline corridor J5 – Active • Monument Valley Pathway system Crash Snapshot Transportation Network • YMCA and central Broadway terminus • Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN segments present on Completion • East-side US-26 corridor E 15th Street and 12th Avenue • South Beltline identified as a high- Project Type: Capital Program – • Perimeter roadway segments lacking speed HIN corridor Multimodal Network Completion shoulders • Downtown and school destinations • Pedestrian exposure documented HIN Relevance: Supports Tier 1 and Tier 2 along W 42nd Street (Tier 1 pedestrian HIN corridors including: The program prioritizes corridors where pedestrians and micromobility users HIN) • South Beltline are currently exposed to traffic due to • US-26 east side lacks equivalent path- • Southeast neighborhood incomplete facilities. way protection compared to west side (E 15th Street / 12th Avenue) • Avenue I Why This Matters than focusing on a single location. • E 27th Street Scottsbluff’s current network contains The program: • US-26 east side exposure gaps critical gaps that force pedestrians and bicyclists onto high-speed corridors • Reduces pedestrian and bicycle Project Purpose including Avenue I, East Overland, and exposure on Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN J5 completes critical gaps in Scottsbluff’s South Beltline. segments active transportation network, connecting Key systemic risks include: • Provides alternatives to high-speed neighborhoods, schools, parks, and corridors • Disconnected pathways that end regional corridors while reducing • Improves network redundancy and route abruptly pedestrian and bicycle exposure along choice • Walking and bicycling along roadway High Injury Network (HIN) segments. • Supports safer access to schools, parks, edges on Tier 1 and Tier 2 corridors Rather than addressing isolated locations, and employment centers • Lack of safe east-west and north-south this program creates a continuous system connections of shared-use paths, bikeways, and Equity & Community Benefit connectors that provide safe alternatives to • Limited access to schools, parks, and The southeast neighborhood includes high-speed arterial travel. Key connections community destinations without using lower-income and older residential areas include the southeast residential arterial roadways and contains documented Tier 1 and Tier neighborhood, South Beltline corridor, This program directly addresses those 2 HIN segments. Residents in this area Monument Valley Pathway system, conditions by shifting travel to dedicated are more likely to experience exposure to US-26 east side, and major community facilities and reducing exposure to vehicle traffic due to incomplete facilities. destinations such as the Western Nebraska conflicts. Completing the Southeast Pathway Spine Community College campus, YMCA, This project functions as the backbone and South Beltline connections improves schools, and downtown. of a broader system that includes equitable access to: Critical connections to the adjacent neighborhood access improvements • Schools communities of Gering and Terrytown are (J11) and barrier crossing solutions (J8b), • Western Nebraska Community College creating a continuous, low-stress east– also addressed where bridges connect • Parks and recreational facilities the communities on Avenue I and South west connection across the community. • The YMCA and community services Broadway, near the YMCA. System-Level Safety Impact • Downtown and employment areas This project focuses on connecting: This is a systemwide safety investment. • Adjacent communities of Gering and • The southeast residential neighborhood By completing missing links and parallel Terrytown (Tier 1 & 2 HIN local streets) facilities, J5 reduces exposure risk across multiple corridors simultaneously rather 218 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 342 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis The southeast neighborhood includes lower-income areas with documented HIN segments. Completing this network reduces systemic exposure and improves access to schools, parks, and community destinations. Western Nebraska Community College Scottsbluff SS4A 219 Page 343 of 657 J5 This project directly responds to: selected corridors • Planning-level cost estimates for • Comprehensive Plan support for • Monument Pathway connector both crossing and pathway pathway expansion ramps at Avenue I (without This study ensures that any • Public safety concerns about creating unsafe crossings) future grade-separated crossing micromobility on high-speed corridors • Quick-build on-street bike lanes functions as part of a complete, • Stakeholder input requesting safe connecting neighborhoods to connected pathway network alternatives to arterial travel parks and downtown rather than an isolated facility. • East-west, north-south bicycle Program Components routing through residential and J5b – Southeast Neighborhood The Active Transportation downtown areas Pathway Spine Network Completion program Improvements may include: (SE Connectivity Corridor) includes the following coordinated • Shared-use paths improvements: Construct a shared-use path • Raised or separated crossings aligned with the existing drainage • J5a – US-26 East Pedestrian/ • Paved shoulders corridor linking: Bicycle Separation Feasibility • Southeast residential areas • Wayfinding • J5b – Southeast Neighborhood • East US-26 crossing location Pathway Spine • ADA-compliant access ramps • South Beltline corridor • J5c – South Beltline Pathway • Striping and delineation • YMCA and south Broadway Completion (East Side) • Lighting where appropriate terminus • J5d – US-26 East Parallel Reduces walking-in-roadway Shared-Use Path J5a – East US-26 Grade- exposure on Tier 1 & Tier 2 local • J5e – Perimeter Bikeway Separated Crossing & Pathway HIN streets. Treatments Feasibility Study • J5f – Monument Pathway J5c – South Beltline Pathway Engineering feasibility study Completion (East Side) Connectors at Avenue I evaluating both a grade-separated • J5g – Quick-Build Bike Lanes pedestrian/bicycle crossing of US- Extend shared-use pathway along and Bicycle Routes 26 and the associated pathway east side of South Beltline to • J5h – Pedestrian Bridge alignment needed to connect the eliminate micromobility exposure Over US-26 (potential grade- SE Pathway Spine to destinations on high-speed corridor and separated crossing) west of the corridor. connect to Monument Pathway. Proposed Improvements Includes alternatives analysis, J5d – US-26 East Parallel This program includes: pathway alignment evaluation, Shared-Use Path connectivity to existing and Develop a parallel pathway along • Feasibility evaluation of a planned facilities, and preliminary east half of US-26 corridor to pedestrian/bicycle overpass or cost modeling. grade separation on the east provide facility parity with west half of US-26 • Grade-separated crossing half of town. alternatives (structure type, • Construction of a southeast span, location) neighborhood pathway spine J5e – Perimeter Bikeway following existing drainage • Pathway alignment alternatives Treatments corridors (east–west connectivity) Install paved shoulders or striped • Completion of the South Beltline • ADA compliance and vertical bike lanes on: pathway on the east side of profile considerations • North Avenue I • East 42nd Street (5th Ave to 21st town • Connectivity to SE Spine, Ave) • Development of an east-side Monument Pathway, and west- • West 42nd Street (Tier 1 US-26 parallel shared-use path side destinations pedestrian HIN segment) • Perimeter bikeway treatments • Right-of-way and constraint including paved shoulders on screening 220 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 344 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J5 J5f – Monument Pathway east side. Tier 3 (Long-Term Completion) Connectors at Avenue I • US-26 east half lacks a parallel Addresses larger-scale pathway connection, unlike the Construct connector ramps on infrastructure and system west half of town. both sides of Avenue I allowing redundancy needs. • Avenue I underpass of the access to existing underpass • J5d–US-26 Parallel Path without requiring at-grade Monument Pathway lacks safe –Potential Grade-Separated crossing of Avenue I. connector access from both • J5h sides of the arterial. Crossing J5g, J5h, J5i – Quick-Build • W 42nd Street is a Tier 1 The tiered structure defines what On-Street Bike Lanes and pedestrian HIN segment due to should be prioritized, while the walking along the roadway edge phasing strategy identifies when Bicycle Routes with back to traffic. Install striping and signage to those improvements can be • The absence of a connected delivered. connect residential areas to: network forces people onto • Downtown high-speed corridors including Phasing Strategy • Parks Avenue I, East Overland, and Implementation is sequenced • Schools South Beltline. • Existing pathway system to deliver early safety benefits • Includes bike route signage, Program Structure while advancing larger capital wayfinding signage, and shared The program is organized improvements over time. roadway markings into three tiers to prioritize Short-Term (1–3 Years) • Locations to be finalized through improvements based on engineering review. safety impact, implementation Focus on low-cost, high-impact readiness, and system improvements and early J5j – Grade-Separated connectivity. coordination: Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Tier 1 (Immediate Connectivity & J5a – US-26 East Feasibility (US-26 near 14th Ave) Exposure Reduction) J5f – Monument Connectors Construct a grade-separated Focuses on closing critical gaps J5g – Quick-Build Bike Lanes pedestrian and bicycle crossing and reducing exposure along on the east half of US-26 to J5e – Striping-based perimeter provide a safe, continuous Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN corridors. bikeways connection between the • J5a–US-26 Feasibility Mid-Term (3–5 Years) southeast neighborhood and • J5b–Southeast Pathway Spine destinations north of the corridor. Advance core network • J5c–South Beltline Completion Implementation is dependent infrastructure: on feasibility study results, • J5g–Quick-Build Bike Routes J5b – Southeast Pathway Spine NDOT coordination, and funding Tier 2 (System Expansion) J5c – South Beltline Completion availability. Expands the network to improve Long-Term (5+ Years) Safety Need continuity and provide additional Complete major corridor and Crash analysis and HIN mapping route options. system elements: indicate: • J5e–Perimeter Bikeways J5d – US-26 East Parallel Path • Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN segments • J5f–Monument Pathway exist within southeast residential Connectors J5h – Potential grade-separated streets where pedestrians may crossing, pending feasibility walk in-roadway. results • South Beltline carries high speeds with limited or no sidewalk infrastructure on the Scottsbluff SS4A 221 Page 345 of 657 J5 Program Delivery Approach Program Benefits Expected Safety Outcomes This program is intentionally This program: • Reduced reliance on high- structured to be delivered • Reduces pedestrian exposure on speed arterial corridors incrementally. Individual Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN segments • Increased use of dedicated components can be advanced • Provides alternative routes to facilities and shared-use paths independently based on funding high-speed corridors availability, coordination with • Improved network continuity partners, and project readiness. • Connects underserved southeast and route choice neighborhoods This approach allows the City to: • Reduced crash risk through • Supports micromobility lower exposure and fewer • Pursue grant funding by seg- management strategy conflict points ment or corridor • Deliver early safety benefits • Completes critical network gaps Implementation Guardrail identified in the Comprehensive through quick-build improve- This program is intentionally Plan ments structured to remain flexible and • Phase higher-cost infrastruc- Implementation Approach implementable over time. The City ture over time This program is intentionally can: • Adjust scope based on feasi- structured as a scalable system. The City can: bility and coordination require- Individual components can be • Build incrementally ments advanced independently based • Pursue funding by segment Funding Alignment on funding, coordination, and readiness. • Adjust scope based on available Different components of this funding program align with different This allows the City to: funding sources, allowing the City • Defer higher-cost components as • Pursue grants for individual needed to pursue a diversified and flexible segments funding strategy. Eligible sources • Pilot improvements before may include: • Deliver early safety benefits committing to full build-out through quick-build • Safe Streets and Roads for All improvements This ensures the program (SS4A) Implementation Grants remains realistic, adaptable, and • Phase larger capital investments deliverable. • Transportation Alternatives over time Program (TAP) • Adjust scope as conditions and Early implementation • Highway Safety Improvement opportunities evolve Program (HSIP) for HIN-linked of J11 neighborhood segments Performance Metrics improvements supports • NDOT coordination and corridor • Reduce pedestrian and bicycle immediate access to programs exposure on Tier 1 and Tier 2 the SE Pathway Spine, corridors • Recreational Trails Program while J8b provides • Increase miles of shared-use the long-term barrier • Partnerships with local institutions paths and bikeways (YMCA, WNCC, schools) crossing needed for full • Reduce walking-in-roadway system functionality. conflicts, particularly in the This is a scalable, southeast neighborhood systemwide program • Improve connectivity to that reduces crash risk schools, parks, and community not at a single location, destinations but across the entire transportation network. 222 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 346 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J5 Planning Level Cost Program-Level Estimated Range The lower bound reflects currently defined priority segments and Total Program Range Summary costed components. The upper (Core Network Implementation): Costing Approach bound reflects full build-out of Tier $5.7M – $14.0M Planning-level cost estimates are 2 and Tier 3 network elements. based on: This range reflects phased • Recent Nebraska bid tabs implementation of the Active Cost Assumptions Summary Transportation Network, including (shared-use paths, concrete, Shared-Use Path paving, striping) shared-use paths, bikeways, connectors, and quick-build (10–12 ft Concrete) • Comparable regional pathway improvements. Individual • $800 – $1,400 per linear foot projects components may be advanced (urban) • Order-of-magnitude structure independently based on funding • Includes grading, subbase, ADA estimates for feasibility availability and coordination. ramps assumptions • Excludes major utility relocation Initial Implementation Phase • Unit costs adjusted for inflation (Identified Priority Segments): or right-of-way acquisition and contingency Approximately $7.5M – $8.0M Paved Shoulders / Bikeway A 20–30% planning-level Future Grade-Separated Striping • $150K – $400K per mile contingency is included. Final Crossing (Not Included Above) alignments and engineering are (striping-focused) not yet complete; costs reflect A future grade-separated • Widening substantially increases program-level budgeting. pedestrian/bicycle crossing of US- cost 26 (east side) is not included in the program total. Connector Ramps The base program • Assumes moderate grading Planning-level order-of-magnitude: reflects scalable, • No major retaining walls or $8M – $11M+ (including near- to mid-term engineering and contingency) structures implementation, while Final cost dependent on structure Feasibility Studies the grade-separated type, span length, site constraints, • Traffic modeling and alternatives crossing represents and NDOT coordination. analysis • Concept-level engineering (≈15%) a future major capital This element remains a future • Public engagement included investment pending capital project pending feasibility feasibility and funding. results. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – Pathway $ | City of Scottsbluff | Southeast expansion support | NDOT (US-26 neighborhood | High Injury Network prioritization Estimated Total (Core Program) coordination) residents | Public input – safe crossings and $7.8 M (2025 planning-level costs) | Schools | Western connectivity Full Build-Out (Including Future Nebraska Grade-Separated Crossing): | Parks & Recreation Community | School and stakeholder input ≈ $16M-19M+ | Public Safety College | Parks and trail connectivity goals (order-of-magnitude) | Transit Provider | YMCA Scottsbluff SS4A 223 Page 347 of 657 J6 circulation Managing drop-off congestion and reducing student conflict zones 224 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 348 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 225 Page 349 of 657 circulation Managing drop-off congestion and reducing student conflict zones • St. Agnes School – Tier 2 HIN J6 – School Circulation neighborhood review area Crash Snapshot & Access Safety • Community Christian School – • Severe crashes cluster on cor- Improvements Lighting and pedestrian visibility ridors directly serving school concern area campuses. Project Type: Capital Project School-related congestion • Arrival/dismissal periods – School Area Operational & increases pedestrian exposure and increase turning, backing, and Circulation Safety Improvements conflict complexity at several Tier 1 mid-block crossing conflicts. HIN Relevance: School campuses HIN locations. • Parking spillover affects are directly connected to Tier 1 and adjacent residential Tier 2 HIN Tier 2 High Injury Network corridors, Why This Matters streets. where congestion and circulation School zones create predictable, • High traffic volumes create conflicts increase exposure during high-exposure conditions where: daily peak congestion arrival and dismissal periods. • Vehicle congestion peaks during conditions. Project Overview short time windows J6 delivers targeted, campus- • Pedestrians and bicyclists are Campus-Specific specific operational safety concentrated Components improvements focused on • Turning, backing, and mid-block crossings increase conflict risk J6a. Scottsbluff High School circulation clarity, pedestrian Access & Parking Optimization protection, and small-scale These conditions are amplified geometric refinements. where schools are located along or Comprehensive evaluation of near Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN corridors, site access, internal circulation, Rather than major roadway and parking operations to reduce reconstruction, this program making circulation management a critical safety strategy. conflict points, improve traffic flow, prioritizes practical, implementable and support safe student movement strategies that reduce conflict Safety Problems Addressed during peak periods. (See following points, improve traffic flow, and • Congested drop-off and pick-up pages.) enhance pedestrian safety in school operations environments. Roosevelt Elementary • Pedestrian crossing exposure • Evaluate southbound 9th Avenue Focus locations include: during dismissal one-way operation during • Bluffs Middle School– North • Inconsistent circulation patterns dismissal Broadway (Tier 1 HIN corridor) between campuses • Reduce conflicts with East • Scottsbluff High School– 27th • Parking spillover into residential Overland Street (Tier 1 HIN corridor) neighborhoods • Coordinate crossing upgrades • Roosevelt Elementary – East • Lighting deficiencies with J3 Overland / 9th Avenue (Tier 1 HIN • Stop-control inconsistencies in • Improve lighting and pedestrian corridor) Tier 2 HIN areas visibility • Longfellow Elementary – Located • Limited coordination between at Tier 1 HIN Intersection #15 engineering and school Bluffs Middle School • Lincoln Heights Elementary operations • Evaluate west-side 2nd Avenue – Adjacent to Tier 2 HIN local pullout feasibility streets • Refine dismissal circulation • Coordinate with J4 raised crossing improvements 226 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 350 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J6 Scottsbluff High School enforcement • curb ramp coordination (Operational Elements) • Data-driven stop-control studies • targeted crossing visibility Operational elements only • Integration with P1 – School Zone enhancements near school – structural access changes Standardization entrances and dismissal routes addressed in J6a • Use of P3 – Quick-Build J6d. RRFB installations • Internal signing and striping clarity Demonstration where appropriate Installation of Rectangular Rapid • Dismissal flow optimization Performance Metrics Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at selected uncontrolled crossings • Reinforce 20 mph compliance • Zero fatal and serious injury crash- with elevated pedestrian exposure messaging es in school zones or documented crossing concerns. • Coordinate with J2 corridor • Reduced dismissal-period conges- RRFB installations may include all improvements tion conflicts appurtenant features: ADA curb Lincoln Heights Elementary • Improved pedestrian yielding ramps, high-visibility crosswalks, • Minor circulation refinements compliance sidewalk infill, minor curb repairs, • Parking staging improvements • Increased circulation clarity and and the complete RRFB with predictability signage. • Pedestrian safety enhancements toward Broadway Project Descriptions Potential locations include crossings associated with: • Coordinate with J4 J6b. School zone signage • Roosevelt Elementary Longfellow Elementary upgrades • East/West Overland • Located at Tier 1 HIN Intersection Replacement and standardization • Avenue I #15 of school-zone signage, pavement • 24th Street markings, speed transition signing, • Formalize one-way dismissal • other school-adjacent Tier 1 HIN and warning devices to improve operations corridors where engineering driver awareness and create more • Signing and striping upgrades review indicates benefit consistent school-zone expectations • Pedestrian visibility enhancements across campuses. J6e. Parking reconfiguration St. Agnes School Improvements may include: Targeted parking and circulation • Evaluate 4-way stop feasibility • flashing beacons reconfiguration at selected (2nd Ave & E 23rd Street) • advance warning signs campuses to improve pickup/ drop-off efficiency, reduce • Conduct stop-control study • speed feedback devices vehicle conflicts, clarify circulation aligned with Tier 2 HIN review • pavement legends • updated MUTCD-compliant patterns, and minimize spillover Community Christian School signage parking impacts into adjacent • Pedestrian-scale lighting neighborhoods. improvements J6c. High-visibility crosswalks Installation or enhancement of Improvements may include: Westmoor Elementary ladder-style and high-visibility • restriping • Signage enhancements crosswalk markings at key student • curb modifications Implementation Approach crossing locations. • loading zone adjustments • Campus-by-campus engineering Improvements may include: • one-way circulation refinements review • advance stop bars • minor geometric changes • Coordination with school • yield markings administrators and law • signing upgrades Scottsbluff SS4A 227 Page 351 of 657 J6 J6f. Bus pullout J6i. Sidewalk / ADA Planning-Level Cost Construction of a dedicated bus improvements Summary pullout or loading area at high- Construction of targeted sidewalk ≈ $1.5 Million conflict school frontage locations connections, curb ramps, to reduce roadway blockage, detectable warnings, and ADA Estimated Range improve visibility, and separate accessibility improvements $1.2M – $1.8M loading operations from through supporting safer student access (Reflects variation in number of traffic. routes and more predictable campuses, extent of circulation Improvements may include: pedestrian circulation near campuses. changes, and optional treatments • pavement widening such as RRFBs and pullouts.) Improvements may address • curb and gutter modifications localized gaps, non-compliant Primary Cost Drivers • signing ramps, and crossing accessibility • Extent of parking and circulation • drainage adjustments deficiencies identified through reconfiguration • ADA-accessible boarding areas engineering review. • Number of campuses requiring J6g. Campus circulation and Bilingual Outreach Coordination improvements operational review All circulation modifications • Inclusion of RRFBs or enhanced Campus-specific engineering and and school zone updates will crossing treatments operational evaluations focused include bilingual (English/Spanish) • Pullout construction feasibility on dismissal patterns, pickup/ communication materials to ensure (Bluffs Middle School) drop-off operations, pedestrian clear understanding by families circulation, signing consistency, and caregivers. • Lighting upgrades and electrical requirements traffic conflicts, and school- Related Projects zone management. Reviews will • Level of ADA and sidewalk J2 – Targeted Corridor & support implementation-ready improvements recommendations coordinated Intersection Corrections with school administrators, law J3 – East Overland Improvements Implementation Notes • Improvements are campus- enforcement, and related corridor J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs specific and scalable projects. Middle • Many elements can be J6h. Pedestrian lighting J6a – SHS Access & Parking implemented as quick-build or enhancements Optimization pilot treatments Installation of pedestrian-scale or P1 – School Zone Standardization targeted crossing lighting at school • Coordination with school P3 – Quick-Build Demonstration crossings, sidewalks, pickup/ administration is critical for drop-off zones, and other high- J6 is a programmatic project success exposure locations where visibility applied across multiple school • Some improvements may deficiencies contribute to safety sites, so cost items reflect require seasonal implementation concerns. treatment types rather than (summer work) location-specific sub-projects. Improvements may include: • Stop-control changes subject to • LED fixtures engineering study and MUTCD • focused crossing illumination compliance • pole upgrades • Can be bundled with corridor • coordination with existing projects (J2, J3, J4) for efficiency electrical infrastructure 228 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 352 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J6 Project Scale Phasing Strategy • CM-7 – Traffic Calming & Speed Citywide program applied across Phase 1: Immediate Safety & Management multiple school campuses Operations • CM-8 – Sidewalk & ADA Includes a mix of: • Signing and striping upgrades Improvements • Operational improvements • Circulation adjustments Expected Safety Outcomes • Signing and striping • Lighting improvements • Reduced pedestrian exposure during arrival and dismissal • Minor geometric changes Phase 2: Targeted Capital • Improved driver yielding • Targeted capital investments Improvements compliance in school zones • Implementation Timing • Parking reconfiguration • Reduced congestion-related • ADA and sidewalk improvements Short- to Mid-Term conflicts • RRFB installation (if warranted) • Short-Term: signage, striping, • Increased clarity and circulation adjustments, lighting Phase 3: Site-Specific predictability of circulation • Mid-Term: parking Enhancements patterns reconfiguration, pullouts, ADA • Pullout construction • Improved safety for students improvements • Advanced circulation redesign at walking and biking to school Potential Funding Sources high-volume campuses • Reduced crash risk in school- • SS4A Implementation Grants Countermeasures Referenced adjacent Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN areas • Highway Safety Improvement • CM-1 – High-Visibility Crossings Program (HSIP) & Stop Bars • School safety funding programs • CM-2 – RRFBs • Local capital improvement funds • CM-4 – School Zone Treatments • Safe Routes to School • CM-5 – Lighting Improvements (where applicable) • CM-6 – Quick-Build / Interim Measures Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | Scottsbluff Public Schools | High Injury Network prioritization | Scottsbluff Police Department | Public input on school safety and | City Public Works crossings Cost Estimate | City Planning Department | School and stakeholder input $1.5 M | Adjacent neighborhood residents Based on 2025 costs | NDOT (US-26 coordination) Scottsbluff SS4A 229 Page 353 of 657 J6a flow Improving student driver safety and dismissal operations 230 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 354 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 231 Page 355 of 657 flow Improving student driver safety and dismissal operations Project Components J6a – Scottsbluff Crash Snapshot J6a1. Parking Lot Operations • Tier 1 corridor adjacent to High School Access & Refinement campus Parking Optimization • Signing and striping improvements • High turning volumes and Capital Project – Campus Access & • Exit channelization refinements queue spill-back during Network Connectivity • Queue management strategies dismissal HIN Relevance: Adjacent to 27th Street • Dismissal staging improvements • Simultaneous vehicle (Tier 1 HIN Corridor) and connected to the J6a2. Lot Expansion (approx. 80 sp.) discharge into constrained signalized intersection at 2nd Avenue & Expansion of on-campus parking capacity network 27th Street. to reduce overflow parking, improve • Residential spillover creating Project Overview internal circulation efficiency, and decrease pedestrian visibility conflicts vehicle conflicts associated with informal • Speed compliance challenges J6a addresses congestion, circulation outside school hours inefficiencies, and pedestrian exposure or off-site parking activity. Improvements risks associated with high student-driver may include: grading, pavement, lighting, • Alignment study drainage, ADA-accessible spaces, sidewalk volumes at Scottsbluff High School. • Property impact review connections, and circulation integration This project combines near-term with existing campus access routes. • Environmental and drainage review operational improvements with evaluation • Traffic modeling of a potential secondary access connection J6a3. • Preliminary cost opinion to improve long-term network performance Evaluation and adjustment of signal timing This component is conceptual and subject and reduce reliance on a single discharge and operations at the 2nd Avenue & to feasibility findings and future funding. point to a Tier 1 corridor. East 27th Street intersection to improve dismissal-period traffic flow, reduce queue Project Purpose J6a5. Residential Spillover Mitigation spill-back, and better accommodate Study To reduce congestion, improve traffic flow, school-related turning movements. • Evaluate permit parking feasibility enhance pedestrian safety, and evaluate Improvements may include: updated • Identify short-term pickup and staging long-term network connectivity options for timing plans, coordination adjustments, zones the Scottsbluff High School campus. detection modifications, and operational • Coordinate with enforcement and This project focuses on structural access refinements aligned with corridor traffic neighborhood stakeholders and network solutions, separate from conditions. operational circulation refinements Why This Matters J6a4. Northwest Connector Road – addressed in J6. High schools generate concentrated Feasibility & Conceptual Design traffic peaks similar to large events—but Safety Problems Addressed Concept: on a daily basis. Without additional access • High-volume dismissal congestion with New roadway connection from the options, all traffic is forced through a event-scale traffic conditions northwest corner of the SHS parking constrained local network into a Tier 1 • Queue spill-back onto 2nd Avenue and lot (2nd Ave & 28th Street) extending corridor. 27th Street northwest to Avenue B. Under the Safe System approach, reducing • Concentrated turning conflicts at a single Purpose: concentration of conflicts and providing access point network redundancy is critical to lowering • Provide a second outlet for student • Residential spillover parking affecting crash risk and improving operational safety. visibility and neighborhood safety traffic Implementation Phasing • Limited redundancy in campus access • Reduce congestion onto 27th Street and egress • Reduce pressure on 2nd Avenue Short-Term (0–3 Years) • Improve emergency access redundancy • Parking lot striping and signing upgrades Includes: • Dismissal management improvements 232 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 356 of 657 J6a Planning Level Cost Basis • Residential mitigation evaluation • Connector roadway is not assumed • Connector roadway construction (if Mid-Term (3–7 Years) and is contingent on feasibility and feasible and supported) • Connector road feasibility study stakeholder support Potential Funding Sources • Preliminary design • Operational improvements can be • SS4A Implementation Funds implemented quickly and coordinated • Local Capital Improvement Program Long-Term (7+ Years) with school administration • School District partnership • Connector road construction (if feasible • Construction elements may require multi- and supported) year funding and coordination • State or regional transportation funding (if connector advances) Performance Metrics Project Scale • Reduced dismissal-period queue length Countermeasures Referenced Single-campus project with potential • CM-6 – Quick-Build / Interim Measures • Reduced spillover parking conflicts network-level impact • CM-7 – Traffic Calming & Speed • Improved average vehicle exit time • Near-term: site-specific operational Management • Maintained zero KSI crashes in school improvements • CM-3 – Signal Visibility & Operations access zone • Long-term: potential network connection (coordination with corridor) Planning Level Cost Summary influencing corridor performance • CM-8 – Sidewalk & ADA Improvements Estimated Range: Implementation Timing (as needed) Phase 1 Short- to Long-Term Expected Safety Outcomes (Operations + Feasibility Only) • Short-Term (0–3 Years): striping, signing, • Reduced congestion-related conflicts $225,000 – $6,000,000 circulation improvements during dismissal Primary Cost Drivers • Mid-Term (3–7 Years): feasibility study • Improved traffic flow and reduced queue • Feasibility and design outcomes for and preliminary design spill-back connector roadway • Long-Term (7+ Years): connector • Reduced pedestrian exposure at campus • Right-of-way and property acquisition construction (if pursued) access points needs Phasing Strategy • Improved neighborhood safety through • Extent of grading, drainage, and utility Phase 1 – Immediate Operations reduced spillover parking impacts • Parking lot striping and signing • Increased network redundancy and • Level of parking lot reconfiguration • Dismissal management improvements reduced reliance on a single access point required • Residential spillover evaluation Performance Metrics • Scope of residential mitigation measures Phase 2 – Planning & Feasibility • Reduced dismissal-period queue length Implementation Notes • Connector study and traffic modeling • Reduced spillover parking conflicts • Project is phased and scalable, with • Preliminary design • Improved vehicle exit times low-cost operational improvements • Maintained zero KSI crashes in school Phase 3 – Capital Implementation independent of long-term construction access zone Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan (school $ | Scottsbluff Public Schools access and safety) | Scottsbluff Police Department | School District facilities and circulation Cost Estimate | City Public Works planning $1.6 M —$6 M | SS4A High Injury Network analysis | City Planning Department Based on 2025 costs | Police Department and stakeholder | Adjacent neighborhood residents input | NDOT (corridor coordination) | Public input on 27th Street congestion Scottsbluff SS4A 233 Page 357 of 657 J7 transit Upgrading stops for ADA access, visibility, and safer boarding 234 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 358 of 657 transit Upgrading stops for ADA access, visibility, and safer boarding Appendix 8 - Projects 235 Page 359 of 657 transit Upgrading stops for ADA access, visibility, and safer boarding J7 – Transit Stop Safety Problems Addressed • Pedestrian exposure at stops along high- Crash Snapshot Upgrade Program speed corridors • Transit stops concentrated Capital Project – Multimodal Safety & • Lack of ADA-compliant boarding areas along Tier 1 corridors Accessibility Improvements • Poor lighting and limited nighttime • Limited lighting and ADA infra- HIN Relevance visibility structure at several locations • Buses stopping in travel lanes Transit stops are located along or • Buses stopping in travel lanes due to lack of defined space adjacent to several Tier 1 High Injury • Vehicles blocking or encroaching on stop • Vehicles blocking stops, creat- Network (HIN) corridors, including: areas ing conflicts • Limited separation between riders and • 27th Street (east & west segments) • Riders include seniors, moving traffic • Avenue I students, and low-income • East Overland Project Components populations • West Overland J7a. ADA Boarding Pads & • 20th Street Accessibility Improvements Riders often board and alight directly • ADA-compliant boarding pads J7f. Feasibility Review for Select Pull- adjacent to high-speed or high-volume • Detectable warnings Out Locations roadways, increasing pedestrian • Sidewalk connections to adjacent • Evaluate feasibility where right-of-way exposure risk. network allows • Coordination with J11 sidewalk program Project Overview • Focus on high-volume or constrained J7 delivers targeted safety and accessibility J7b. Shelter Installation Program corridors improvements at high-priority transit stops, • Install 6 donated shelters • Recognize limitations on most HIN focusing on ADA compliance, visibility, and • Prioritize high-ridership stops corridors safer boarding conditions. • Concrete pads and seating What This Project Does NOT This program improves conditions for • Weather protection Include transit riders—particularly vulnerable J7c. Lighting Enhancements at Stops • No roadway widening users—while reducing conflicts between • Pedestrian-scale lighting • No major corridor reconstruction buses, pedestrians, and vehicles along • Focus on poorly lit HIN segments high-risk corridors. • No new transit routes • Coordination with P2 – HIN Lighting • No pull-outs where infeasible Project Purpose Program To improve safety, visibility, and ADA Why This Matters accessibility at transit stops located J7d. Bus Stop Location Optimization Transit riders are among the most along high-risk corridors and near key • Evaluate minor relocation opportunities vulnerable roadway users. When stops lack destinations, while supporting equitable • Improve visibility near intersections defined space, lighting, or ADA access, mobility across the community. • Reduce turning conflicts and improve riders are exposed to moving traffic. approach geometry Under the Safe System approach, This program focuses J7e. Curb/access improvements improving visibility, accessibility, and on low-cost, high- • Sidewalk connections to adjacent separation at transit stops reduces crash impact improvements network severity risk while supporting equitable access to mobility. that can be deployed • Coordination with J11 sidewalk program quickly across multiple locations. 236 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 360 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J7 Planning-Level Cost Summary Project Scale Potential Funding Sources Estimated Program Range: • Citywide program applied across priority • SS4A Implementation Grants $250,000 – $991,000 transit stops • FTA Section 5311 (Rural Transit) Primary Cost Drivers • Focus on HIN corridors and key • State transit grants destinations • Number of stops upgraded • Local funding / TIF (where applicable) • Improvements vary by location based on • Employer partnerships (e.g., industrial • Extent of ADA improvements and need and feasibility sidewalk connections corridors) • Shelter installation and site preparation Implementation Timing Countermeasures Referenced needs Short- to Long-Term • CM-1 – High-Visibility Crossings & Stop • Lighting installation and electrical access • Short-Term: shelters, ADA pads, lighting Bars • Feasibility and construction of pull-out at priority stops • CM-5 – Lighting Improvements locations • Mid-Term: relocation adjustments and • CM-8 – Sidewalk & ADA Improvements Costs reflect an initial build-out of priority additional shelters • CM-10 – Transit Stop Improvements stops and can be expanded incrementally • Long-Term: continued incremental Expected Safety Outcomes as additional funding becomes available. upgrades • Reduced pedestrian exposure at transit Implementation Notes Phasing Strategy stops • Program is incremental and scalable by Phase 1 – Immediate Safety • Improved visibility for riders and drivers improvements stop location • Increased ADA accessibility across the • Can be delivered annually as funding • Install donated shelters network allows • ADA pad construction • Reduced bus-related traffic conflicts • Prioritization based on HIN location, • Lighting upgrades • Improved safety for vulnerable users ridership, and equity considerations Phase 2 – System Optimization including seniors and students • Coordination required with transit • Stop relocation adjustments Performance Metrics provider and NDOT (where applicable) • Additional shelter expansion • % of HIN transit stops ADA-compliant • Many improvements can be bundled Phase 3 – Select Enhancements • Number of shelters installed with corridor or lighting projects • Limited pull-out implementation where • Reduction in buses stopping in travel feasible lanes • Improved nighttime visibility at transit stop locations Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan (multimodal $ | Tri-City Roadrunner Transit connectivity & equity) | City Public Works | SS4A HIN analysis Cost Estimate | City Planning | Transit stakeholder input $991 k | Scottsbluff Police Department | United We GROW workforce access Based on 2025 costs strategy | NDOT (corridor coordination) | Tri-City Sustainability Assessment | Disability and senior advocacy groups Scottsbluff SS4A 237 Page 361 of 657 J8 crossings Improving surface, visibility, and pedestrian safety at rail interfaces 238 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 362 of 657 crossings Improving surface, visibility, and pedestrian safety at rail interfaces While Scottsbluff’s rail crossings are equipped with active warning devices (gates and flashers), crash risk is influenced by: • High-speed corridor context (Tier 1 HIN) • Vehicle queueing and signal proximity • Surface condition variability • Limited pedestrian ADA pathways at select crossings • Lighting deficiencies at certain locations The concentration of crossings within Tier 1 HIN corridors indicates that rail-related risk exposure is embedded within the city’s highest-severity roadway network. This supports a proactive Safe System approach focused on: • Visibility • Surface condition • Accessibility • Operational clarity Appendix 8 - Projects 239 Page 363 of 657 crossings Improving surface, visibility, and pedestrian safety at rail interfaces J8 – Rail Corridor For J8a. and J8b. see pages 228-231 for Crash Snapshot Safety & Accessibility grade separation • 7 crossings are located on Tier 1 Upgrades feasibility studies. HIN segments Tiered Urban Railroad Crossing • 1 crossing are located on a Tier 2 Treatments HIN segment Improvement Program • J8c. Crossing surface rehabilitation HIN Tier Highest Hazard Index crossings: • J8d. ADA sidewalk completion & • Avenue I (Rank 1) • Tier 1 (7 crossings) ramp upgrades • Broadway (Rank 2) • Tier 2 (1 crossing) Pedestrian delineation enhance- • J8e. • Avenue B (Rank 3) Hazard Index Ranks ments • 21st Avenue (Rank 4) • #1–#7 (Urban Crossings) • J8f. LED lighting upgrades • 5th Avenue (Rank 5) • J8g. Pavement marking refresh Primary Mode(s) • 20th Street (Rank 6) (RR crossing, STOP bars) • Vehicles • 9th Avenue (Rank 7) Advance warning signage • Pedestrians • J8h. improvements Key Issues Identified: • Bicycles • J8i. Skew-approach visibility treat- • Rough or deteriorated crossing • Emergency Access ments surfaces Timeframe • J8j. Median/channelization review • Skewed roadway approaches • Short–Mid Term (Phased) (where warranted) • Inconsistent or inadequate lighting Lead Partner • These crossings carry the highest • Gaps in pedestrian and ADA • City of Scottsbluff (coordination with combined AADT and hazard ranking. accommodations BNSF & NDOT) PHASE 2 – Additional Crossings • Delay-related congestion and Project Purpose (Tier 2 / Add-Alternative) driver frustration Improve safety, accessibility, and • 5th Avenue operational consistency at Scottsbluff’s • 20th Street • Inconsistent nighttime visibility • 9th Avenue highest-risk urban railroad crossings • Skewed approach geometry through a phased, hazard-index-driven Same treatment package scaled to location • Inadequate advance warning upgrade program aligned with FHWA need. consistency Appendix C systematic evaluation guidance. Corridor-Wide Study Components • Gate-running potential without This project addresses at-grade crossing • J8k. Rail lighting consistency channelization evaluation safety only. Ranked Crossings within Grade separation feasibility studies are • J8m. Pavement marking & signage Scottsbluff standardization study addressed separately under J8a and J8b. 1. Avenue I PHASE 1 – • J8n. Wayside horn feasibility study 2. Broadway Priority Crossings (Tier 1) Quiet zone framework evaluation 3. Avenue B 4. 21st Avenue • Avenue I Safety Problems Addressed 5. 5th Avenue • Rough surface conditions affecting • Broadway 6. W 20th Street vehicle control • Avenue B 7. 9th Avenue • 21st Avenue • Limited ADA pedestrian accommodation 240 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 364 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J8 Why This Project Matters Performance Metrics Phase 2 – Add-Alternate Scope Urban railroad crossings are high- • Reduce crash severity at Tier 1 rail (3 Crossings) consequence conflict points where vehicle, crossings • Construction pedestrian, and rail movements intersect. • Improve ADA compliance at 100% of $550,000 – $950,000 Although all crossings include gates and Phase 1 crossings • Soft Costs (~30%) flashing lights, several require surface, • Achieve corridor-wide lighting $165,000 – $285,000 ADA, and lighting improvements to reduce consistency standard Phase 2 Total: crash severity risk and improve user • Reduce public safety complaints related $715,000 – $1,235,000 expectancy. to crossing condition Corridor-Wide Study Components This project uses a data-driven Hazard Planning-Level Cost Basis Index approach to prioritize improvements • Lighting Study where they will produce the greatest safety Phase 1 – Base Scope $75,000 – $120,000 benefit. (4 Crossings) • Signing & Marking Study • Surface Rehabilitation $50,000 – $80,000 $300,000 – $500,000 • Wayside Horn Feasibility • ADA & Pedestrian Improvements $75,000 – $125,000 $200,000 – $3,000 Total Study Package: • Lighting Upgrades $200,000 – $325,000 $150,000 – $300,000 Potential Full Build-Out Range • Signing & Marking $1.9M – $3.2M Enhancements Scaled appropriately for SS4A $75,000 – $125,000 These conditions implementation. contribute to elevated Construction Subtotal $725,000 – $1,275,000 Detailed cost estimates crash risk and reinforce are provided at the end of Soft Costs (Design, ROW, the need for a this Appendix A8-Projects; the coordinated, corridor- Coordination, Contingency ~30%) $220,000 – $380,000 following summarizes planning- wide improvement Phase 1 Total: level ranges for phased strategy. $950,000 – $1,650,000 implementation. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan (Corridor $ | City of Scottsbluff Safety & Connectivity) | BNSF Railway | SS4A High Injury Network (HIN) Analysis Cost Estimate | Nebraska Department of | Railroad Crossing Hazard Index Evaluation $1.6 M Transportation (NDOT) | Public and Task Force Input Based on 2025 costs | Emergency Services | FHWA Appendix C Systematic Safety | Panhandle Public Heath District Guidance | Scottsbluff Police Department Scottsbluff SS4A 241 Page 365 of 657 J8a resilience Evaluating long-term solutions to rail delay and emergency access • W 20th Street (Tier 1 HIN corridor #21) (overpass or underpass) at a high-volume J8a – In-Town Rail • 5th Avenue (Tier 1 HIN corridor seg- urban railroad crossing in Scottsbluff. Grade Separation ments) This study does not commit the City to Feasibility Study • South Beltline Hwy East (2 crossings on construction. It determines whether grade Tier 1 HIN segments including #11) separation is justified based on: Project Type: Feasibility Study (Planning- This concentration of crossings within Level Engineering & Alternatives Analysis) • Hazard Index ranking the city’s highest-risk roadway segments • Delay frequency and duration HIN Relevance: Rail crossings occur reinforces the need to evaluate long-term • Emergency response impacts directly on or adjacent to Tier 1 HIN separation options. corridors, including: • Crash history • CR 19 (Tier 1 HIN segment #12) Project Purpose • Adjacent land use and right-of-way Evaluate the technical, financial, constraints • Avenue I (Tier 1 HIN corridor) operational, and community feasibility of • Rail coordination requirements • Broadway / Overland (Tier 1 HIN corri- constructing a grade-separated crossing dors, including #25) 242 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 366 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J8a Hazard Index ranking Cost Basis Overview • Delay frequency and duration Scope of Study Crash Snapshot • Emergency response impacts Citywide rail crossing screening and • 7 rail crossings located on Tier 1 • Crash history alternatives evaluation HIN corridors • 1 rail crossing located on Tier 2 • Adjacent land use and right-of-way Planning-Level Estimate constraints HIN segment Engineering feasibility study • Rail coordination requirements • Crossings embedded in high- $150,000 – $400,000 speed, high-volume corridors Focus Area Included: • Emergency access and freight Priority evaluation locations include: • Traffic & safety modeling movements intersect these • Avenue I (Hazard Rank #1) corridors • Conceptual structure layouts • Broadway (Hazard Rank #2) • Preliminary cost modeling • Avenue B (Hazard Rank #3) Note: Construction costs not Final location to be determined based on included in this project. If feasible, engineering screening. grade separation construction Study Components could range from $15M–$40M+ • Traffic operations modeling depending on structure type and location. • Rail coordination feasibility review (BNSF) Why This Matters • Concept-level engineering alternatives • At-grade rail crossings create recurring • Cost estimating (Class 4 level) delay, emergency response con- • Environmental & ROW screening straints, and high-consequence conflict points within the transportation system. • Funding strategy assessment • This study ensures that any future Outcome grade separation investment is da- • Deliver a defensible recommendation: ta-driven, cost-effective, and aligned • Advance to design with Safe System principles. • Preserve corridor for future project • Do not pursue This ensures large-scale capital investment is grounded in data and Safe System principles. Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan (corridor $ | City of Scottsbluff safety emphasis) | Nebraska Department of | SS4A High Injury Network findings Cost Estimate Transportation (NDOT) | United We GROW (freight and regional $400 K | Railroad operator(s) mobility reliability) Based on 2025 costs | Scottsbluff Police & Fire | Public safety stakeholder input | Regional freight stakeholders | Adjacent property owners Scottsbluff SS4A 243 Page 367 of 657 J8b separation Eliminating rail conflicts for walking and biking connections J8b – Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Overview J8b evaluates the feasibility of a grade- Rail Separation Feasibility separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing (SE Pathway Connection) near 9th Avenue to complete a critical gap in the southeast pathway network. Project Type: Feasibility Study—Multimodal Grade Separation Evaluation) This connection would remove at-grade rail crossing conflicts and improve safe, continuous access between neighborhoods, schools, and community destinations. Crash Snapshot • Rail crossings located within HIN Relevance Tier 1 HIN corridors The proposed SE Pathway Spine connects: • Southeast neighborhood • Tier 1 HIN Southeast neighborhood contains Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN segments local streets • East Overland corridor (Tier 1 HIN) • Elevated pedestrian expo- • South Beltline Hwy East (Tier 1 HIN) sure along planned pathway • Monument Pathway network alignment This crossing addresses a key barrier within a high-risk corridor environment. 244 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 368 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J8b Project Purpose Safe System Alignment • Position project for future funding and Evaluate the feasibility of a grade- This study evaluates permanent implementation separated pedestrian/bicycle crossing to separation of vulnerable road users from If full separation is not feasible, support: rail conflict — a Safe System “conflict findings will guide enhanced at-grade • SE Neighborhood Spine completion elimination” strategy. improvements. (Southeast Connectivity Corridor) Even if full separation is infeasible, Planning-Level Cost Summary • WNCC<-->YMCA loop connectivity findings will guide: Estimated Study Range: • South Beltline pathway connection • Enhanced at-grade crossing design $100,000 – $300,000 • Improved access for lower-income • Lighting improvements Implementation Notes neighborhoods • Surface upgrades • Study is focused on a single priority Why This Location • Protective barriers crossing location This crossing location was identified This crossing is a critical link in the • No construction is included based on: southeast connectivity system, • Results will inform future capital project • Skewed roadway and rail geometry connecting the SE Pathway Spine (J5) development with neighborhood access improvements • Limited existing pedestrian • Coordination required with railroad (J11) and enabling a continuous, grade- accommodations operator and NDOT (if applicable) separated route across the rail corridor. • Proximity to US-26 and high-speed Why This Matters Project Scale corridors Single-location study with network-wide At-grade rail crossings present significant • Identified equity corridor connectivity benefits barriers and safety risks for pedestrians • Priority active transportation and bicyclists, particularly in areas with Implementation Timing connection high exposure and limited infrastructure. Short-Term (0–2 Years) Study Components This study evaluates whether a Expected Safety Outcomes • Conceptual alignment alternatives permanent separation can eliminate • Elimination or reduction of pedestrian/ • Vertical clearance and profile analysis these conflicts and provide a safe, rail conflict exposure • ADA slope compliance evaluation continuous connection for all users, • Improved connectivity across the rail • Structural concept screening consistent with Safe System principles corridor and community connectivity goals. • Order-of-magnitude cost estimation • Increased use of safe, designated • Connectivity and network impact Outcome pathways analysis • Determine feasibility of an all-ag- • Reduced reliance on unsafe at-grade es-and-abilities crossing crossings • Preserve corridor space if warranted Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | City of Scottsbluff (pathway expansion support) | Railroad operator(s) | Master Pathways Map Cost Estimate | NDOT (if adjacent to state facilities) | SS4A HIN analysis (SE Tier 1 segments) $300K | Parks Department | Parks & Connectivity goals Based on 2025 costs | Southeast neighborhood residents | Active transportation stakeholders Scottsbluff SS4A 245 Page 369 of 657 network Creating a citywide strategy for safe, connected pathways J9 – Pathway Master Plan • Equity-focused improvements reach underserved Crash Snapshot Project Overview neighborhoods • Pedestrian KSIs cluster along • Safe System principles guide The Pathway Master Plan will Tier 1 HIN corridors (US-26, future development establish a comprehensive, phased, Avenue I, Broadway, East and implementation-ready vision for • Projects are phased and Overland) Scottsbluff’s long-term shared-use financially realistic • Southeast neighborhood pathway system. • The City remains competitive for includes Tier 1 and Tier 2 local grant funding street segments While the City maintains a Master • Limited east–west Pathway Map, it does not currently What the Plan Will Address The plan will define a connected, connectivity east of US- have a detailed plan that includes 26 increases pedestrian citywide network that addresses: engineering feasibility, phasing exposure priorities, cost ranges, funding • East–west connectivity gaps • Lack of Monument Pathway strategies, ADA integration, and policy across US-26 connections forces unsafe alignment. • Southeast neighborhood pathway crossings This effort translates crash data, High spine Injury Network (HIN) findings, and • South Beltline corridor completion J9c – Alignment Development community priorities into a defined, • US-26 east parallel pathway • Conceptual corridor alignments buildable network that improves safety, feasibility • Off-street vs. on-street evaluation connectivity, and equitable access • Monument Pathway access • Drainage corridor utilization across the community. without arterial crossings (SE neighborhood) • Perimeter bicycle and shoulder • Grade separation screening treatments This plan provides the J9d – Cost & Phasing Strategy strategic foundation • Long-term grade separation needs (rail and highway • Planning-level cost estimates for implementing J5 – interfaces) • Short-, mid-, and long-term Active Transportation Scope of Work phasing Network Completion. • Funding eligibility and grant J9a – Network & Connectivity alignment Assessment Why This Project Is Needed • Maintenance considerations • Pathway inventory and gap Scottsbluff’s pathway system functions J9e – Policy & Development analysis well in the west half of the city but lacks Integration continuous connectivity east of US-26, • ADA compliance review • Connectivity to schools, parks, • Subdivision and development connections to Downtown, and access standards to the southeast neighborhood. transit, and commercial areas • Right-of-way dedication guidance J9b – Risk & Exposure Analysis Several Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN segments Coordination with NDOT corridors are local streets where pedestrians • HIN overlay and crash pattern • Integration with Transportation and micromobility users travel in the analysis Safety Ordinance Update • Identification of high-conflict roadway due to missing infrastructure. J9f – Community Engagement crossings A Master Plan ensures: • Rail and highway interface • Bilingual (Eng/Spanish) outreach • Infrastructure investments align evaluation • Public workshops and map-based with crash risk feedback • School and senior outreach • Walk audits 246 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 370 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J9 J9g – Plan Document & GIS Performance Metrics Funding Considerations Deliverables • Miles of planned shared-use path • SS4A Planning or Supplemental J9h – Wayfinding & Signage identified Funding Develop coordinated wayfinding and • Number of HIN segments with separated • Transportation Alternatives signage system to improve pathway facilities Program (TAP) visibility, user orientation, destination • Percentage of population within ½ mile • Nebraska Trails Program access, and safer connections between of pathway access • RAISE / Reconnecting neighborhoods, schools, parks, downtown, • Reduction in pedestrian exposure on Tier Communities (future phases) and regional corridor routes. 1 corridors (long-term) • Local capital improvement funds Implementation Approach Planning-Level Cost Summary Implementation Considerations This plan is structured as an Estimated Range: • Requires multidisciplinary implementation-ready framework that $150,000 – $300,000 coordination supports phased capital investment • Must align with Comprehensive Includes: over time. Plan • Network analysis and alignment • Should include GIS-based The City can: development mapping • Advance projects incrementally • Public engagement and bilingual • Designed to support grant • Pursue grants by corridor or segment outreach applications • Deliver early safety benefits through • Cost modeling and phasing • Scalable to match City funding priority connections strategy capacity • Adjust scope based on funding and • Final plan document and GIS Why This Is Right-Sized for feasibility deliverables Scottsbluff Relationship to Other Projects Optional Add-Alternates • Focused scope tied directly to • Directly informs J5 – Active • Preliminary engineering for priority documented HIN needs Transportation Network Completion segments • Phased build-out strategy aligned • Supports J8b – Ped/Bike Rail Separation • Concept-level structure sketches with funding reality Feasibility • Traffic modeling for major • Avoids over-designing beyond • Aligns with J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap crossings realistic capacity Elimination • Corridor visualization • Establishes grant readiness • Supports O1 – Transportation Safety Additional Range: without committing to Ordinance Update $50,000 – $150,000 unaffordable construction • Coordinates with P4 – Safety Performance Monitoring Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | City of Scottsbluff | Tri-City Roadrunner (multimodal connectivity emphasis) (Planning, Public Works, Transit | Parks and Trails planning goals Engineering) | Police Department | Public input prioritizing pathway | NDOT (US-26 | Railroad operators Cost Estimate coordination) expansion $300 K | Southeast neighborhood | HIN findings (Tier 1 and Tier 2 | Scottsbluff Public representatives segments) Based on 2025 Schools costs | Spanish-speaking | Safe System Approach principles | Western Nebraska community Community College representatives | Parks & Recreation Scottsbluff SS4A 247 Page 371 of 657 accessibility Closing sidewalk gaps and removing ADA barriers on priority routes J10 – Sidewalk & • Non-compliant ADA ramps and inaccessible crossings Crash Snapshot • Gaps in connections to schools, ADA Gap Elimination • Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN local transit, and neighborhoods Program streets include segments • Elevated exposure on Tier 1 and : Capital Improvement in the Southeast Project Type Tier 2 corridors Program neighborhood (E 15th • Barriers for seniors and mobility- Primary Focus: Vulnerable Road impaired users Street corridor, 10th User Safety & Accessibility Avenue vicinity) Project Components Related Countermeasure: • Tier 1 intersection (#15) at CM-8 (Sidewalk & ADA Accessibility J10a. Sidewalk Gap Closure Longfellow Elementary Improvements) • Construct missing sidewalk School segments along prioritized : Tier 1 & Tier 2 segments • Tier 2 local street HIN Focus corridors near schools, transit stops, and concerns near Lincoln • Focus on Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN Southeast neighborhood corridors Heights Elementary segments Project Overview • Pedestrian activity • Prioritize school walking routes concentrated near transit The Sidewalk & ADA Gap and transit access corridors stops on 27th Street, Elimination Program establishes J10b. ADA Curb Ramp a phased, citywide effort to close Avenue I, and East critical sidewalk gaps and upgrade Upgrades Overland • Replace non-compliant ramps non-compliant ADA facilities, with • Public input consistently with detectable warnings priority given to High Injury Network identifies missing (HIN) corridors and school- and • Upgrade corner geometry to sidewalks and transit-adjacent areas. improve pedestrian alignment accessibility barriers • Address cross-slope and landing While Scottsbluff has an existing deficiencies sidewalk network, discontinuities and aging curb ramps create Southeast Neighborhood Focus Transit Stop Accessibility exposure risks for pedestrians— • Target E 15th Street and nearby Integration particularly children, older adults, Tier 1/Tier 2 segments • ADA boarding pads where and individuals with disabilities. This • Coordinate with proposed SE missing program prioritizes locations where Pathway Spine (J5) Ensure sidewalks connect directly people are currently walking in or • Improve pedestrian access to transit stops near travel lanes or crossing without between residential streets and • Coordinate with J7 – Transit Stop accessible facilities. East Overland Upgrade Program This program directly supports School-Adjacent Accessibility Performance Metrics the Safe System goal of reducing Improvements • Linear feet of sidewalk gap pedestrian exposure to high-speed • Longfellow Elementary eliminated annually traffic and improving equitable (Tier 1 intersection #15) • Number of ADA ramps upgraded access across the community. • Lincoln Heights pedestrian per year Safety Problems Addressed walking routes toward Broadway • Reduction in pedestrian walking- • Missing sidewalk segments • Roosevelt and other campuses as in-roadway observations forcing pedestrians into travel identified through ADA screening • Increased accessible routes to lanes schools and transit stops 248 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 372 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis Implementation Strategy Countermeasures Referenced improvements extend beyond CM-8 Sidewalk & ADA Accessibility major corridors into residential Phase 1 (Short-Term: 1–3 Years) neighborhoods—particularly those • Inventory and confirm priority Tier Improvements with documented Tier 1 and Tier 2 1 & Tier 2 segments Why This Project Matters risk. • Address highest-risk school and Sidewalk and ADA improvements By focusing on systematic gap transit gaps are among the most effective closure rather than isolated • Bundle with resurfacing projects and scalable safety investments segments, the City builds long-term where feasible available to Scottsbluff. safety equity into its transportation Phase 2 (Mid-Term: 3–6 Years) This program reduces pedestrian network while supporting Safe • Expand into Southeast exposure, improves accessibility, System principles. neighborhood corridors and ensures that safety • Coordinate with Pathway Master Plan (J9) Phase 3 (Long-Term: 6+ Years) • Complete remaining system gaps • Maintain ADA compliance tracking system Project Scale Citywide program targeting Tier 1 and Tier 2 corridors, school routes, transit access, and neighborhood gaps Implementation Timing Short- to Long-Term (phased annually) Implementation Notes • Highly scalable and grant-ready • Can be bundled with resurfacing projects • Prioritization driven by HIN and equity needs • Supports multiple parallel funding sources Primary Cost Drivers • Length of sidewalk gaps • Number of ADA ramps • Utility conflicts and drainage • Driveway density and grading complexity Scottsbluff SS4A 249 Page 373 of 657 Planning Level Cost J10a. Sidewalk Gap Closure Southeast Neighborhood Focus Summary Assumptions Area (Example) Costing Methodology • 5’ standard sidewalk width If bundled with J5 SE Pathway Planning-level costs are based • 4” concrete thickness Spine and J12 improvements: on: • Includes removal of obstructions 2,000 LF sidewalk gap closure • Recent Nebraska municipal and minor grading 8 ADA ramp upgrades sidewalk bid tabs • Includes limited driveway Estimated Range: • RSMeans unit cost references crossing reconstruction $110,000 – $150,000 (sidewalk) (adjusted for regional pricing) J10b. ADA Curb Ramp $48,000 – $80,000 (ramps) • Comparable Panhandle Total Example Bundle: Reconstruction $158,000 – $230,000 community ADA ramp projects Assumptions • Typical concrete thickness, • Full corner replacement School-Adjacent Priority Package excavation, and restoration • Detectable warnings (Example) assumptions • Grading correction Longfellow / Lincoln Heights / • Moderate utility conflict • Landing reconstruction Roosevelt targeted upgrades: allowance (not heavy urban • 1,000–1,500 LF gap closure Unit Cost (Planning Level) conditions) • 6–8 ramp upgrades $6,000 – $10,000 per corner Estimated Range: Costs reflect installed construction Typical Intersection Cost $100,000 – $200,000 per school- including demolition, grading, (4 corners) focused phase base prep, concrete, detectable $24,000 – $40,000 per warnings, and basic restoration. intersection These are order-of-magnitude planning figures and will be refined during corridor-level design. This program is scalable and can be delivered annually based on available funding. 250 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 374 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J10 Transit Stop ADA Integration Phasing Logic Why This Remains Pair with J7 Transit Program Prioritize in this order: Realistic for Scottsbluff • Concrete boarding pad 1. Tier 1 HIN segments This program is scalable and can be • Ramp tie-in 2. School walking routes implemented incrementally without • Minor sidewalk extension 3. Transit stop access overwhelming local budgets. $8,000 – $18,000 per stop (if 4. Tier 2 neighborhood corridors It focuses on: sidewalk already exists nearby) 5. System continuity gaps • High-risk corridors Program-Level Implementation • Equity-driven improvements Risk & Cost • Practical, constructible segments Scenarios Considerations • Bundling with other projects Conservative Annual Program Costs increase where: This keeps the program • 1,000 LF sidewalk • Drainage structures must be achievable for Scottsbluff while • 4 ramps modified still demonstrating systemic $85,000 – $115,000 per year • Utility relocation required commitment to pedestrian safety. Moderate Annual Program • Driveway density is high • 2,000 LF sidewalk • Retaining walls or grading Expected Safety Outcomes • 8 ramps required • Reduced pedestrian exposure to $170,000 – $230,000 per year Costs decrease where: traffic Aggressive Catch-Up Program • Work is bundled with resurfacing • Increased ADA compliance across (Grant Supported) • Sidewalk is on flat, unobstructed network • 4,000 LF sidewalk corridor • Improved access to schools and • Concrete can be poured • 12–16 ramps transit continuously $350,000 – $500,000 per year • Reduction in walking-in-roadway Performance Tracking behavior Funding Strategy Annual reporting should track: Eligible funding sources may • Linear feet installed include: • ADA ramps upgraded • SS4A Implementation Grants • Gaps remaining • Transportation Alt. (TA) • School/transit routes completed • Safe Routes to School • Reduction in pedestrian walking- (if applicable) in-roadway observations • CDBG (in low/mod areas) • Local capital improvement funds • Utility coordination savings (paired projects) Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – $ | City Public Works Walkability & Connectivity Goals | City Engineering | SS4A High Injury Network Analysis | Scottsbluff Public Schools School Safety Study Cost Estimate | SE Neighborhood Residents | Public Input Summary | Transit: Tri-City Roadrunner (sidewalk and lighting concerns) $1.43 M | Disability Advocacy Reps | ADA Transition Planning Framework Based on 2025 costs | NDOT (where state routes interface) Scottsbluff SS4A 251 Page 375 of 657 J11 252 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 376 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 253 Page 377 of 657 neighborhoods Reducing exposure on local high-risk streets J11 – Southeast Safety Problems Addressed • Pedestrians walking in roadway due to Crash Snapshot Neighborhood Safety missing sidewalks • Tier 1 HIN Local Street Seg- Improvements • Speeding on neighborhood connector ment(s) streets Project Type: Capital Project • Tier 2 HIN Neighborhood • Inconsistent stop/yield control at Tier 2 Intersections Primary Focus: Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN Local intersections • Pedestrian KSIs present Street Segments • Poor crossing visibility at uncontrolled • Parallel to East Overland (Tier Project Area: Southeast Scottsbluff (E 15th locations 1 Corridor) Street, 12th Avenue, adjacent local streets) • Cut-through traffic from East Overland • Area of anticipated future SE HIN Relevance: Tier 1 & Tier 2 Local Street corridor Pathway Spine Segments • Limited lighting at key pedestrian Project Overview crossing locations J11f. Pavement Marking Refresh J11 delivers targeted safety improvements Core Improvements • Refresh faded stop bars, crosswalks, within the southeast Scottsbluff (Targeted & Scalable) lane markings neighborhood—an area containing both J11a. Stop/Yield Review & Signing • Improve visibility at neighborhood Tier 1 and Tier 2 High Injury Network intersections and crossings (HIN) local street segments and elevated Corrections • Evaluate intersection control consistency • Reinforce traffic control consistency pedestrian exposure due to incomplete along Tier 1 and Tier 2 local streets infrastructure, proximity to East Overland, • Replace or upgrade signage • Coordinate with quick-build traffic and anticipated future pathway • Install stop bars where missing calming and crossing enhancements connections. J11b. High-Visibility Crosswalk J11g. Micromobility / Bicycle Racks This project focuses on reducing Treatments • Bicycle racks at key neighborhood systemic neighborhood-level crash • Ladder-style crosswalk markings destinations (parks, schools, pathway risk through traffic calming, crossing • Advance stop bars visibility improvements, stop/yield control access points) • School-route emphasis where applicable consistency, and pedestrian infrastructure Why This Area Matters enhancements along E 15th Street, 12th J11c. Targeted Traffic Calming The southeast neighborhood: Avenue, and adjacent local streets. (HIN-Based Only) • Contains Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN local street Unlike corridor-scale projects, J11 is • Paint-and-post curb extensions segments intentionally focused and scalable— • Narrowing lane striping • Includes historically underserved designed to improve safety where • Neighborhood gateway treatments residential areas pedestrians are walking along roadway Speed feedback sign (where warranted) • Lacks continuous sidewalk infrastructure edges and interacting with local traffic. J11d. Pedestrian Lighting • Parallels a high-speed East Overland This project ensures Improvements (Targeted) (Tier 1 corridor) • Pedestrian-scale lighting at specific high- that future pathway • Is a priority connection to the SE risk crossings Pathway Spine (J5) investments (J5) are • Coordination with P2 Targeted HIN Addressing safety at the neighborhood accessible and usable Lighting Program level prevents risk from shifting off at the neighborhood J11e. Sidewalk Tie-Ins & ADA corridors into local streets. level. Improvements This project provides the local access • Short sidewalk segments connecting to component of the southeast connectivity SE Pathway Spine (J5) system, linking neighborhood streets to • ADA ramp upgrades at key intersections the southeast connectivity corridor: SE 254 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 378 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis J11 Pathway Spine (J5) and future grade- • Extent of sidewalk and ADA improve- Countermeasures Referenced separated crossings (J8b). ments • CM-01 High-Visibility Crosswalks Relationship to Other Projects • Lighting installation locations and • CM-03 Yield/Stop Control Improvements electrical needs J3 – East Overland Improvements • CM-07 Traffic Calming (Paint & Post) • Community-supported calming mea- J5 – Active Transportation Network • CM-04 Pedestrian Lighting sures Completion (SE Spine) • CM-05 Sidewalk & ADA Improvements • Coordination with pathway connections J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination (J5) Expected Safety Outcomes P2 – Targeted HIN Lighting Implementation Notes • Reduced pedestrian exposure on local O1 – Transportation Safety Ordinance • Improvements are targeted to HIN streets Update segments only • Lower vehicle speeds in neighborhood Implementation Strategy • Quick-build materials assumed for corridors Phase 1 – Quick-Build (0–2 Years) initial phases • Improved yielding behavior at crossings Rapid deployment at priority HIN • Designed to be community-supported • Reduced walking-in-roadway conditions locations and scalable • Improved neighborhood livability and • Stop/yield corrections • Does not include full roadway recon- connectivity • High-visibility crosswalks struction • Paint-and-post curb extensions Project Scale This project delivers • Speed feedback sign pilot Neighborhood-focused, multi-location targeted, high-impact safety improvements Phase 2 – Infrastructure (2–5 Years) safety improvements across select Tier 1 • Sidewalk tie-ins and ADA ramps and Tier 2 local streets that reduce • Pedestrian lighting installation Implementation Timing neighborhood crash • Permanent calming treatments Short-term to mid-term (phased delivery) risk while ensuring safe, (if warranted) Potential Funding Sources connected access to Planning-Level Cost Estimate • SS4A Implementation Grants the City’s future active $500,000 - $900,000 • HSIP (if eligible) transportation network. Primary Cost Drivers • CDBG (equity-based improvements) • Local Capital Improvement Program • Number of intersections receiving traffic calming Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – $ | City of Scottsbluff Public Works Connectivity & Equity Goals | Scottsbluff Police Department | HIN Analysis (Tier 1 & Tier 2 Segments | Southeast Neighborhood Residents Identified) Cost Estimate | Schools (walking routes impact) | Public Input – Neighborhood speeding $582 k & pedestrian exposure | Transit (if stops nearby) Based on 2025 costs | Safe System Approach – Local street | Planning Department speed management | SS4A Risk Factor Matrix – Exposure + Speed + Infrastructure Gaps Scottsbluff SS4A 255 Page 379 of 657 P1 256 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 380 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 257 Page 381 of 657 consistency Standardizing school-zone operations and expectations citywide • Standardized sign placement school frontages to improve driver speed P1 – School Zone • Consistent flashing beacon configuration awareness and support targeted speed Standardization Program • High-visibility crosswalk markings compliance efforts during arrival and Program Type: Citywide Operations & • Standardized pavement legends dismissal periods. Engineering Coordination/Support (“SCHOOL”, “20 MPH”) P1c – Flashing Beacon Upgrades Focus Area: All School Frontages Citywide • Clear operating hours signage Installation or upgrade of school-zone Primary Risk Factors: Speed, Visibility, School Speed Consistency Initiative flashing beacons at priority campuses to Inconsistent Controls • Review and standardize speeds citywide improve visibility of active school-zone HIN Relevance: Multiple Tier 1 & Tier 2 • Reduce variation between campuses conditions and reinforce reduced-speed Segments Adjacent to Schools • Align operating hours where appropriate compliance during school hours. P1d – Pavement Marking Refresh Project Overview Engineering Enhancements Refresh and enhancement of school-zone The School Zone Standardization Program (Coordinated with Capital Projects) pavement markings including high-visibility establishes a consistent, citywide approach • Flashing beacon installation/upgrades crosswalks, stop bars, “SCHOOL” legends, to school zone signage, speed limits, • Speed feedback signs at priority loca- speed markings, and related striping pavement markings, flashing beacons, and tions improvements at school frontages. operational treatments to improve safety • Crosswalk visibility improvements Potential Improvements Include: and driver compliance. • Sight distance enhancements • High-visibility crosswalk restriping Public input, school stakeholders, and Capital improvements coordinated through • “SCHOOL” pavement legends law enforcement consistently identified J6/J6a. • Stop bar and yield line refresh inconsistent school zone controls, • School-zone speed pavement markings speeding during arrival and dismissal, and Enforcement Coordination • Defined enforcement windows • Thermoplastic upgrades at high-use confusion regarding operating hours as key crossings safety concerns. • Data-driven deployment strategies • Reduced reliance on continuous officer This program creates a unified, predictable P1e – School Zone Compliance Audit presence system across all campuses—improving Study driver expectancy, supporting enforcement, Bilingual Outreach & Education Citywide review of school-zone operations, and reducing crash risk for students and • English/Spanish communication mate- signage consistency, crossing visibility, families. rials speed compliance, and dismissal-period conditions to identify priority operational Safety Problems Addressed • Parent and student safety messaging • Coordination with P5 – Education & and engineering improvements. • Inconsistent school zone speed limits Outreach P1f – Standard Development and signage • Driver confusion about active school Program Descriptions Development of a standardized school- hours P1a – School Zone Signage Replacement zone design package including signage • Speeding during arrival and dismissal Program placement, speed management treatments, pavement marking standards, periods Replacement and standardization of flashing beacon criteria, and operational • Visibility issues at school crossings school-zone signage, pavement legends, guidance for consistent implementation • Lack of consistency between campuses operating-hour signs, and warning citywide. • Over-reliance on police presence for devices to create a more consistent and speed control predictable school-zone environment P1g – Bilingual Outreach & Education Core Program Components across all campuses. Development of English- and Spanish- School Zone Standard Template P1b – Speed Feedback Signs language educational materials, school Develop and adopt a standard design (Rotational Units) safety messaging, and parent/student outreach focused on school-zone package for all schools including: Deployment of portable or relocatable awareness, crossing safety, and speed • Uniform speed limits during school hours radar speed feedback signs at priority compliance. 258 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 382 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis P1 P1h – Coordination Improvements Planning-Level Cost Summary Ongoing coordination between the P5 – Transportation Safety Education & Estimated Range: Outreach City, school districts, law enforcement, $150,000 – $350,000 and related partners to support phased O1 – Ordinance Update Package (school- implementation, enforcement alignment, related speed authority) (3-year rollout + initial implementation) annual review, and program updates. Implementation Phasing Program Type: Citywide Standardization & Why This Program Matters Year 1: Implementation Children are the most vulnerable road • Inventory existing conditions (signage & Cost Category: Engineering + Equipment + users. Standardization: speeds) Outreach • Improves driver expectancy • Develop standard template P1 planning-level cost estimate is based on: • Reduces confusion and inconsistency • Begin sign replacement • Number of school campuses (8 total) • Supports targeted enforcement Years 2–3: • Assumed need for signage replacement • Reduces crash severity risk • Beacon upgrades at all campuses • Builds trust with families and schools • Crosswalk and marking improvements • Beacon upgrades at priority campuses This is one of the most cost-effective and • Speed feedback deployment (assume 3–4) immediately impactful safety strategies • Speed feedback signs at high-speed Ongoing: available. locations (assume 3) • Annual review before school year • Annual refresh of pavement markings Schools Covered Enforcement coordination and updates • Bilingual outreach materials develop- • Roosevelt Elementary Performance Metrics • Bluffs Middle School ment • Speed compliance rates during school • Scottsbluff High School • Staff time for inventory, coordination, and hours • Longfellow Elementary enforcement alignment • Lincoln Heights Elementary • Reduction in school-adjacent crashes Costs reflect moderate upgrades — not full • Westmoor Elementary • Improved yielding rates at school cross- reconstruction. • St. Agnes School ings Primary Cost Drivers • Community Christian School • Reduced need for continuous enforce- • Number of schools requiring beacon Relationship to Other Projects ment presence upgrades J6 – School Circulation & Access Safety • Extent of sign replacement Program • Speed feedback sign deployment J6a – SHS Access & Parking Optimization • Pavement marking cycles J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle • Outreach and coordination needs Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – | City Public | Parents & PTA Safety & Connectivity Goals $ Works & Groups | School Safety Assessment Study Engineering | Spanish- | HIN Analysis (multiple school- Cost Estimate | Scottsbluff language adjacent segments) $293 K Public Schools community | SS4A Safe System Approach Based on 2025 costs | Private Schools organizations – Safe Speeds for Vulnerable | Scottsbluff Users Police Dept Scottsbluff SS4A 259 Page 383 of 657 Implementation Notes Planning-Level Cost Range: Bilingual Outreach Materials • Focuses on consistency, not recon- $10,000 – $20,000 (one-time) Includes: struction Sign Replacement & • English/Spanish campaign materials • Designed for phased rollout Standardization (All Campuses) • School newsletter inserts • Highly grant-eligible and low-cost Includes: • Parent communication flyers • New school zone signs • Integrates engineering, enforcement, • Social media graphics • Replacement of inconsistent signage and education Planning-Level Cost Range: • Removal of redundant/conflicting signs $5,000 – $10,000 • Supports all school-related capital • Installation labor projects Annual Enforcement & Review Basis Assumption: Coordination Program Scale • 10–15 signs per campus Includes: • Citywide program covering all public • 8 campuses total and private school campuses Planning-Level Cost Range: • Data review • Coordination meetings $3,000 – $6,000 per campus Implementation Timing • Minor adjustments Total Estimated: $24,000 – $48,000 • Short-term (initial rollout), ongoing • Mostly staff time. program thereafter Flashing Beacon Upgrades Planning-Level Cost Range: Potential Funding Sources (Priority Campuses) $3,000 – $7,000 annually Includes: Estimated Program Cost Summary • SS4A (planning + implementation) • Replace or install new beacon systems (3-Year Rollout) • HSIP (in partnership with NDOT) • Wiring or solar units Component | Estimated Range • Safe Routes to School (if applicable) • Pole installation • Standard Development $10k – $20k • Local CIP funds Assumed: • Sign Standardization $24k – $48k Countermeasures Referenced • 3–4 priority schools needing upgrade • Beacon Upgrades $45k – $100k Planning-Level Cost Range: • Speed Feedback Signs $24k – $36k • School Zone Speed Management $15,000 – $25,000 per location • Pavement Markings $16k – $32k • High-Visibility Crosswalks Total Estimated: $45,000 – $100,000 • Outreach Materials $5k – $10k • Flashing Beacons • Coordination (3 yrs) $9k – $21k Pavement Marking Refresh Total Planning-Level Estimate • Speed Feedback Signs Includes: (3-Year implementation) • Signing & Pavement Markings • “SCHOOL” legends $133,000 – $267,000 Expected Safety Outcomes • Crosswalk repainting Cost Perspective • Increased driver compliance in school • Stop bar refresh zones • Thermoplastic upgrades at high-use • Highly manageable sites • Phased over 3 years • Reduced speeds during school hours Assumed: • Strong grant eligibility • Improved yielding at crossings • 2 cycles over 3 years • Visible public impact • Reduced school-related crashes Planning-Level Cost Range: • Direct child safety benefit • Reduced reliance on enforcement $2,000 – $4,000 per campus presence Total Estimated: $16,000 – $32,000 School Zone Inventory & Speed Feedback Signs Standard Development (High-Speed Frontages) Includes: : Includes Consistency in school • Field inventory of signage & speeds • Radar speed feedback signs • Standard detail development • Installation zones is one of the • Engineering coordination • Data collection capability fastest, most effective • Speed consistency review Assumed: ways to reduce risk • 3 locations (e.g., SHS, North Broadway, • Administrative adoption for children across the Roosevelt area) : entire transportation Basis Assumption Planning-Level Cost Range: 80–120 staff hours + limited consultant system. $8,000 – $12,000 per location support Total Estimated: $24,000 – $36,000 260 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 384 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis Scottsbluff SS4A 261 Page 385 of 657 visibility Reducing nighttime severity through focused lighting upgrades • Limited visibility near rail crossings and Relationship to Other Projects P2 – Targeted HIN complex intersections • J2 – Targeted Corridor & Intersection Lighting Program Program Scope Corrections Program Type: Safety Infrastructure P2a-b. HIN-Based Lighting Assessment • J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Program • Inventory existing lighting conditions Improvements – Transit Stop Upgrade Program Focus Area: Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN • Identify gaps relative to safety standards • J7 • J8 – Rail Crossing Accessibility Upgrades Intersections and Segments • Prioritize Tier 1 locations • J11 – Southeast Neighborhood Safety Primary Risk Factors: Nighttime Visibility, • Photometric analysis & design Improvements Pedestrian Detection, Conflict Recognition P2c. and P2f. Intersection and Implementation Strategy HIN Relevance: Documented Severe Corridor Lighting Enhancements Crashes in Low-Visibility Conditions • Add or upgrade luminaires at HIN Phase 1 (0-2 Years) • Lighting inventory and prioritization Program Overview intersections • LED fixture retrofits The Targeted HIN Lighting Program • Focus on school crossings, transit areas, prioritizes safety-driven lighting and commercial corridors • Address highest-risk gaps improvements at corridors and • Improve lighting uniformity and coverage Phase 2 (2-4 Years) intersections where limited visibility • Intersection lighting upgrades P2d. Pedestrian-Scale Lighting contributes to increased crash severity. (Targeted Only) • Targeted pedestrian-scale installations Crash analysis, public input, and law Limited deployment at: enforcement feedback consistently identify Phase 3 (4+ Years) • Avoid decorative or non-safety • Rail corridor coordination poorly lit locations along Tier 1 corridors— installations as areas of concern. Segments of concern • Expansion based on ongoing HIN • Install lighting at key crossings and include: analysis transit stops • W 27th Street near Avenue I • Focus on areas without adequate Performance Metrics (Dollar Store area — HIN Tier 1 #18) illumination • Reduction in nighttime severe crashes • Segments of East Overland • Transit stops on 27th Street, Avenue I, • Improved pedestrian detection distance • School-adjacent crossings East Overland • Reduction in pedestrian near-miss • Rail-adjacent corridors • North Broadway school zone complaints • Transit stop areas along HIN routes • Southeast neighborhood crossings • Improved uniformity ratings at HIN This program focuses on targeted, high- P2e. Rail Crossing Lighting intersections impact lighting upgrades that improve Coordination Primary Cost Drivers driver detection distance, pedestrian • Coordinate with J8 Rail Crossing • Number of intersections receiving visibility, and overall roadway awareness. Improvements upgrades Improvements are limited to safety- • Improve pedestrian and vehicle visibility • Extent of LED retrofits vs new critical locations and are not intended as at crossings installations decorative or corridor-wide streetscape • Address approach lighting and detection • Electrical and utility coordination enhancements. Why This Program Matters requirements • Pedestrian-scale lighting locations Safety Problems Addressed Lighting does not prevent all crashes—but • Rail coordination complexity • Reduced pedestrian detection distance it significantly reduces crash severity by in low-light conditions improving detection and reaction time. Program Scale • Poor intersection illumination at high-risk Targeted lighting improvements are among Corridor-focused improvements across Tier locations the most cost-effective strategies for 1 and Tier 2 HIN segments • Transit riders waiting in unlit areas reducing nighttime crashes and improving Lighting improvements are particularly safety for vulnerable users, particularly in • Inconsistent lighting along HIN corridors effective in reducing severe crashes involving transit-dependent and lower-income areas. pedestrians & improving nighttime safety. 262 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 386 of 657 P2 Planning Level Cost Basis Planning-Level Cost Summary Geographic Focus: Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN 6–10 intersections Estimated Range: Segments and Intersections $60,000–$250,000 $600,000 – $1,200,000 Primary Locations Identified: Includes wiring, mounting, and electrical • W 27th Street near Avenue I tie-in. Implementation Notes • East Overland segments C. Pedestrian-Scale Lighting • Focused strictly on HIN locations • North Broadway near Bluffs Middle (Targeted Only) • Not a citywide lighting replacement School program Limited to transit stops and school • Scalable based on funding availability • Transit stops along 27th Street, Avenue I, crossings. • Can be implemented incrementally East/West Overland Pedestrian-scale pole & fixture • Strong candidate for multiple funding • Rail-adjacent crossings (see J8) $6,000–$12,000 per pole sources Planning-Level Cost Basis 10–20 locations Implementation Timing Assumptions $60,000–$240,000 Short- to mid-term with phased expansion This program focuses on safety-driven Used only where no adequate illumination exists. Potential Funding Sources lighting upgrades, not decorative D. Rail Crossing Lighting • SS4A Implementation Grants streetscape lighting. Coordination (J8) • Highway Safety Improvement Program Costs reflect: Crossing-focused illumination (HSIP) • LED retrofits $15,000–$40,000 per crossing • NDOT coordination (state corridors) • Intersection luminaires 3–5 crossings • Energy efficiency / LED retrofit programs • Targeted pedestrian-scale fixtures $45,000–$200,000 • Local capital improvement funds • Limited new pole installations where Final cost depends on railroad coordination Countermeasures Referenced necessary requirements. • Roadway Lighting Improvements • Electrical tie-ins and mobilization Expanded HIN-Focused Buildout • Intersection Lighting Enhancements All quantities are preliminary and scalable. • Pedestrian-Scale Lighting Includes rail lighting enhancements + full • Visibility & Detection Enhancements Cost Component Breakdown intersection upgrades ≈ $500,000 – $800,000 Expected Safety Outcomes A. Lighting Inventory & Assessment • Reduced nighttime crash severity Corridor lighting inventory F. LED Fixture Retrofits • Improved pedestrian visibility Tier 1 & Tier 2 corridors (Existing Poles) • Increased driver awareness and reaction $15,000–$25,000 Assumed Qty & Subtotal time Includes photometric review and LED retrofit conversion • Reduced near-miss incidents prioritization matrix. $1,200–$2,000 per fixture 40–80 fixtures • Improved safety perception along key B. Intersection Lighting corridors $50,000–$160,000 Enhancements Targeted HIN Lighting Program Cost varies depending on pole Add luminaires at HIN intersections compatibility. Program Type: Targeted Infrastructure 10,000–$25,000 per intersection Retrofit Key Partners Plan Alignment Key Partners | HIN Analysis (Tier 1 & Tier 2 segments) | City Public Works | xxx | Public Safety Stakeholder Input (Police $ | Scottsbluff Police Department Department lighting concerns) Cost Estimate | NDOT (US-26 & state facilities) | Public Input (vis concerns near W 27th & Ave I) $1 M | Transit Provider | 2026 Comprehensive Plan – Safety & | Railroad Operators Corridor Enhancement Based on 2025 costs | Local Businesses | SS4A Safe System Approach – Improve Detection & Reaction Time Scottsbluff SS4A 263 Page 387 of 657 P3 264 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 388 of 657Appendix 8 - Projects 265 Page 389 of 657 acceleration Deploying fast, scalable safety improvements on priority corridors Eligible Quick-Build Treatments • 20th Street & 11th Avenue P3 – Quick-Build (signal clarification improvements) P3a. Paint & Delineator Treatments Demonstration (Quick Build) Implementation Framework Program • Curb extensions (paint + flex posts) Step 1: Site Selection Program Type: Pilot / Rapid Deployment • Temporary refuge islands • Tier 1 or Tier 2 HIN location or document- Safety Program • Lane narrowing / edge-line treatments ed risk Geographic Focus: Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN • Turn-lane channelization • Reviewed by Public Works and Police Corridors & Intersections • Double-left-turn paint arcs Step 2: Temporary Installation Implementation Horizon: Ongoing • Stop bar relocation • Paint, posts, modular materials (annual program) • High-visibility crosswalk refresh • Rapid deployment (weeks, not months) Program Purpose • Temporary bike lanes (where applicable) Step 3: Evaluation Period • 3–12 month monitoring period The Quick-Build Demonstration Program P3b. Speed Management & Traffic • Speed, safety, and user behavior review allows the City of Scottsbluff to deploy Calming Pilots low-cost, interim safety treatments at • Gateway striping Step 4: Decision High Injury Network (HIN) locations while • Edge-line narrowing • Remove, modify, or convert to perma- longer-term capital projects are designed • Mini-roundabout pilot (site dependent) nent improvement and funded. • Temporary traffic calming devices Countermeasures Referenced These improvements: (HIN-based only) • FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures • Address immediate crash risk P3c. School-Area Quick Build • Paint-and-post curb extensions • Test design concepts before permanent Interventions • Lane narrowing and visual friction construction • Temporary pickup/drop-off circulation treatments striping • Deliver visible safety improvements • Temporary refuge islands within months rather than years • Paint-and-post curb extensions at • High-visibility crosswalk enhancements crossings This program aligns with FHWA SS4A Expected Safety Outcomes guidance promoting interim and pilot • Interim no-parking delineation • Reduced vehicle speeds at treated treatments as part of a Safe System (i.e. near bus stops) locations approach. • Modular raised crossing systems (select locations) • Improved pedestrian visibility and yield- Safety Problems Addressed ing rates P3d. Pilot Evaluation & Data Collection • Excessive speeds on HIN corridors • 3–12 month pilot evaluation period • Reduced crossing distances and expo- • Long pedestrian crossing distances sure • Speed and volume data collection • Confusing or inconsistent lane assign- • Increased driver awareness and compli- • Crash trend monitoring ments ance • Community feedback • School-area congestion and pickup • Data-driven transition to permanent conflicts Typical Locations in Scottsbluff improvements • Localized Tier 2 HIN intersection risks • Avenue I (Tier 1 HIN corridor) Program Guardrails • Community-identified “hard to cross” • 27th Street (Tier 1 HIN corridor) This program: locations • Southeast neighborhood (Tier 1 & Tier 2 • Is limited to data-supported HIN loca- local streets) tions • East Overland targeted sites • Is not a citywide traffic calming initiative • North Broadway near Bluffs Middle • Is not aesthetic or beautification-focused • School-adjacent Tier 2 HIN intersections • Prioritizes measurable safety outcomes 266 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 390 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis P3 Planning-Level Cost Summary Implementation Timing Performance Metrics 3-Year Program Total: • Short-Term: Immediate rollout (Year 1) • Speed reduction at pilot sites $380,000 • Ongoing: Annual deployment and evalu- • Change in yielding rates Estimated Annual Range ation cycle • Reduction in near-miss complaints • Modest program: $75,000–$125,000 Phasing Strategy • Conversion rate to permanent improve- ments • Moderate deployment: • Initial pilots focused on highest-risk HIN $125,000–$200,000 corridors • Crash trend over 3-year window Primary Cost Drivers • Expansion to additional Tier 2 locations Why It’s Effective based on performance • Quantity of treatment locations deployed Quick-build treatments: • Successful treatments transition to per- annually • Reduce speeds through visual narrowing manent capital projects • Use of modular elements (refuge islands, • Increase driver awareness raised crossings) A. Annual Materials & Deployment • Clarify movements Item & Planning Estimate) • Level of striping and thermoplastic Fund ( • Shorten crossing distances Striping & thermoplastic required • Allow real-world evaluation before per- • Data collection and evaluation intensity • $30,000–$75,000 annually manent investment Implementation Notes Flexible delineators Under the Safe System framework, interim • Highly scalable and adaptable to funding • $15,000–$40,000 annually treatments: availability Temporary refuge/island materials • Reduce exposure immediately • Can be deployed independently or in • $20,000–$60,000 • Address predictable risk coordination with capital projects Modular raised crossings (if used) • Support data-driven refinement • Minimal utility conflicts and design • $25,000–$60,000 per site Governance & Oversight requirements Program managed under: • Strong candidate for early SS4A imple- B. Annual Program Budget Range mentation funding • Modest Implementation: • P4 – Safety Performance Monitoring & $75,000–$125,000 per year Implementation Program Project Scale • Moderate Deployment: • Annual HIN review • Citywide program focused on Tier 1 and $125,000–$200,000 per year • Public reporting Tier 2 High Injury Network locations. • 3-Year Program: $380,000 Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | City Public Works (safety and multimodal goals) | Scottsbluff Police Department | SS4A HIN analysis Cost Estimate | NDOT (state corridors) | Project prioritization framework $380K | School Districts (as applicable) | Public input summary Based on 2025 costs | Transit provider | Stakeholder feedback | Adjacent property owners (case-specific) Scottsbluff SS4A 267 Page 391 of 657 accountability Tracking crash trends and measuring implementation progress • Enforcement may not align with crash Meet annually to: P4 – Safety trends • Review performance data Performance • Completed projects may not be • Update priorities Monitoring & evaluated for effectiveness • Adjust implementation strategy This program ensures safety remains Implementation institutionalized—not episodic. P4e. Project Performance Tracking • Before/after crash comparison Program Core Program Components (where data allows) Program Type: Ongoing Implementation & P4a. Annual Crash & HIN Review • Speed and compliance evaluation Accountability Framework • Update crash database annually • Pedestrian yielding and school zone Geographic Focus: • Recalculate HIN segments and behavior review Citywide (HIN-prioritized) intersection rankings Deliverable: Annual Safety Performance Implementation Horizon: • Identify emerging Tier 1 & Tier 2 locations Summary Continuous (Annual Review Cycle) • Evaluate 5-year rolling KSI trends Performance Metrics Program Purpose Deliverable: Annual HIN & Crash Summary • Reduction in KSI crashes The Safety Performance Monitoring & Report (5-year rolling average) Implementation Program establishes • Reduction in Tier 1 HIN segment KSIs the structure needed to ensure that P4b. Citation & Behavioral Data • Pedestrian/bicycle KSI trends Scottsbluff’s Safety Action Plan remains Review active, measurable, and accountable • Analyze citation trends (speeding, red- • School zone compliance rates over time. light running, impaired driving) • Project implementation progress This program formalizes: • Compare citation activity with HIN • Speed reduction at treated locations locations • Annual crash and High Injury Network Relationship to SS4A Goals • Identify gaps between crash risk and (HIN) updates This program ensures: enforcement focus • Project performance tracking • Measurable safety targets Supports alignment between engineering • Citation and behavioral data review and enforcement strategies. • Ongoing Safe System alignment • Interdepartmental coordination • Data-driven capital programming P4c. Annual Public Reporting • Public reporting and transparency • Continuous refinement of strategies • One-page “Safety Snapshot” This aligns directly with FHWA SS4A • Accountability beyond grant period requirements for measurable safety • HIN update summary outcomes and long-term implementation. • Project progress dashboard Implementation Considerations • GIS capacity already established through Why This Program Is Necessary • Bilingual publication (English/Spanish) Supports transparency and public trust. SS4A Crash patterns in Scottsbluff show: • Annual data pull from NDOT crash • Concentration of fatal and serious injury P4d. Implementation Task Force database crashes on Tier 1 corridors Continuation • Police citation data integration Formalize continuation of the SS4A Task • Recurring patterns • Minimal new staffing required (not isolated incidents) Force: • Can be incorporated into existing annual • Public Works • Ongoing risk on state-controlled routes reporting cycle • Elevated exposure for vulnerable users • Police Department in specific neighborhoods • Planning Department Without structured monitoring: • School District • Projects may drift over time • Transit provider • Emerging high-risk locations may go • NDOT (as appropriate) unidentified • Public health representation (optional) 268 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 392 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis P4 Planning-Level Cost Summary • Data-driven safety evaluation practices Annual Monitoring & Reporting Estimated Annual Cost: Expected Outcomes Costs $25,000–$50,000 • Improved alignment between crash Item & Planning Estimate Primary Cost Components trends and investments Crash & HIN GIS analysis • Crash & HIN GIS analysis • Measurable progress toward Vision Zero • $10,000–$20,000 annually • Citation data analysis goals Citation data analysis • Task Force coordination • More effective targeting of safety im- • $5,000–$10,000 provements • Public reporting materials Task Force coordination • Increased transparency and account- • Project performance tracking • $5,000 ability Public reporting materials Implementation Notes • Stronger future grant competitiveness • Builds on GIS and analysis framework • $3,000–$8,000 developed through SS4A Project performance tracking • Uses existing NDOT crash data and City • $5,000–$8,000 datasets • Requires minimal additional staffing • Can be integrated into existing annual reporting cycles Project Scale Citywide program supporting all SS4A projects and programs. Implementation Timing Short-Term: Immediate initiation Ongoing: Annual monitoring and reporting cycle Countermeasures Referenced • Safe System Approach – Continuous improvement • FHWA performance management guidance Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | City Public Works (safety emphasis) | Scottsbluff Police Department | SS4A High Injury Network analysis Cost Estimate | Planning Department | Project prioritization framework $50K/Year | School Districts | Stakeholder and public input Based on 2025 costs | Transit provider | NDOT | Public health partners (optional) Scottsbluff SS4A 269 Page 393 of 657 awareness Changing behavior through targeted safety education campaigns Public health partners also emphasized P5e. Micromobility Education P5 – Transportation that crash data alone does not capture • E-bike and scooter rules Safety Education & near misses or perceived safety risks, (if adopted via O1) Outreach Program reinforcing the need for education to • Pathway etiquette support infrastructure investments. • Youth helmet encouragement Program Type: Education, Behavior, and Community Engagement Core Program Components P5f. Trail Wayfinding & Connectivity Geographic Focus: Citywide P5a. Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Awareness (HIN-prioritized & school-focused) Coordination • Trail maps and wayfinding materials • Walk audits (schools and neighborhoods) • Safe crossing awareness at key locations Implementation Horizon: Ongoing (annual program) • Student pedestrian and bicycle • Coordination with tourism and health education initiatives Program Purpose • Parent awareness campaigns P5g. Community Walk Audit Program The Transportation Safety Education • School dismissal safety messaging • School-area and neighborhood walk & Outreach Program establishes a audits coordinated, bilingual (English/Spanish), P5b. Teen Driver Education Initiative • Identification of: multi-partner strategy to address • Explore partnership with WNCC for local behavioral factors contributing to fatal and driver education • Informal paths serious injury crashes in Scottsbluff. • Pursue funding for subsidized instruction • Visibility issues This program complements engineering • Integrate safety topics: • ADA gaps improvements by: • School zones • Direct input into J10 and J11 prioritization • Promoting safe driver behavior • Speed management Performance Metrics (measurable) • Supporting Safe Routes to School • Railroad crossings • School zone compliance rates initiatives • Micromobility awareness • Speed changes at targeted corridors • Addressing speeding and distracted P5c. Speed & Distracted Driving • Participation in education programs and driving Campaign events • Improving school area safety awareness • Corridor-focused messaging (US-26, • Teen driver program engagement • Supporting vulnerable populations, Avenue I, East Overland, 27th Street) • Walk audit participation including youth and older drivers • B“Slow Down for School” campaign • Public awareness indicators This program supports the Safe System • Bilingual outreach and social media (if measured) Approach by addressing human behavior • Coordination with enforcement and Equity & Public Health Integration alongside roadway design. engineering improvements PPHD contributes: Possible Funding: Why This Program Matters • Injury prevention data Crash analysis and stakeholder input • Highway Safety Office grants • Health disparity data consistently identify: • Federal safety grants • Community Health Improvement Plan • Speeding and red-light running • Public health braided funding alignment • School-area circulation confusion P5d. Older Driver Safety • Active transportation metrics • Pedestrian visibility conflicts (CarFit & Awareness) • Youth and older adult safety indicators • Increasing micromobility use • CarFit events and visibility education • Mental health & physical activity benefits • Limited driver education exposure • Nighttime driving awareness This strengthens future SS4A among teens • Railroad crossing safety implementation grant applications. Education and outreach ensure that infrastructure investments are understood, accepted, and used safely by the community. 270 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 394 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis P5 Planning-Level Cost Summary • Align campaigns with infrastructure projects: implementation Estimated Annual Cost: J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle $20,000–$60,000 Countermeasures Referenced J6 – School Circulation & Access • Safe System Approach – behavior and J6a – SHS Access Optimization 5-Year Program Total: awareness J5 – Active Transportation Network ~$205,000 • FHWA education and outreach strategies Completion Primary Cost Components • Safe Routes to School framework J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination • Campaign materials and printing • Public health-based injury prevention J11 – Southeast Neighborhood Safety • Bilingual outreach materials models • Walk audits and coordination Expected Safety Outcomes P1 – School Zone Standardization • Teen driver program support • Improved driver behavior and Education amplifies the impact of • Event-based programming (CarFit, SRTS) compliance infrastructure. Implementation Notes • Increased awareness of pedestrian and Implementation Considerations school safety • Strong partnership with Panhandle Public • Formalize PPHD partnership role • Reduced speeding and distraction- Health District (PPHD) • Maintain Task Force coordination related risks • Integrates with engineering project • Ensure bilingual outreach • Improved effectiveness of infrastructure rollout investments • Coordinate with schools & WNCC • Scalable based on grant funding • Increased community support for safety • Align with Highway Safety Office cycles availability initiatives • Use engineering rollouts as education • Aligns with Highway Safety Office and moments Relationship to Capital Projects public health funding cycles This program scales based on available Project Scale This program reinforces and amplifies funding. the effectiveness of the following capital Citywide program supporting all safety projects and high-risk user groups. Implementation Timing Short-Term: Immediate campaign rollout Ongoing: Annual program expansion and refinement Phasing Strategy • Initial focus on school zones and Tier 1 corridors • Expand to broader community and emerging safety needs Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan | Scottsbluff Police Department (walkability & connectivity themes) $ | School Districts | | SS4A Risk Analysis Cost Estimate Western Nebraska Community College | | Panhandle Public Health District PPHD Community Health $40K per year Improvement Plan | NDOT Based on 2025 costs | Stakeholder Sessions | Transit Provider (Police, Schools, Transit) | Community organizations | Public Engagement Results | Bike Walk Nebraska Scottsbluff SS4A 271 Page 395 of 657 governance Aligning local regulations with Safe System principles O1 – Transportation • Enforcement may lack clarity or authority O1e. Signalized Right-Turn-on-Red • User expectations remain inconsistent (NRTOR) Review Framework Safety Ordinance This program ensures that safety is Provide authority to evaluate and restrict Update Package reinforced through clear, consistent, and right-turn-on-red at signalized intersections enforceable regulations. based on crash data. Type: Policy / Ordinance Update • Allow data-driven restriction of right-turn- Implementation Horizon: Short–Mid Term Core Policy Components on-red Scope: Citywide O1a. Micromobility Operating Structure: Modular Adoption Framework • Focus on high-risk intersections with Standards pedestrian activity Provide clarity on where and how e-bikes Purpose Tie designation to: The Transportation Safety Ordinance and scooters may operate. • HIN ranking Update Package modernizes the City’s • Define e-bike classifications • Pedestrian activity transportation-related regulations to align • Clarify where devices may operate • Crash history with the Safe System Approach, SS4A • Establish pathway speed expectations findings, and current roadway conditions in • NDOT coordination where required • Reinforce yielding to pedestrians Scottsbluff. O1f. Stop/Yield Review Authority O1b. Bus Stop No-Parking Buffer The package addresses key policy gaps (Tier 2 HIN Focus) related to: Ordinance Provide formal process to evaluate and Improve transit stop loading safety and modify intersection control in Tier 2 HIN • Micromobility operations prevent buses from stopping in travel neighborhoods. • Transit stop safety lanes. • Establish formal process for evaluating • School zone consistency • Establish no-parking zones near transit intersection control • Intersection control authority stops • Incorporate HIN data into decision-mak- • Work zone enforcement • Improve boarding safety and visibility ing • Signalized intersection operations • Allow administrative flexibility as stop It provides a framework to ensure that locations evolve O1g. Optional Complete Streets safety improvements are institutionalized Policy O1c. ADA-at-Bus-Stop Requirement and sustained beyond individual projects Establish policy guidance for multimodal Ensure accessible boarding areas are consideration in transportation projects. Why This Is Needed incorporated during resurfacing or sidewalk work. • Provide flexible, advisory framework for Appendix A4 - Findings and stakeholder multimodal design • Require ADA boarding pads during input identified: • Align with Comprehensive Plan without resurfacing or sidewalk work • Speed-related crash severity patterns mandating all projects • Ensure accessible connections to transit • Confusion at signalized intersections Safe System Alignment O1d. Work Zone “Fines Double” • Transit stop loading conflicts This policy package institutionalizes: • Micromobility operating in high-speed Posting Authority • Speed management corridors Improve compliance in temporary traffic control zones. • Predictable user behavior • Inconsistent intersection control in Tier 2 neighborhoods • Authorize consistent work zone enforce- • Protection of vulnerable road users • Work zone compliance challenges ment signage • Data-driven decision-making Without policy alignment: • Improve compliance in temporary traffic • Equity and accessibility considerations control areas • Engineering improvements may not perform as intended 272 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 396 of 657 Planning Level Cost Basis O1 Relationship to Projects & Planning-Level Cost Summary Phasing Strategy Programs Estimated Total: • Adopt high-priority items first (school This policy package directly supports: $20,000–$45,000 zones, transit, enforcement clarity) J1 & J2 – Intersection improvements Primary Cost Components • Advance remaining components based on community support and readiness J5 – Active Transportation Network • Legal drafting and review • Maintain flexibility through modular • Public engagement and hearings J7 – Transit Stop Upgrades structure • Education and outreach materials J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Program Expected Outcomes Implementation Notes J11 – Neighborhood Safety Improvements • Clear and consistent transportation • Requires coordination with City Attorney P1 – School Zone Standardization regulations • NDOT coordination for state routes (as – Education & Outreach • Improved compliance and user behavior P5 applicable) Policy ensures that capital investments are • Enhanced effectiveness of safety invest- • Bilingual public communication recom- ments reinforced through consistent rules and mended expectations. • Reduced conflicts at intersections and • Can be adopted in phases or as a transit stops package Implementation Considerations • Stronger alignment with Safe System • Review by City Attorney Project Scale principles • Coordination with NDOT (where appli- Citywide policy framework supporting all cable) transportation safety initiatives. • Public education roll-out (bilingual) Implementation Timing • Phased adoption if desired Short-Term: Drafting and stakeholder • Incorporate into municipal code chapter review updates Mid-Term: Adoption and implementation Plan Alignment Key Partners | 2026 Comprehensive Plan $ | City Council | Panhandle Public | Appendix A4 - Findings | City Attorney Health District | SS4A Safe System Approach Cost Estimate | Public Works | NDOT (as applicable) | Stakeholder and public input $40 K | Scottsbluff Police | School Districts Based on 2025 costs Department | Community members | Transit provider Scottsbluff SS4A 273 Page 397 of 657 A8.11 detailed planning level cost estimates The following section provides detailed, planning- Not all cost estimate level cost estimates for each project, program, and line items are described policy identified in this plan. These estimates support separately within the the project sheets and are intended to guide funding strategy, phasing, and implementation—not final design detailed project and or construction. program sheets. 274 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 398 of 657PROJECTS J1 – US-26 Signal & Intersection Modernization (NDOT) Assumptions: 6 signalized intersections 2 unsignalized Tier 1 intersections Signal head replacement at 2 skewed “cage” intersections Ped timing updates at 6 locations Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Full signal modernization 1 J1a EA 2 $400,000 $800,000 1 (mast arm, heads, controller) 2 J1b Signal head & backplate upgrades EA 4 $120,000 $480,000 1 3 J1c Protected/permissive phasing updates LS 1 $210,000 $210,000 1 4 J1d Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) programming LS 1 $45,000 $45,000 1 High-visibility crosswalks 5 J1e Approach 8 $7,500 $60,000 1 (continental markings) 6 J1f Stop bar refresh & relocation Approach 12 $3,000 $36,000 1 Pedestrian refuge island upgrade 7 J1g EA 1 $75,000 $75,000 1 (27th St) Corridor signal timing & progression study 8 J1h LS 1 $125,000 $125,000 1 (US-26) Unsignalized intersection evaluation (warrants & 9 J1i LS 1 $30,000 $30,000 1 control review) Construction Subtotal: $1,861,000 Contingency (25%): $465,250 Detailed cost components are provided in Appendix A8 (J1a–J1h). Engineering (15%): $279,150.00 Estimated Total: $2,605,400 J2 – City Corridor & Intersection Safety Corrections Includes Ave I, 27th, Tier 2 signing corrections Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Double left-turn striping 1 J2a EA 1 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 1 (Ave I @ 33rd) NRTOR review & signal reprogramming 2 J2b LS 1 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 1 (Ave I @ 33rd) Signal timing & operations review 3 J2c LS 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 1 (Ave I) Directional arrow signage 4 J2d EA 2 $ 350 $ 700 1 (20th & 11th mast arm) Stop/Yield corrections 5 J2e Location 10 $ 5,000 $ 50,000 1 (Tier 2 HIN – 10 locations) High-visibility crosswalk refresh 6 J2f EA 12 $ 6,000 $ 72,000 2 (continental markings) 7 J2g Minor ADA curb ramp corrections EA 8 $ 9,000 $ 72,000 2 Construction Subtotal: $279,700 Contingency (25%): $69,925 Engineering (15%): $41,955.00 Estimated Total: $391,580 Appendix 8 - Projects 275 Page 399 of 657 J3 – East Overland Targeted Improvements (Tier 1 HIN corridor – 3 targeted locations) Locations: 1. 9th Ave & East Overland (skewed signalized intersection) 2. Mid-block crossing east of 14th Ave (apartment ↔ Dollar Store) 3. 21st Ave & East Overland gateway area 4. East of 21st Ave in East Overland gateway area Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Signal modification & geometric operations refinement 1 J3a LS 1 $ 75,000 $75,000 1 (9th Ave & East Overland – phasing, skew evaluation, striping/signing updates) High-visibility crosswalks 2 J3b Approach 2 $ 7,500 $ 15,000 1 (9th Ave approaches) High-visibility crosswalks 3 J3c Approach 4 $ 7,500 $ 30,000 1 (21st Ave intersection – 4 approaches) RRFB mid-block crossing 4 J3d Crossing 1 $ 65,000 $ 65,000 1 (east of 21st Ave) Corridor striping corrections 5 J3e LS 1 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 1 (lane/channelization adjustments) 6 J3f Minor curb & ADA ramp upgrades EA 4 $ 20,000 $ 80,000 1 Construction Subtotal:$ 305,000 Contingency (25%):$ 76,250 Engineering (15%):$ 45,750 Estimated Total: $ 427,000 Add-alternate items reflect improvements that may be implemented if future demand, land use, or pedestrian activity warrants additional investment. Mid-block crossing cost includes RRFB equipment, high-visibility markings, and associated signing. Add-Alternate (Optional RRFB at Mid-block Pedestrian Crossing at E. Overland & 14th Avenue) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier RRFB mid-block pedestrian crossing 7 J3g Location 1 $ 65,000 $ 65,000 3 (east of 14th Ave) High-visibility crosswalk markings 8 J3h Approach 2 $ 7,500 $ 15,000 3 (north & south approaches) 9 J3i Pedestrian Lighting Enhancements Location 1 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 3 Construction Subtotal:$ 98,000 Contingency (25%):$ 24,500 Engineering (15%):$ 14,700 Add-Alt Total (with contingency & engineering): Estimated Total: $ 137,200 Add-Alternate (Optional HV Crosswalks at E. Overland & 5th Avenue) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier J3e. E Overland @ 5th Avenue (5 lane) High-visibility crosswalks 10 J3j (4 approaches) Approach 4 $ 7,500 $ 30,000 3 276 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 400 of 657J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety Improvements (Tier 1 HIN corridor) Scope: Raised crossing Add-Alternate RRFB Costs are organized by primary construction School-zone compliance upgrades components and reference project elements (J4a–J4f). Median adjustments for turning clarity Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J4a Raised crosswalk (full-width) EA 1 $ 110,000 $ 110,000 2 2 J4b High-visibility striping & advance markings LS 1 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1 3 J4c Median modification (turning clarity) LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 2 4 J4d School zone signing refresh LS 1 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 1 Includes advance school crossing signs, school crossing signs, and state law crosswalk signs Pedestrian lighting enhancement 5 J4e EA 2 $ 18,000 $ 36,000 2 (crossing focus) Base Construction Subtotal:$ 338,000 Estimate reflects full build-out of proposed safety treatments. Contingency (25%):$ 84,500 Engineering (15%):$ 50,700 Estimated Total: $ 473,200 Costs reflect primary capital improvements. Additional school-zone and operational enhancements may be implemented as part of corridor-wide or programmatic efforts. Add-Alternate (Optional RRFB at Raised Crossing) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 6 J4f RRFB installation Location 1 $ 70,000 $70,000 3 Add-Alternate Total (with contingency & engineering): ~$95,000 RRFB cost reflects full crossing installation including equipment, signing, high-visibility crosswalk, and activation systems. Appendix 8 - Projects 277 Page 401 of 657 J5 – Active Transportation Network Completion Broken into subcomponents: SE Pathway Spine South Beltline Completion US-26 East Parallel Path Perimeter Bikeways Monument Connectors Quick-Build Bike Lanes Approx Item Ref Component Unit Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Length East US-26 Grade Separation Feasibility Engineering study, crossing & pathway 1 J5a LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 1 alternatives analysis, connectivity evaluation, preliminary cost model SE Pathway Spine 2 J5b (10–12 ft shared-use path, grading, drainage, Mile 1.2 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,560,000 1 ADA ramps) (Southeast connectivity corridor) South Beltline Path Extension 3 J5c Mile 0.8 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,120,000 1 (shared-use path along high-speed corridor) US-26 East Parallel Path 4 J5d Mile 1 $ 1,200,000 $ 1,200,000 3 (shared-use path parallel to highway) Perimeter Bikeways 5 J5e paved shoulders or shared-use path (context Mile 2 $ 450,000 $ 900,000 2 dependent); Ave I, 42nd St, 21st Ave) Monument Pathway Access Connectors (paired ramps on both sides of roadway to eliminate at- 6 J5f grade crossings at Avenue I; EA 2 $ 175,000 $ 350,000 2 includes grading, ADA transitions, and underpass tie-ins) Quick-Build Bikeway Treatments 7 J5g Mile 3 $ 75,000 $ 225,000 1 (striping, delineators, pilot segments) 8 J5h Bike Route & Wayfinding Signage LS 1 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1 9 J5i Shared Roadway / “Share the Road” Signage LS 1 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 1 Construction Subtotal: $ 5,540,000 Contingency (25%):$ 1,385,000 Engineering (15%):$ 831,000 This program is intentionally scalable. Individual components Estimated Total: $ 7,756,000 may be advanced independently based on funding availability, coordination, and implementation readiness. Southeast connectivity corridor: see also J8b and J11. Add-Alternate (Pedestrian Bridge) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Grade-Separated Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing 10 J5j Location 1 $ 8,000,000 $ 8,000,000 3 (US-26 near 14th Ave) Construction Subtotal: $ 8,000,000 Concept-level estimate. Final cost dependent on Contingency (25%):$ 2,000,000 structure type, span, and NDOT coordination. Engineering (15%):$ 1,200,000 Add-Alternate Total (with contingency & engineering): Estimated Total: $ 11,200,000 Estimate includes full construction, engineering, and contingency. Final cost subject to structure type, span length, and NDOT coordination. 278 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 402 of 657J6 – School Circulation & Access Safety Includes Roosevelt, Longfellow, Bluffs Middle, Lincoln Heights, Community Christian, St Agnes Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J6b School zone signage upgrades School Area 5 $ 35,000 $175,000 1 2 J6c High-visibility crosswalks EA 3 $ 18,000 $54,000 1 RRFB installations 3 J6d (select locations if warranted; Location 3 $ 65,000 $195,000 3 i.e. 24th St & 5th Ave, W Overland, Ave I) Parking reconfiguration 4 J6e (elementary campuses; pickup/drop-off LS 2 $ 175,000 $350,000 3 circulation improvements) 5 J6f Pullout at Bluffs Middle School (east side) EA 1 $ 250,000 $250,000 3 Campus circulation and operational review (multi- 6 J6g LS 1 $ 40,000 $40,000 2 campus coordination) 7 J6h Pedestrian lighting enhancements Location 1 $ 18,000 $18,000 2 8 J6i Sidewalk / ADA improvements LS 1 $ 20,000 $20,000 1 Construction Subtotal: $ 1,102,000 This project is structured as a scalable bundle of campus-specific Contingency (25%):$ 275,500 improvements that can be implemented incrementally based on Engineering (15%):$ 165,300 need, coordination, and funding availability. Estimated Total: $ 1,542,800 J6a – SHS Access & Parking Optimization (High school event-scale daily circulation issue) Scope: Residential parking and circulation strategies within adjacent neighborhoods Internal lot circulation redesign will be coordinated with the School District Parking expansion feasibility and may include policy or programmatic Connector road conceptual alignment actions outside this capital estimate. Signal timing review at 2nd Ave & E 27th St Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Parking re-striping & internal circulation 1 J6a1 Lump 1 $ 150,000 $150,000 2 modifications 2 J6a2 Lot expansion (approx. 80 spaces) Lump 1 $ 800,000 $800,000 3 Traffic signal retiming 3 J6a3 Lump 1 $ 35,000 $35,000 1 (2nd Avenue & East 27th Street) Connector road feasibility study with cost 4 J6a4 Lump 1 $ 150,000 $150,000 2 estimate Construction Subtotal (without connector build): $ 1,135,000 Contingency (25%):$ 283,750 Engineering (15%):$ 170,250 Estimated Total (Phase 1 + feasibility) $ 1,589,000 Future Add-Alternate (Not Included Above): Connector Road Construction (Conceptual)) Approx. 3-block urban collector with utilities Estimated range: $2.5M – $3.5M Final alignment, right-of-way impacts, and construction cost dependent on feasibility study outcomes. Appendix 8 - Projects 279 Page 403 of 657 J7 – Transit Stop Upgrade Program (HIN Corridors: 27th St, Avenue I, 20th St, East/West Overland) Initial Program Build-Out Assumptions: (6–10 Priority Stops) 6 donated shelters to install 10 additional ADA boarding pads 8 lighting upgrades 3 potential minor pullout feasibility designs (not full construction) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J7a ADA boarding pads (new concrete) EA 10 $ 18,000 $180,000 2 2 J7b Install donated shelters (pad + install) EA 6 $ 28,000 $168,000 1 3 J7c Pedestrian-scale lighting at stops EA 8 $ 12,000 $96,000 3 4 J7d Stop relocation / signing improvements EA 10 $ 5,000 $50,000 2 5 J7e Minor curb work / access improvements EA 6 $ 20,000 $120,000 1 7 J7f Pullout feasibility design studies EA 3 $ 40,000 $120,000 2 Program Subtotal:$ 734,000 Costs reflect initial improvements at approximately 6–10 priority Contingency (20%):$ 146,800 transit stops. Program can be expanded incrementally as funding Engineering (15%):$ 110,100 becomes available. Estimated Total: $ 990,900 A 20% contingency is applied to reflect the relatively low- complexity, repeatable nature of transit stop improvements and the limited uncertainty compared to corridor or reconstruction projects. J8 – Rail Crossing Accessibility Upgrades (7 Tier 1 crossings, 1 Tier 2 crossing) Engineering is estimated at 18% due to coordination requirements with BNSF, Assumptions: NDOT, and railroad crossing design 8 crossings total standards. Mix of ADA improvements, surface rehab, lighting upgrades Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J8c Surface rehabilitation EA 4 $ 120,000 $ 480,000 1 2 J8d ADA pedestrian rail path upgrades EA 8 $ 35,000 $ 280,000 1 3 J8e Pedestrian delineation enhancements EA 4 $ 7,500 $ 30,000 1 4 J8f Crossing lighting improvements EA 6 $ 30,000 $ 180,000 1 5 J8g Pavement markings & signage refresh EA 8 $ 12,000 $ 96,000 1 6 J8h Advance warning signage improvements EA 16 $ 900 $ 14,400 2 Base Construction Subtotal:$ 1,080,400 Contingency (25%):$ 270,100 Additional treatments such as skew-approach visibility Engineering (18%):$ 194,472 improvements, channelization, and corridor-wide studies are addressed separately or incorporated into project-level design Estimated Total: $ 1,544,972 and are not fully itemized in this construction estimate. 280 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 404 of 657J8a – In-Town Grade Separation Feasibility Study Study Only – No Construction Included Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J8a1 Traffic & rail operations analysis LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 2 2 J8a2 Concept alternatives development LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 2 3 J8a3 Cost estimating & funding strategy LS 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 2 4 J8a4 Public engagement process LS 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 2 Estimated Study Total: $400,000 Costs reflect a planning-level study scope. A reduced contingency is assumed due to the defined and limited nature of feasibility study tasks. Estimated study cost aligns with the upper end of typical planning-level ranges due to the complexity of rail coordination and corridor evaluation. J8b – Ped/Bike Rail Separation Feasibility (SE Pathway) Study Only – No Construction Included Focused Study – SE Pathway Rail Crossing Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J8b1 Concept design alternatives LS 1 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 2 2 J8b2 Structural feasibility assessment LS 1 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 2 3 J8b3 Environmental screening LS 1 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 3 4 J8b4 Cost estimating & phasing LS 1 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 2 Estimated Study Total: $300,000 Costs reflect a planning-level study scope. A reduced contingency is assumed due to the defined and limited nature of feasibility study tasks. Southeast connectivity corridor: see also J5 and J11. J9 – Pathway Master Plan Foundation plan supporting J5 – Active Planning document. Transportation Network Completion Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J9a Network inventory & gap analysis LS 1 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1 2 J9b Risk & exposure analysis LS 1 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1 3 J9c Alignment development LS 1 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 1 4 J9f Public engagement & walk audits LS 1 $ 65,000 $ 65,000 1 5 J9c Wayfinding & signage strategy LS 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 1 6 J9d Cost phasing & funding strategy LS 1 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 1 7 J9e Policy and development integration LS 1 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 1 8 J9g Draft & final document production LS 1 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 1 Estimated Plan Total: $300,000 Costs reflect a comprehensive planning-level document including analysis, engagement, and implementation strategy development. Appendix 8 - Projects 281 Page 405 of 657 J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination Assume: 8,000 LF new sidewalk 40 ADA ramps Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 J10a New sidewalk (5’) LF 8000 $ 90 $720,000 1 2 J10b ADA curb ramps EA 40 $ 8,500 $340,000 1 3 J10c Spot fixes $ - Construction Subtotal: $ 1,060,000 Contingency (20%):$ 212,000 Engineering (15%):$ 159,000 Estimated Total: $ 1,431,000 J11 – Southeast Neighborhood Safety Improvements (E 15th St, 10th Ave, Tier 1 & 2 HIN local streets) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Inter- 1 J11a Stop/Yield review & signing corrections 6 $ 6,000 $ 36,000 1 section Inter- 2 J11b High-visibility Crosswalk Treatments 3 $ 18,000 $ 54,000 1 section Inter- 3 J11c Quick-build curb extensions (paint & post) 4 $ 35,000 $ 140,000 1 section Inter- 4 J11d Neighborhood pedestrian lighting improvements 6 $ 22,000 $ 132,000 2 section Sidewalk Tie-Ins - tie in sidewalks to SE Pathway 6 J11e LF 100 $ 90 $ 9,000 1 Spine 5 J11f Pavement marking refresh LS 1 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 1 Construction Subtotal:$ 416,000 Contingency (25%):$ 104,000 Engineering (15%):$ 62,400 Southeast connectivity corridor: see also J5 and J8b. Estimated Total: $ 582,400 282 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 406 of 657PROGRAMS Programs are mostly annual operating or phased implementation. P1 – School Zone Standardization Program (Citywide, multi-campus consistency) Assume 6 primary campuses. Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier School 1 P1a School zone signage replacement program 5 $ 9,600 $ 48,000 1 Areas 2 P1b Speed feedback signs (rotational units) EA 3 $ 12,000 $ 36,000 1 3 P1c Flashing beacon upgrades Schools 4 $ 25,000 $ 100,000 1 4 P1d Pavement marking refresh LS 1 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 1 Implementation Subtotal: $ 216,000 Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 5 P1e School zone compliance audit study LS 1 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 1 6 P1f Standard development Program 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 1 7 P1g Bilingual outreach & education Years 3 $ 2,500 $ 7,500 1 8 P1h Coordination Years 3 $ 3,000 $ 9,000 1 Program Subtotal: $76,500 Estimated Program Total: $292,500 Costs reflect a 3-year phased rollout of school zone standardization measures across primary campuses. P2 – Targeted HIN Lighting Program (Focused on documented lighting gaps) Assume: 10 intersection lighting upgrades 8 corridor infill segments A. Planning & Design Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 P2a HIN-Based Lighting Assessment LS 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 1 2 P2b Photometric analysis & design LS 1 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 1 B. Implementation (Capital Improvements) Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 3 P2c Intersection lighting enhancements Location 10 $ 25,000 $ 250,000 1 Pole & 4 P2d Pedestrian-Scale Lighting (Targeted Only) 10 $ 8,000 $ 80,000 1 fixture 5 P2e Rail Crossing Lighting Coordination Crossing 3 $ 25,000 $ 75,000 1 6 P2f Corridor infill lighting (mid-block) Location 8 $ 22,000 $ 176,000 1 7 P2g LED conversion where needed LS 1 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 1 Construction Subtotal:$ 766,000 Contingency (20%):$ 153,200 Costs reflect targeted, safety-driven lighting improvements at High Injury Engineering (15%):$ 114,900 Network locations and are scalable based on funding availability. Estimated Total: $ 1,034,100 Appendix 8 - Projects 283 Page 407 of 657 P3 – Quick-Build Demonstration Program Assume 3 pilots per year over 3 years. Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 P3a Paint & post curb extensions (quick-build) Location 6 $ 25,000 $150,000 1 2 P3b Temporary refuge islands (modular) Location 3 $ 35,000 $105,000 1 3 P3c Striping & lane reconfiguration treatments LS 1 $ 75,000 $75,000 1 4 P3d Pilot evaluation & data collection LS 1 $ 50,000 $50,000 1 3-Year Program Total: $380,000 (Average annual program cost: approximately $125,000) Costs reflect multi-location deployment of quick-build treatments using paint, thermoplastic, delineators, and modular materials, along with program-level evaluation over a 3-year period. “Location” represents a typical intersection, segment, or treatment site and may include multiple individual elements (e.g., both corners of an intersection or full crossing treatments). P4 – Safety Performance Monitoring & Implementation Program 5-year monitoring cycle. Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 P4a Annual crash/HIN update Years 5 $ 18,000 $ 90,000 1 2 P4b Citation data integration & analysis Years 5 $ 10,000 $ 50,000 1 3 P4c Annual public reporting (Safety Snapshot) Years 5 $ 8,000 $ 40,000 1 4 P4d Task force coordination & facilitation Years 5 $ 6,000 $ 30,000 1 5 P4e Project performance tracking & evaluation Years 5 $ 8,000 $ 40,000 1 5-Year Program Total: $250,000 (Average annual program cost: approximately $50,000) Costs reflect ongoing annual monitoring, analysis, coordination, and reporting activities over a 5-year implementation cycle. 284 Appendix 8 - Projects Page 408 of 657P5 – Transportation Safety Education & Outreach Program Assume 5-year implementation. Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier Safe Routes to School coordination 1 P5a Program 1 $ - $0 1 (partner-led) Teen driver education partnership development 2 P5b Years 5 $ 15,000 $ 75,000 1 (bilingual) 3 P5d CarFit & older driver events (bilingual) Years 5 $ 3,000 $ 15,000 1 4 P5c Speed & distraction campaigns (bilingual) Years 5 $ 20,000 $ 100,000 1 5 P5e Micromobility education (bilingual) Program 1 $ - $ - 1 Trail wayfinding & connectivity awareness 6 P5f Program 1 $ - $ - 1 (partner-led) Community walk audit program (partner with 7 P5g Audits 3 5000 $ 15,000 1 PPHD) 5-Year Program Total: $205,000 Certain program components are anticipated to be led or supported by partner organizations (e.g., PPHD, regional stakeholders) or integrated into related initiatives. Costs shown reflect primary City-led program investments. POLICIES O1 – Transportation Safety Ordinance Update Package Item Ref Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Subtotal Tier 1 O1 Transportation Safety Ordinance Update LS 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 1 2 O1 Legal drafting & ordinance development LS 1 $ 7,500 $ 7,500 1 3 O1 Stakeholder workshops & coordination LS 1 $ 7,500 $ 7,500 1 4 O1 Public outreach & materials (bilingual) LS 1 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 1 Estimated Total: $40,000 Individual ordinance components (O1a–O1g) are included within the overall legal drafting and policy development scope. Appendix 8 - Projects 285 Page 409 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 286 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 410 of 657 A9 countermeasures 287 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 411 of 657 Appendix 9 Table of Contents A9.1 Best Practice Tools & Tactics ........................................................................ 289 A9.2 Examples of Proven Safety Treatments Referenced by the Scottsbluff Countermeasures .........................................................................................289 Countermeasure Visual Examples ...........................................................................292 CM-1: High-Visibility Pedestrian Crossings & Stop Bars .......................................... 294 CM-2: Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) .............................................295 CM-3: Signal Visibility & Operations Improvements ...............................................296 CM-4: School Zone Safety Treatments ..................................................................... 297 CM-5: Pedestrian-Scale & Intersection Lighting Improvements ............................ 298 CM-6: Quick-Build & Interim Safety Measures ........................................................299 CM-7: Traffic Calming & Speed Management .........................................................300 CM-8: Sidewalk & ADA Accessibility Improvements ................................................301 CM-9: Rail Crossing Safety Improvements ..............................................................302 CM-10: Transit Stop Safety & Accessibility Improvements ...................................... 303 288 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 412 of 657A9.1 Best Practice Tools & Tactics A9.2 Examples of Proven Safety Ten safety countermeasures used throughout the Treatments Referenced by the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan are provided and represent proven, FHWA-endorsed strategies Scottsbluff Countermeasures selected to directly address the most common crash The following list summarizes examples of types, risk factors, and community safety concerns FHWA, NACTO, and nationally recognized identified through data analysis and engagement. safety treatments that inform and support the Each countermeasure page includes a brief ten countermeasures used in this plan. These description of the treatment, illustrative graphics, treatments are not additional countermeasures, and examples of typical applications. The intent but illustrative examples of specific tools that may is to provide a clear, consistent reference that be applied individually or in combination under the supports project development, design scoping, and broader countermeasure framework described. implementation without prescribing site-specific Intersection Safety (CM-1, CM-3, CM-5) engineering solutions. ● Signal modernization & visibility Countermeasure pages also summarize the roadway ● Left-turn phasing (protected / flashing yellow arrow) contexts and conditions where each treatment is ● Advance signal-ahead warning flashers most effective, including intersections, corridors, ● Stop bars & high-visibility markings school zones, rail crossings, and transit areas. Where applicable, quick-build and permanent ● Intersection lighting implementation options are identified to support Pedestrian Crossings (CM-1, CM-2, CM-6) phased delivery and funding flexibility. ● RRFBs References and links to additional design guidance ● PHBs / HAWKs are provided to support further technical review ● Median refuges during project development. These include applicable ● Curb extensions FHWA resources, MUTCD guidance, and other ● Raised crossings nationally recognized best practices aligned with the School Zone Safety (CM-4, CM-1, CM-7) Safe System Approach. ● Standardized school zone treatments Finally, each countermeasure is mapped to the ● School RRFBs & flashing beacons primary crash types and safety issues it addresses, ● Pick-up/drop-off circulation changes illustrating how individual treatments contribute Corridor & Speed Management (CM-7, CM-3, CM-5) to reducing fatal and serious injury crashes. This alignment reinforces the plan’s data-driven approach ● Road diets & lane narrowing and clarifies how countermeasures are applied across ● Speed feedback signs multiple projects, as documented in the Project– ● Traffic calming elements Countermeasure Crosswalk in Appendix A8 - Projects. ● Corridor lighting Accessibility & Sidewalks (CM-8, CM-5) ● ADA curb ramps ● Sidewalk gap closure ● Pedestrian-scale lighting Rail & Transit Safety (CM-9, CM-10, CM-5) ● Rail crossing upgrades ● Transit stop access & lighting Quick-Build Safety (CM-6) ● Paint-and-post curb extensions ● Interim medians ● Temporary lane reconfiguration 289 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 413 of 657 Countermeasures are applied The Countermeasure Summary Matrix, individually or in combination shown in Table A9-1, summarizes the primary countermeasures included in the Scottsbluff across multiple projects, as shown SS4A Safety Action Plan. These treatments were in Table A9.1, at right, and is selected based on crash analysis, High Injury applied through one or more of the Network (HIN) findings, public and stakeholder input, and alignment with FHWA-endorsed Safe ten countermeasures described System strategies. Detailed descriptions and on the following pages and implementation guidance for each countermeasure referenced in Table A8-6, Project– are provided in the Countermeasure Toolbox Countermeasure <—> Crosswalk in section of this plan. Appendix A8 - Projects. 290 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 414 of 657 Table A9-1. Countermeasure Summary Matrix Implemen- Counter- Crash Types / Risk Typical Application CM ID Primary Safety Purpose tation measure Factors Addressed Contexts Flexibility Signalized and High-Visibility Improve pedestrian Pedestrian injury; unsignalized Pedestrian CM-1 visibility and driver angle collisions; intersections; school Both Crossings & yielding at conflict points failure-to-yield areas; downtown Stop Bars crossings Increase driver Rectangular Pedestrian injury; awareness and Multilane or high-speed Rapid Flashing failure-to-yield; mid- CM-2 compliance at crossings; school routes; Permanent Beacons block crossing uncontrolled pedestrian trail crossings (RRFBs) conflicts crossings Signal Visibility Reduce red-light running Angle collisions; rear- Signalized intersections; CM-3 & Operations and improve predictable end crashes; red- major arterials; state Permanent Improvements intersection operations light running routes School Zone Slow vehicle speeds and Pedestrian injury; School zones; routes to CM-4 Safety improve safety for speeding; drop- school; youth activity Both Treatments children near schools off/pick-up conflicts areas Pedestrian- Improve nighttime Nighttime crashes; Scale & Intersections; corridors; visibility of pedestrians, pedestrian injury; CM-5 Intersection school areas; rail Permanent crossings, and conflict visibility-related Lighting crossings; transit stops areas crashes Improvements Speed-related Quick-Build & Test and deploy rapid, Neighborhoods; crashes; pedestrian CM-6 Interim Safety low-cost safety corridors; school areas; Both conflicts; visibility Measures improvements downtown issues Speed-related Traffic Calming Reduce vehicle speeds Residential streets; crashes; loss-of- CM-7 & Speed and cut-through traffic to downtown corridors; Both control; pedestrian Management lower crash severity school areas injury Sidewalk & ADA Provide continuous, Pedestrian injury; Citywide pedestrian CM-8 Accessibility accessible pedestrian accessibility barriers; network; routes to Permanent Improvements routes for all users trip/fall risk schools, parks, transit Reduce conflicts and Rail Crossing Rail-vehicle crashes; At-grade rail crossings; improve safety at rail- CM-9 Safety pedestrian conflicts; rail corridors; emergency Permanent vehicle and rail- Improvements visibility issues access routes pedestrian crossings Transit Stop Pedestrian injury; Improve safety, visibility, Safety & boarding/alighting Bus stops; transit CM-10 and access for transit Permanent Accessibility conflicts; nighttime corridors; activity centers riders Improvements crashes Both = Countermeasure may be implemented as a quick-build treatment or permanent installation, depending on context and funding. Countermeasure details, example applications, and design guidance are provided in Appendix A9 - Countermeasures. 291 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 415 of 657 Countermeasure Visual Examples Typical applications of key safety countermeasures used throughout the Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan. CM-1 CM-4 CM-2 CM-5 CM-3 292 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 416 of 657 CM-6 CM-8 CM-7 CM-9 CM-10 CM-1 — High-visibility continental crosswalk CM-6 — Quick-build curb extension (paint & post) CM-2 — RRFB pedestrian crossing CM-7 — Traffic calming / lane narrowing CM-3 — Signal backplates with reflective border CM-8 — ADA-compliant curb ramp and sidewalk CM-4 — School zone crossing and signage CM-9 — Active rail crossing with warning devices CM-5 — Pedestrian-scale lighting CM-10 — Accessible transit stop improvements Photos represent typical applications and may vary based on site conditions. 293 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 417 of 657 CM-1: High- Where It Works Best Implementation • Signalized and stop-controlled Considerations Visibility intersections • NDOT Pedestrian • School zones and routes to Coordination: school Required for crossings on or Crossings & adjacent to US-26 or other state • Downtown and commercial facilities Stop Bars corridors with pedestrian activity • Quick-Build Friendly: Can be High-visibility pedestrian crossings • Multilane or higher-speed installed rapidly using durable use enhanced pavement roadways where crossing paint or thermoplastic markings, advance stop/yield distance and exposure are bars, and supplemental signage higher • Maintenance: Requires periodic refresh; should be included in to improve driver awareness and • Transit stop access points and annual striping programs yielding behavior at locations trail crossings where people walk across streets. • Design Details: Stop bars should Treatments typically include ladder Why It’s Effective be placed per MUTCD guidance, or continental crosswalk markings, High-visibility markings and set back from crosswalks to refreshed stop bars set back from properly placed stop bars increase improve sight distance and crosswalks, and advance yield the conspicuity of pedestrian pedestrian comfort markings on multilane approaches. crossings and reinforce where Order-of-Magnitude Cost drivers are expected to stop. These improvements are among FHWA guidance recognizes these Range (Planning Level) the most cost-effective pedestrian treatments as proven measures • High-visibility crosswalk striping: safety countermeasures and are for improving yielding rates and low thousands per crossing often implemented as quick-build reducing pedestrian crashes, treatments or paired with larger • Stop bar installation / refresh: low particularly when paired with intersection and corridor upgrades. cost per approach lighting or beacon enhancements. • Advance yield markings and Safety Problems Addressed From a Safe System perspective, signage: low cost per approach • Poor driver yielding compliance these treatments: (Exact costs vary by material type, at marked and unmarked roadway width, and number of crossings • Improve roadway user understanding (clear approaches.) • Rear-end and angle crashes expectations) caused by late braking or Related Scottsbluff Projects • Reduce speed at conflict points unclear stopping locations • J1 – US-26 Intersection • Pedestrian visibility issues, • Increase time and distance for Improvements driver reaction especially at night or during • J4 – Intersection Visibility & adverse weather Typical Applications in Stop-Bar Upgrades • Inconsistent crossing treatments Scottsbluff • J8 – Citywide School Zone that create driver confusion • US-26 intersections and crossing Safety Upgrades Examples of Proven locations with documented rear- • J10 – School Area Pedestrian Treatments end and angle crashes Crossing & ADA Improvements • High-visibility crosswalk • School-adjacent crossings near • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk & markings (ladder, continental) Roosevelt, Bluffs Middle School, Curb Extension Program and Scottsbluff High School • Advance stop bars • J20 – Bus Stop and Transit • Downtown Broadway crossings Access Upgrades • In-street pedestrian signs with high pedestrian volumes This countermeasure focuses on • Yield/stop line relocation • Transit stop crossings along passive visibility and compliance • Crossing delineation at Avenue I, East Overland, and treatments such as pavement intersections and mid-block 27th Street markings and stop bars, and • Locations identified through the does not include active warning High Injury Network (HIN) and devices such as RRFBs, which are public comment map addressed separately. 294 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 418 of 657 CM-2: Where It Works Best Implementation • Mid-block crossings on arterial Considerations Rectangular and collector roadways • NDOT Coordination: Required Rapid • School crossings and youth for installations on US-26 or state-maintained corridors Flashing activity areas • Trail and pathway crossings of • Power Source: Solar units work Beacons major streets well in open corridors; shaded or urban locations may require • Transit access points with fre- (RRFBs) hard-wired power quent pedestrian demand Rectangular Rapid Flashing Bea- • Supplemental Treatments: • Multilane roadways without full cons (RRFBs) are pedestrian-ac- Effectiveness is enhanced signal control tivated warning devices that use when paired with high-visibility high-intensity, rapid-flashing LED Why It’s Effective markings, median refuges, or lights mounted on pedestrian RRFBs are among the most lighting crossing signs. When activated, effective pedestrian crossing • Maintenance: Periodic inspec- RRFBs significantly increase treatments available short of full tion of flash patterns, lenses, driver awareness and yielding signalization. FHWA research and power systems is required at crossings where traditional has shown that RRFBs can Order-of-Magnitude Cost signage alone has proven insuf- dramatically improve driver ficient. yielding behavior, particularly Range (Planning Level) RRFBs are commonly installed on higher-speed and multilane • RRFB installation (complete at mid-block crossings and roadways. crossing): tens of thousands per location (Cost varies by uncontrolled intersections Within the Safe System frame- number of beacons, median in- and can be solar-powered or work, RRFBs: stallations, and power source.) hard-wired depending on site • Increase visibility and aware- conditions. ness at critical conflict points Related Scottsbluff Projects Safety Problems Addressed • Provide active warning rath- • J2 – US-26 & US-71 Crossing • Low driver yielding rates at er than passive reliance on Safety Upgrades uncontrolled crossings signage • J8 – Citywide School Zone • High-speed multilane crossings • Reduce severity risk by encour- Safety Upgrades with limited pedestrian protec- aging earlier deceleration and • J9 – School Access & Conges- tion compliance tion Management • School and trail crossings Typical Applications in • J10 – School Area Pedestrian where pedestrian volumes are Scottsbluff Crossing & ADA Improvements concentrated • School crossings near Roos- • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk • Locations with document- evelt, Bluffs Middle School, and & Curb Extension Program ed pedestrian crashes or Community Christian School • J15 – Downtown—WNCC— near-misses • Mid-block crossings along YMCA Pathway Loop • Poor visibility conditions, Broadway and East Overland including nighttime or skewed • Trail crossings connecting approaches Downtown, WNCC, YMCA, and Examples of Proven neighborhood pathways Treatments • Transit-related crossings near • RRFB systems Avenue I and major bus stops • Supplemental crossing warning • Locations identified through signs public outreach as “hard to cross” streets • Pedestrian-activated warning devices (non-signal) 295 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 419 of 657 CM-3: Signal • Signal coordination near rail Implementation crossings Considerations Visibility & Where It Works Best • NDOT Coordination: Required Operations • Signalized intersections on arteri- for signal work on US-26 or state-owned facilities Improvements als and highways • Skewed or wide intersections • Design Standards: All upgrades Signal visibility and operations with limited sight distance must meet MUTCD and NDOT improvements focus on signal design criteria making traffic signals easier to • Corridors with high rear-end and • Pedestrian Focus: LPIs and see, understand, and comply angle crash patterns countdown timers should be with—particularly at complex, • Locations with heavy truck traffic considered where pedestrian high-speed, or high-volume • Intersections with pedestrian ac- volumes are present intersections. Treatments include tivity near schools, transit stops, • System Integration: Signal upgraded signal heads, reflective or downtown areas backplates, improved signal changes should align with timing and phasing, pedestrian Why It’s Effective corridor timing plans and traffic countdown signals, Leading Improving signal visibility and detection systems Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs), and timing reduces uncertainty and Order-of-Magnitude Cost advance signal-ahead warning last-second decision-making, Range (Planning Level) flashers. two major contributors to severe • Signal visibility upgrades (back- intersection crashes. FHWA These improvements are often plates, heads): low to moderate recognizes signal visibility implemented as part of signal cost per approach enhancements and pedestrian- modernization or corridor safety focused signal timing as proven • Signal timing and phasing up- programs and can significantly safety strategies, especially dates: low to moderate cost per reduce red-light running and when paired with corridor-wide intersection severe angle crashes. consistency. • Advance signal-ahead warning Safety Problems Addressed From a Safe System perspective, flashers: moderate cost per • Red-light running and late deci- these treatments: approach sion-making at intersections • Improve user comprehension Related Scottsbluff Projects • Poor signal conspicuity due to and expectancy • J1 – US-26 Intersection Improve- sun glare, skewed approaches, • Reduce speed and conflict ments or cluttered backgrounds severity • J2 – US-26 & US-71 Crossing • Conflicts between turning vehi- • Provide additional time and sep- Safety Upgrades cles and pedestrians aration for vulnerable users • J5 – Targeted Intersection Signal • Inadequate pedestrian clearance Timing Improvements time or visibility Typical Applications in Scottsbluff • J7 – High Injury Network Corri- • Inconsistent signal operations dor Enhancements across corridors • US-26 intersections at Avenue I, Avenue B, East 27th Street, and • J17 – Downtown Streetscape Examples of Proven 21st Avenue and Broadway Corridor En- Treatments hancements • Intersections with documented • Signal head upgrades red-light running or rear-end • Backplates / reflective borders crashes • Protected or protected-permis- • School-adjacent signalized sive left turns crossings • Signal re-timing • Locations where signals are po- • Leading Pedestrian Intervals sitioned on diagonal approaches (LPIs) • High Injury Network (HIN) signal- ized intersections 296 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 420 of 657 CM-4: School Where It Works Best Implementation • Elementary, middle, and high Considerations Zone Safety school frontages • Standardization: A single Treatments • School walking routes and citywide school zone standard improves driver understanding School zone safety treatments designated crossings include a coordinated package • Streets with on-street parking • Flashing Beacons: Should be of signage, pavement markings, near schools synchronized and clearly visi- ble in all conditions flashing beacons, speed • Locations with high volumes of management tools, and crossing young pedestrians • Enforcement Coordination: enhancements designed to Design should support target- • Areas identified through school create consistent, predictable ed enforcement during school staff and parent input conditions around schools. hours These treatments emphasize Why It’s Effective • Maintenance: Regular checks visibility, driver awareness, and Children are among the most are needed to ensure signs operational safety during arrival vulnerable roadway users, and and beacons remain operation- and dismissal periods. school zones require heightened al clarity and predictability. FHWA Standardizing school zone Order-of-Magnitude Cost and Vision Zero guidance treatments citywide helps Range (Planning Level) reduce confusion and improves emphasize standardized compliance across all school school zone treatments as a • School zone signage and locations. foundational safety strategy that pavement markings: low cost supports both engineering and per location Safety Problems Addressed enforcement. • Flashing beacons: moderate • Speeding and driver non-com- From a Safe System perspective, cost per school frontage pliance in school zones these treatments: • Crossing enhancements: low to • Inconsistent signage, speed moderate cost per crossing • Reduce vehicle speeds where limits, and operating hours injury risk is highest Related Scottsbluff Projects • Congestion and conflicts • Improve visibility and recogni- • – 9th Avenue & East Over- during drop-off and pick-up J3 tion of school activity land Intersection Improve- • Poor pedestrian visibility near • Support enforcement and op- ments schools erational consistency • J8 – Citywide School Zone • Unclear crossing locations for Safety Upgrades students Typical Applications in Scottsbluff • J9 – School Access & Conges- Examples of Proven tion Management Treatments • School zones at Roosevelt, Bluffs Middle School, Scotts- • J10 – School Area Pedestrian • School zone signage bluff High School, and Commu- Crossing & ADA Improvements • Flashing beacons nity Christian School • Speed feedback signs in • Crossings on 2nd Avenue, 5th school areas Avenue, and 27th Street • School crossing markings • School-adjacent segments • Pick-up/drop-off circulation identified through public input improvements and crash data • Locations with documented congestion or near-miss activ- ity 297 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 421 of 657 Examples of Proven Typical Applications in Treatments Scottsbluff • Intersection lighting • Broadway corridor and Down- • Pedestrian-scale lighting town core • Crossing illumination • East Overland and Avenue I corridors • Rail-adjacent lighting • School-area crossings and • Transit stop lighting pathways Where It Works Best • Rail crossings along Railway CM-5: Pedestrian-Scale • High-speed or multilane corri- Street and Broadway dors • Bus stops and transit access & Intersection Lighting • Pedestrian crossings and me- routes Improvements dians Implementation • Downtown streets with eve- Pedestrian-scale and intersection Considerations ning activity lighting improvements enhance • NDOT Coordination: Required visibility for people walking and • School and transit stop areas on state highways or signalized driving during nighttime and • Rail-adjacent corridors and intersections low-light conditions. Treatments crossings • Design Balance: Lighting include new or upgraded Why It’s Effective should improve visibility with- streetlights, focused pedestrian out excessive glare lighting at crossings, and lighting Improved lighting increases the retrofits that improve uniformity distance at which drivers can • Energy Efficiency: LED retrofits and reduce dark zones. detect pedestrians and recognize reduce long-term operating conflicts. FHWA identifies lighting costs Lighting improvements are upgrades as a proven strategy for • Maintenance: Lighting plans especially important along arterials, reducing nighttime crash severity, should include inspection and near schools, transit stops, rail particularly at intersections and replacement cycles crossings, and downtown areas. crossings. Order-of-Magnitude Cost Safety Problems Addressed Within the Safe System framework, Range (Planning Level) • Nighttime pedestrian crashes lighting: • Lighting retrofit (LED conver- and near-misses • Improves detection and reac- sion): moderate cost per fixture • Poor visibility at crossings and tion time • New pedestrian-scale lighting: intersections • Reduces crash severity during moderate cost per pole • Dark corridors that discourage nighttime conditions • Intersection lighting upgrades: walking or transit use • Supports equitable access for moderate to higher cost per • Limited recognition of pedestri- people who rely on walking or intersection ans by drivers transit Related Scottsbluff Projects • Uneven lighting near rail cross- • J4 – Intersection Visibility & ings and commercial driveways Stop-Bar Upgrades • J7 – High Injury Network Corri- dor Enhancements • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk & Curb Extension Program • J17 – Downtown Streetscape and Broadway Corridor En- hancements • J20 – Bus Stop and Transit Ac- cess Upgrades 298 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 422 of 657 Examples of Proven Typical Applications in Treatments Scottsbluff • Paint-and-post curb extensions • Interim curb extensions and • Temporary refuge islands lane reconfiguration on Broad- way • Flexible delineators • Temporary pedestrian refuges • Interim striping changes near schools and downtown • Pilot traffic calming installations crossings Where It Works Best • Paint-and-post treatments • High Injury Network (HIN) corri- along US-26 parallel routes CM-6: Quick-Build & dors and intersections • Pilot treatments responding to Interim Safety Measures • School zones and neighbor- neighborhood speed concerns Quick-build and interim safety hood streets Implementation measures use low-cost, rapidly • Downtown and commercial Considerations deployable materials—such as areas with changing conditions • Speed of Deployment: Can pavement markings, delineators, • Locations identified through often be installed within weeks modular curb elements, and public input or recent crash temporary signage—to improve • Evaluation: Before/after data trends safety while longer-term capital collection is critical projects are developed. These Why It’s Effective • Maintenance: Requires moni- treatments allow cities to test Quick-build measures reduce toring and periodic refresh designs, respond quickly to risk by narrowing travel lanes, • Transition: Successful pilots safety concerns, and deliver clarifying movements, and should inform permanent de- near-term crash reduction increasing driver awareness at signs benefits. conflict points. FHWA supports Order-of-Magnitude Cost Safety Problems Addressed interim treatments as part of a Safe System approach because Range (Planning Level) • Excessive speeds and unclear they deliver immediate safety • Temporary curb extensions and lane assignments benefits and allow agencies to lane reconfiguration: low cost • Wide crossings and long pe- refine designs before permanent per location destrian exposure distances construction. • Interim signage and markings: • Driver confusion at complex or very low cost per location changing intersections Related Scottsbluff Projects • Delayed implementation of • J4 – Intersection Visibility & permanent safety projects Stop-Bar Upgrades • J6 – Neighborhood Traffic Calming • J7 – High Injury Network Corri- dor Enhancements • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk Program 299 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 423 of 657 Where It Works Best Order-of-Magnitude Cost • Residential neighborhoods Range (Planning Level) • Collector streets with speeding • Speed feedback signs and complaints striping changes: low to mod- erate cost • School and park areas • Permanent traffic calming • Downtown and mixed-use features: moderate cost per corridors location Why It’s Effective CM-7: Traffic Calming & Related Scottsbluff Projects Lower speeds directly reduce • J6 – Neighborhood Traffic Speed Management crash severity and increase Calming Traffic calming and speed reaction time. FHWA and Vision management strategies use Zero guidance emphasize speed • J7 – High Injury Network Corri- roadway design, operational management as one of the most dor Enhancements changes, and visual cues to powerful tools for preventing • J17 – Downtown Streetscape reduce vehicle speeds and fatal and serious injuries. Design- Enhancements discourage cut-through traffic. based calming is particularly • – East Overland Corridor Treatments include lane J18 effective because it does not rely Improvements narrowing, curb extensions, solely on enforcement. chicanes, mini-roundabouts, speed feedback signs, and Typical Applications in targeted access management. Scottsbluff • Neighborhood avenues with Safety Problems Addressed recurring speeding concerns • Excessive speeds on neighbor- • Broadway corridor and down- hood and corridor streets town approaches • Cut-through traffic in residen- • School-area streets with arrival tial areas and dismissal congestion • Loss-of-control and pedestrian • Corridors identified through injury crashes public input and speed studies • Speed-related severity on wide or over-designed roadways Implementation Considerations Examples of Proven • Community Engagement: Early Treatments outreach improves acceptance • Lane narrowing • Phasing: Temporary pilots can • Road diets precede permanent construc- • Speed humps / cushions tion • Chicanes • Emergency Access: Designs • Mini-roundabouts must accommodate fire and EMS vehicles • Gateway treatments • Coordination: NDOT involve- • Speed feedback signs (outside ment required on state facilities school zones) 300 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 424 of 657 Examples of Proven Implementation Treatments Considerations • Sidewalk gap closure • Prioritization: Focus on schools, • ADA curb ramps transit, and HIN corridors • Detectable warnings • Coordination: Combine with resurfacing or utility work when • Cross-slope corrections possible • Pedestrian route continuity • Standards: All upgrades should CM-8: Sidewalk & Where It Works Best meet current ADA require- • Routes to schools, parks, and ments ADA Accessibility community facilities • Funding: Eligible for SS4A and Improvements • Transit stop access routes complementary programs Order-of-Magnitude Cost Sidewalk and ADA accessibility • Downtown and older neighbor- improvements focus on creating hoods Range (Planning Level) a continuous, accessible • Corridors with documented • New sidewalk construction: pedestrian network that pedestrian activity moderate cost per linear foot meets current ADA standards. Why It’s Effective • ADA ramp installation: low to Treatments include sidewalk gap moderate cost per corner closure, reconstruction of non- Providing a complete and compliant segments, ADA curb accessible sidewalk network Related Scottsbluff Projects ramps with detectable warnings, reduces pedestrian exposure • J10 – School Area Pedestrian driveway crossing upgrades, and to traffic and supports equitable & ADA Improvements mobility. FHWA emphasizes removal of physical barriers. • J11 – Sidewalk Gap Elimination ADA compliance and pedestrian Program Safety Problems Addressed accessibility as foundational • Missing or discontinuous side- safety strategies, particularly for • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk walks vulnerable users. Program • – Transit Stop and Access • Non-compliant curb ramps and Typical Applications in J20 Upgrades cross-slopes Scottsbluff • Barriers for people with disabil- • Sidewalk gaps near schools ities, seniors, and children and transit stops • Pedestrian exposure to vehicle • Downtown corridors with aging travel lanes infrastructure • Neighborhood routes identi- fied through the ADA transition plan • Locations highlighted through public comment and stakehold- er input 301 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 425 of 657 Examples of Proven Typical Applications in Treatments Scottsbluff • Crossing surface rehab • Crossings at Avenue I, Broad- • Rail warning signage way, and East Overland • Pavement markings • Locations with reported vehicle damage or near-misses • Pedestrian rail crossing delin- eation • Routes serving schools, transit, or emergency services • Lighting at crossings CM-9: Rail Crossing Implementation • Signal/rail coordination Considerations Safety Improvements Where It Works Best • Coordination: Requires close Rail crossing safety • Urban rail crossings with high collaboration with the railroad improvements address surface traffic volumes condition, visibility, and • Scheduling: Work windows pedestrian accommodation • Locations with pedestrian or may be limited transit activity at roadway–rail intersections. • Eligibility: Some elements may Treatments may include crossing • Corridors critical to emergency require cost-sharing or sepa- surface rehabilitation, upgraded response rate agreements warning signage and markings, • Crossings identified through • Long-Term Planning: Findings improved lighting, pedestrian public safety and community can inform future grade sepa- crossing delineation, and input ration studies coordination with traffic signals and rail operations. Why It’s Effective Order-of-Magnitude Cost Improving rail crossing visibility Range (Planning Level) Safety Problems Addressed and surface condition reduces • Signing, markings, and lighting: • Rough crossing surfaces caus- driver uncertainty and vehicle moderate cost per crossing ing loss of control maneuvering errors. FHWA • Surface rehabilitation: higher recognizes rail crossing • Limited visibility at rail ap- cost per crossing proaches upgrades as important safety measures when coordinated with Related Scottsbluff Projects • Inadequate pedestrian accom- rail operators and integrated into modations • J18 – East Overland Corridor corridor safety planning. Improvements • Delays affecting emergency access and circulation • J19 – US-26 Parallel Routes • J21 – Rail Crossing Upgrades 302 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 426 of 657 Examples of Proven Typical Applications in Treatments Scottsbluff • ADA boarding pads • Stops along Avenue I, East and • Shelters and benches West Overland • Lighting • Downtown and Broadway corridor stops • Bus pull-outs • YMCA, WNCC, and major • Safe pedestrian access to employment centers stops • Locations identified through CM-10: Transit Stop • Crossing improvements near transit operator input stops Safety & Accessibility Implementation Where It Works Best Considerations Improvements • High-ridership stops on • Coordination: Work closely Transit stop safety improvements arterials with transit providers on stop enhance comfort, visibility, and • Downtown and commercial locations accessibility for people using corridors public transportation. Treatments • Lighting: Pedestrian-scale include ADA-compliant boarding • Stops near schools, healthcare, lighting improves safety and pads, shelters and benches, and senior services comfort lighting, defined bus pull-outs or • Locations with documented • Accessibility: All upgrades curb extensions, and improved pedestrian conflicts should meet ADA requirements pedestrian connections to stops. Why It’s Effective • Integration: Pair with crossing Safety Problems Addressed Safe, well-lit, and accessible and sidewalk improvements • Riders waiting close to traffic transit stops reduce pedestrian Order-of-Magnitude Cost lanes exposure and support equitable Range (Planning Level) access to transportation. FHWA • Poor lighting and nighttime • Bus stop pads and shelters: guidance emphasizes transit visibility at stops moderate cost per stop stop improvements as part of a • Uneven or inaccessible complete and safe multimodal • Lighting and access boarding areas system. improvements: low to • Unsafe crossings near high- moderate cost per location use stops Related Scottsbluff Projects • J20 – Bus Stop and Transit Access Upgrades • J12 – High-Visibility Crosswalk Program • J7 – High Injury Network Corridor Enhancements 303 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 427 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 304 Appendix 9 - Countermeasures Page 428 of 657 A10 support 305 Appendix 10 - Support Page 429 of 657 Appendix 10 Table of Contents A10.1 Purpose of Support Appendix ................................................................... 307 A10.2 Letters of Support from Local Agencies and Stakeholders ..................... 307 A10.3 Plan Concurrence Forms | Resolutions ..................................................... 307 A10.4 Key Meetings Documentation ................................................................... 307 A10.5 Documentation of Partner Collaboration .................................................. 307 A10.6 High-Severity Intersection Ranking and Community Validation .............308 306 Appendix 10 - Support Page 430 of 657A10.1 Purpose of Support Appendix A10.3 Plan Concurrence Forms | Community and partner support for the Safety Resolutions Action Plan include letters of support from local Plan concurrence forms and resolutions adopted agencies and stakeholders; plan concurrence by participating agencies or governing bodies are forms and adopted resolutions where available; included to demonstrate formal acknowledgment meeting documentation such as agendas, of the plan and commitment to advancing safety attendance records and photographs (in lieu of improvements consistent with SS4A principles. sign-in sheets for select events); and additional documentation of partner collaboration (agency A10.4 Key Meetings Documentation coordination, interviews, and coordination Attendance at key meetings, task force sessions, notes). Engagement artifacts also demonstrate and stakeholder discussions was documented public alignment with the plan, including survey through a combination of attendance tracking, summaries and popup voting results used to meeting records, and photographs. While formal inform project and policy prioritization. sign-in sheets were not collected for all events, Public support for the Safety Action Plan has participation is substantiated through supporting been documented, including summaries of SS4A materials and documented engagement survey results and public voting activities that activities. informed project and policy prioritization (see Appendix 1 - Engagement for extensive details). A10.5 Documentation of Partner A10.2 Letters of Support from Local Collaboration Documentation of partner collaboration— Agencies and Stakeholders including meeting materials, correspondence, Letters of support from local agencies, shared data, joint analysis, and coordinated institutions, and community partners are included outreach—is included to demonstrate ongoing where available to document organizational coordination among City staff, public safety endorsement of the Safety Action Plan’s goals, agencies, public transit, schools, regional priorities, and recommended projects. partners, and consultants throughout the planning process. 307 Appendix 10 - Support Page 431 of 657 A10.6 High-Severity Intersection commuters, and vulnerable users experience and report real-world safety challenges. Ranking and Community Validation Use of Public Comment Data Purpose and Methodology Public comments were analyzed by: Intersections in Scottsbluff with the highest • Location (latitude/longitude spatial join to risk of fatal and serious injury crashes, based intersections), on crash severity analysis are identified, along with how these locations align with community- • Primary concern category (e.g., speeding, reported safety concerns. This information near misses, pedestrian signal issues, supports the project prioritization and funding visibility), readiness of the SS4A Safety Action Plan by • User mode (pedestrian, cyclist, motorist, ADA, demonstrating a clear linkage between data- transit, trucking), and driven risk, public experience, and recommended • Up-votes (used as an indicator of shared countermeasures. concern). Intersections were ranked using a crash For reporting clarity, approach-level data severity score derived from reported crashes were aggregated so that each intersection is between 2014 and 2023, with emphasis on represented by a single summary record. Public fatal and serious injury outcomes. To validate comment support is presented qualitatively these findings, the City also evaluated spatially (Low / Moderate / High) based on the number of referenced public safety comments submitted comments, up-votes, and consistency of themes, through the online crowdsource mapping tool. rather than raw counts. Public comments were spatially summarized to the intersection level to account for divided Top 26 High-Severity Intersections roadways and approach-based geometry. Table A11-1 summarizes the highest-severity intersections citywide and shows how crash risk This combined analysis ensures that intersections aligns with community-reported safety concerns prioritized for action are not only statistically high- and recommended SS4A actions. risk locations, but also places where residents, Table A10-1. High-Severity Intersection Ranking and Community Validation Public Dominant Primary Related Severity Rank Intersection Comment Safety Affected SS4A Score Support Concerns Modes Actions Speeding, near Motorist, J1, J4, 1 US-26 & Avenue I 106.6 High misses, poor Pedestrian J5, ST3 visibility Speeding, crossing Pedestrian, J1, J4, 2 US-26 & East 27th Street 100.3 High difficulty, Cyclist ST9 lighting Unsafe 3 West 27th Street & Avenue B 18.6 Moderate crossings, Pedestrian J4, J12 visibility Red-light Motorist, 4 US-26 & Avenue B 36.2 High running, J1, J5 Pedestrian speeding Near misses, 5 West 33rd Street & Avenue I 17.1 Moderate Motorist J4 visibility 308 Appendix 10 - Support Page 432 of 657Table A10-1. High-Severity Intersection Ranking and Community Validation Public Dominant Primary Related Severity Rank Intersection Comment Safety Affected SS4A Score Support Concerns Modes Actions Speeding, 6 20th Street & Broadway 48.1 Moderate pedestrian Pedestrian J6, ST4 exposure Speeding, Motorist, J1, J5, 7 US-26 & 5th Avenue 48.3 High signal visibility Pedestrian ST9 Speeding, lane 8 South Beltline Hwy & Broadway 37.7 Moderate Motorist J6 conflicts Crossing 9 US-26 & 21st Avenue 22.2 Moderate difficulty, Pedestrian J4, ST9 visibility Speeding, 10 US-26 & East 20th Street 25.9 Moderate pedestrian Pedestrian J4 access 11 South Beltline Hwy & 21st Avenue 22.7 Low Visibility Motorist J4 Access and Motorist, 12 US-26 & County Road 19 22.5 Low ST7 visibility Trucking East Overland Drive & 14th 13 11.2 Low Crossing issues Pedestrian J12 Avenue Speeding, 14 US-26 & Heartland Expressway 32 Moderate Motorist J1 access Pedestrian 15 East 20th Street & 5th Avenue 10.3 Low Pedestrian J12 access 16 West 20th Street & Avenue I 9.9 Low Visibility Motorist J4 West 42nd Street & Avenue I / 17 9.6 Low Speeding Motorist J6 Hwy 71 School-related 18 West 27th Street & Avenue I 9.2 Moderate Pedestrian J8 congestion Speeding, near Motorist, 19 US-26 & East Overland Drive 35.5 High J1, J5 misses Pedestrian 20 West 27th Street & Avenue F 8.6 Low Visibility Motorist J4 21 West 20th Street & Railway Street 8.5 Low Poor lighting Pedestrian PRJ2 22 County Road 19 & Highway L79-G 8.4 Low Access Motorist ST7 23 South Beltline Hwy & Avenue I 8.3 Low Speeding Motorist J6 Pedestrian 24 East Overland Drive & 21st Avenue 8.1 Low Pedestrian J12 access 25 West Overland Drive & Broadway 7.5 Low Speeding Motorist J6 Speeding, 26 US-26 & 14th Avenue 7.1 Moderate pedestrian Pedestrian J1, J4 exposure 309 Appendix 10 - Support Page 433 of 657 April 1, 2026 Dear U.S. Department of Transportation Review Committee, On behalf of the Panhandle Public Health District (PPHD), I am pleased to express our support for the City of Scottsbluff’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Safety Action Plan and the City’s continued efforts to advance transportation safety through implementation of the strategies identified in the plan. PPHD has participated in the development of the Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan as a member of the project Task Force and as a regional public health partner serving communities throughout the Nebraska Panhandle. Through this involvement, PPHD has supported conversations about how transportation safety, injury prevention, and community health intersect, particularly in communities where walking, biking, and driving all play essential roles in daily mobility. From a public health perspective, traffic crashes remain one of the leading causes of preventable injury and death. Improvements that reduce crash severity, manage speed, and create safer environments for pedestrians and bicyclists can have meaningful impacts on community health and quality of life. The Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan reflects these principles by applying the Safe System Approach and prioritizing improvements along high-risk corridors, near schools, and in areas with higher pedestrian exposure. The plan also reflects strong collaboration among local and regional partners. As a regional health district serving Scotts Bluff County and surrounding communities, PPHD regularly works with local governments, schools, healthcare providers, and community organizations to promote safer, healthier environments. Transportation safety is an important component of this work. PPHD supports the goals and strategies outlined in the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan and looks forward to continuing to serve as a partner where appropriate. Potential areas of support may include community engagement activities, walkability and safety assessments, public health data and injury- prevention framing, and coordination with regional partners and neighboring communities. 310 Appendix 10 - Support Page 434 of 657We commend the City of Scottsbluff for its proactive, data-driven approach to improving transportation safety and for its commitment to protecting residents, students, and visitors who live, work, and travel in the community. Sincerely, Jessica Davies, Director Panhandle Public Health District 311 Appendix 10 - Support Page 435 of 657312 Appendix 10 - Support Page 436 of 657 313 Appendix 10 - Support Page 437 of 657 This page left intentionally blank 314 Appendix 10 - Support Page 438 of 657 A11 documentation 315 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 439 of 657 Appendix 11 Table of Contents A11.1 Reference List of Sources and Publications ...........................................317 A11.2 Task Force Meeting #1 .............................................................................317 A11.3 Task Force Meeting #2 ............................................................................319 A11.4 Task Force Meeting #3 ............................................................................321 A11.5 Task Force Meeting #4 ............................................................................323 A11.6 Notes from Working Sessions (As Needed) ...........................................325 A11.7 Draft Versions and Revision History (As Needed) .................................325 A11.8 Action Plan Checklist ...............................................................................326 316 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 440 of 657A11.1 REFERENCE LIST OF SOURCES AND A11.2 TASK FORCE MEETING #1 PUBLICATIONS June 25, 2025; 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m.; Powerhouse • City of Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan, City Task Force Members Present: of Scottsbluff, 2016 • Kevin Spencer, Scottsbluff City Manager • City of Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan, • Doug Gompert, Public Works Director PADD, 2004 • Janelle Visser, Tri-City Active Living Advisory • City of Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan, Committee, PPHD Leader (ongoing—2026) • Molly Bonuchi, WNCC Student Life Director • Scottsbluff School Safety Assessment Final Task Force Members Not Present: Study, 2020 • James Todd, SBPS Director of Safety and • East Overland Corridor Revitalization Plan, Security studioINSITE/Felsburg Hold & Ullevig, May • Melissa Lally, NDOT District 5 ROW/Utilities/ 2017 Maintenance Environmental Liaison • Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, Consultant Team: M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. dropseed studio/City of Scottsbluff, March 31, • David Schaff, P.E. 2014 • Jeff Fuller, P.E. • City of Scottsbluff Standards and • Bob Juve, P.E. Specifications for the Design & Construction • Susan Myers, Project Manager of Public Improvements, 1996 Edition • Katherine Reisig, Graduate Engineer • Jamie Weingart, JNW Consulting • City of Scottsbluff Master Pathways Plan, Baker & Assoc., June 1, 2004 Meeting Agenda • Tri-City Sustainability Plan, Gering, Terrytown The meeting began with a welcome and and Scottsbluff, Tri-City Sustainability Task introductions, including participants’ names, Force, 2009 roles, and a reflective question about local traffic crashes. An overview of the SS4A (Safe Streets • Regional Economic Development Strategic for All) program and Vision Zero was presented, Plan, Thomas P. Miller & Associates/Foote highlighting the number of fatal and serious injury Consulting Group, 2014 crashes in Scottsbluff over the past decade. • Economic & Demographic Trends of Scotts The Safe System Approach was introduced, Bluff County, NPPD, February 2021 emphasizing six key principles: deaths and • Multi-County Regional Housing Study, injuries are unacceptable, humans make Hanna:Keelan Associates, P.C., August 2022 mistakes, humans are vulnerable, responsibility is shared, safety is proactive, and redundancy is critical. Participants voted on safety focus areas using a poster board and weighted stickers. The scope of services was reviewed, with the goal of integrating data and community input into a plan that reduces killed or seriously injured (KSI) crashes in Scottsbluff. Attendees were asked to identify the most problematic roadway areas and potential hurdles to success, followed by a vote on policy and infrastructure priorities, 317 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 441 of 657 again using weighted stickers. The role of the Task Force was clarified to include oversight of the plan’s development and implementation, representing community voices, and reviewing possible project priorities. Future meetings were previewed to maintain momentum. Data collection and analysis efforts were also discussed, including definitions of KSI and High Injury Network (HIN), total crash data, breakdowns by mode, and “when” graphics that illustrate crash trends by time of day, month, and year. Comparative data from peer cities was also shared to help inform local strategies. Finally, the project Storymap website, public survey, and public commenting map were reviewed; and Task Force members each completed the public survey and began adding comments to the online crowdsource map. Working Session Notes The Scottsbluff SS4A Task Force identified several key safety concerns, with the Highway 26 corridor emerging as a major problem area— particularly at Avenue I and 27th Street, and 27th Street near WNCC. Issues include frequent red-light running, inconsistent driver behavior at crosswalks, and increasing pedestrian traffic, especially near the college dorms and the soon- to-open preschool across from the Harms Center. Temporary crosswalk signage has shown some benefit, but more permanent improvements are needed. School zones were noted as vague and unenforceable, prompting calls for clearer designations and flashing signals during school hours. Task Force shared personal experience around schools reveals that current designs favor vehicles over pedestrians and cyclists, underscoring a broader need for pedestrian- focused improvements. 318 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 442 of 657One major challenge is the lack of engagement reviewing relevant planning documents. The full from the Nebraska Department of Transportation, consulting team will reconvene after Oregon Trail whose involvement is critical for addressing Days to evaluate progress and plan next steps. Highway 26 issues. The consulting team The Task Force has tentatively saved the dates emphasized the need for strong internal for three additional working sessions: October 1, communication and encouraged members to November 10, and February 25. actively participate and challenge assumptions to help improve safety outcomes. A Spanish- A11.3 TASK FORCE MEETING #2 language version of the website, survey, and October 1, 2025; 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m.; Powerhouse commenting map is in development to ensure Task Force Members Present: inclusive participation. Survey invitations will be sent out through local contacts, and additional • Kevin Spencer, Scottsbluff City Manager public input will be gathered through upcoming • Zachary Glaubius, Development Services pop-up events and focus groups with community Director organizations such as the Western Nebraska Bike • Lane Kizirre, Director of Finance Club, Runners Club, Empowering Families, EMS • Janelle Visser, Tri-City Active Living Advisory and police and fire staff, and business leaders. Committee, PPHD Leader • Molly Bonuchi, WNCC Student Life Director Public engagement goals include gathering • James Todd, SBPS Director of Safety and at least 375 surveys, with 1,000 as the stretch Security goal. Outreach strategies include utility bill • Melissa Lally, NDOT D5 ROW/Util./Maint./Env. inserts, marquee and screen ads at the Midwest Liaison Theater, magnetic vehicle stickers for city utility vehicles, bus stop signage with QR codes, flyers Task Force Members Not Present: in downtown, school communications, library • Doug Gompert, Public Works Director events, social media posts, radio spots, and Consultant Team: M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. newspaper coverage. Scheduled pop-up events • David Schaff, P.E. include Bands on Broadway (July 10), Oregon • Bob Juve, P.E. Trail Days (July 11–12), the Scotts Bluff County • Susan Myers, Project Manager Fair (July 26–Aug 2), and National Night Out • Katherine Reisig, Graduate Engineer (August 5). Additional ideas for outreach include • Jamie Weingart, JNW Consulting strategically placed yard signs, Downtown sidewalk sales, and participation in local festivals Purpose: Align community feedback with crash such as the Old West Balloon Fest and Beef, analysis, identify safety priorities, and begin Beans, and Bluegrass. prioritization for the Safety Action Plan. Meeting Overview & Summary Task Force member assignments reflect their The second task force meeting advanced the strengths and networks: two members with broad group’s understanding of local safety issues, organizational connections will distribute email community priorities, and roadway risk patterns. invitations to complete the online survey and The session combined community input, crash commenting map, while another will coordinate analytics, policy review, and group exercises to within the City to arrange focus sessions with identify priorities for improving safety. EMS, fire, police, crime analysis staff, and city social media personnel. The consulting team are developing Spanish-language materials, designing marketing collateral, scheduling focus groups with schools and employers, and 319 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 443 of 657 These observations correlated strongly with concerns raised by parents, students, and school staff. Policy & Plan Review The group reviewed how existing city plans and municipal codes support or limit safety progress. Key observations included: • Strong alignment with best-practice goals in some areas. • Gaps in policy and standards that could limit implementation of traffic calming, speed management, and pedestrian infrastructure. • Opportunities to update standards to support Community & Stakeholder Feedback Highlights future Safe Streets projects. • School outreach and stakeholder discussions Crash Analysis and High Injury Network revealed consistent concerns about: The Task Force reviewed crash trends through: • School zones and pick-up/drop-off safety • Yearly and hourly patterns • Walking and biking routes used by students • Space-time cluster analysis • Lighting, crossings, speeding, and visibility • High Injury Network (HIN) mapping • Traffic congestion around corridors and key Key Findings: intersections • The HIN represents only ~6% of road mileage During Exercise #1 (Top Safety Concerns), Task but carries nearly all fatal and serious injury Force members shared the issues they hear crashes. most frequently from residents, reinforcing these themes. Comments included: • Severe crashes cluster on mid-volume arterial corridors (5,000–15,000 AADT) with posted “Schools – parking, speeding, congestion, speeds of 30–45 mph. especially near the middle school and high school.” • Many of these locations have commercial/ “Preschool near WNCC is creating long recreational activity and on-street parking, queues and speeding issues.” creating conflict and visibility issues. “Highway 26 — enforcement tools and control • Tier 1 corridors have severity rates six times are needed.” higher than the citywide average. “27th & Avenue I — impatience, turning • Crash types along the HIN align with targeted conflicts, and truck movements are a countermeasures related to high-speed turn concern.” conflicts, pedestrian crossings, sight distance, “Need a safer crossing on 5th Avenue and lighting. between Bluffs Middle and Longfellow.” Following the analysis, the Task Force completed Exercise #2 (Map Markup) by identifying unsafe locations on local maps, which were then compared with KSI crash patterns. The group noted strong alignment between community perception and crash data. 320 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 444 of 657Countermeasures & Prioritization The group reviewed a range of countermeasures and strategies — including engineering, enforcement, and education tools — and then completed Exercise #3 (Prioritization) to: • Rate project and policy categories • Assign relative weighting • Begin shaping near-, mid-, and long-term implementation priorities This feedback will guide which safety investments and programs are emphasized first in the SS4A Action Plan. • Explore Driver’s Education partnerships (SHS, Additional Discussion & Requested Follow-Up WNCC, community options). Task Force members requested further • Extend outreach to WNCC, Community information and discussion regarding: Christian, and St. Agnes. • Crash type and causation breakdowns along • Conduct field verification and drone Highway 26 documentation at key intersections. • Signal timing and upcoming work on Highway 26 A11.4 TASK FORCE MEETING #3 • Truck and semi movements at Highway November 12, 2025; 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m.; 26/27th Powerhouse • Access to a study showing vehicles Task Force Members Present: accelerating near a warning signal west of • Kevin Spencer, Scottsbluff City Manager town • Doug Gompert, Public Works Director • Driver’s education opportunities in Scottsbluff, • Zachary Glaubius, Dev. Services Director including gaps and potential partnerships with • Janelle Visser, Tri-City Active Living Advisory SHS or WNCC Committee, PPHD Leader • Inclusion of WNCC leadership as a • Molly Bonuchi, WNCC Student Life Director stakeholder in ongoing discussions • James Todd, SBPS Director of Safety/Security These requests will inform further fieldwork, Task Force Members Not Present: outreach, and analysis. • Lane Kizirre, Director of Finance Action Items Moving Forward • Melissa Lally, NDOT D5 ROW/Util./Maint./Env. Liaison • Provide crash type breakdown for Highway 26, including intersections. Consultant Team: M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. • Confirm signal timing details and scheduled • David Schaff, P.E. work on Highway 26. • Bob Juve, P.E. • Susan Myers, Project Manager • Follow up on truck movement and visibility • Katherine Reisig, Graduate Engineer issues at Highway 26/27th. The third Task Force meeting focused on • Obtain the speed study near the west-of-town validating public input, reviewing high-risk warning signal. 321 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 445 of 657 locations, and refining the project and policy Additional location-specific comments also priorities for the SS4A Safety Action Plan. The emerged during worksheet discussions, consultant team began with a brief recap of including: the earlier prioritization exercise and confirmed where rankings still reflect community values and • Highway 26: need for turning and signal where adjustments were needed based on new timing improvements; significant left-turn crash analysis and stakeholder feedback. issues at Avenue I; conflicts at Walmart driveway and S Beltline; request to update The Task Force reviewed new projects, policies, fatality trends for public transparency. and plan concepts that emerged from recent discussions with residents, schools, transit • 5th Avenue: interest in extending green time staff, and public safety agencies. These items at US-26; improve signing at Broadway/5th were added to the prioritization worksheets so shared-use crossing. members could vote on their importance. The • Lighting: questions about whether NPPD group also reviewed the expanding Project conducts lighting audits; potential need for an Matrix, now containing 82 draft projects, policies, external audit under a visibility program. and studies derived from crash trends, HIN corridors, surveys, mapping, and stakeholder • Residential areas near SHS: need to address input. student parking spillover into neighborhoods; suggestions for one-side parking restrictions, A major discussion centered on the Top 25+1 designated student areas, or adding a parallel high-risk intersections on the High Injury Network. access road around school ballfields to Members reviewed crash patterns by type, reduce conflicts. user mode, severity, lighting, and contributing factors. Brief overviews were also provided for • Pedestrian concerns: wide crossings at S eight school access areas and eight railroad Beltline & Avenue I, sight distance issues at crossings, with attention to congestion, sight W. Overland & Broadway, and tree/visibility distance, turning conflicts, freight movement, and challenges near 24th & B (school crossing). pedestrian visibility. Because countermeasures • Transit needs: ROW limitations for bus were introduced in Meeting #2, only a short pullouts; enhancements or relocations may FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures summary be more practical than construction in some was provided. areas. 322 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 446 of 657The meeting also revisited policy priorities. High-priority actions reaffirmed include updating school zone ordinances, adopting a speed management policy, ADA compliance and sidewalk programs, Vision Zero commitments, and bilingual/ inclusive outreach. Medium-priority ideas— such as targeted enforcement initiatives, DRAFT micromobility regulations, and a Safe Routes- to-School framework—remain important but not urgent. Members questioned whether a Complete Streets design standard is appropriate for Scottsbluff and emphasized focusing on pedestrian-first principles rather than bike-focused design. A brief discussion on Driver’s Education highlighted staffing and cost limitations at WNCC, limited incentives for completion, scholarship needs, and the importance of A11.5 TASK FORCE MEETING #4 teaching basic vehicle operation. One member February 25, 2026; 11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.; volunteered to explore grant options. SPD Powerhouse committed to providing citation data so it can Task Force Members Present: be mapped alongside crash data to inform • Kevin Spencer, Scottsbluff City Manager enforcement and engineering strategies. • Doug Gompert, Public Works Director Next Steps • Zachary Glaubius, Dev. Services Director • Lane Kizirre, Director of Finance • Finalize intersection- and corridor-specific • Janelle Visser, Tri-City Active Living Advisory recommendations based on new voting Committee, PPHD Leader results. • Molly Bonuchi, WNCC Student Life Director • Refine project phasing by impact, feasibility, Task Force Members Not Present: ADA priorities, and corridor timing. • Melissa Lally, NDOT D5 ROW/Util./Maint./Env. Liaison • Integrate lighting, transit access, and parking • James Todd, SBPS Director of Safety/Security management into recommended project tiers. Consultant Team: M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. • Prepare a targeted countermeasure • David Schaff, P.E. discussion in the next Task Force session. • Bob Juve, P.E. • Jeff Fuller, P.E. • Provide a draft plan to members ahead of the • Susan Myers, Project Manager next review meeting. • Katherine Reisig, Engineer • Jamie Weingart, JNW Consulting 323 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 447 of 657 Purpose of the Meeting • Damage to traffic signal cabinets, signage, Task Force Meeting #4 focused on reviewing and other public infrastructure the near-final draft of the Scottsbluff Safe • Traffic congestion and roadway disruptions Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Safety following crashes Action Plan and confirming priorities and Participants recommended that the final plan implementation direction prior to public emphasize the economic and operational release of the plan. benefits of reducing all crashes, in addition The project team conducted a structured to the primary goal of eliminating fatal and walkthrough of the draft plan, including the serious injury crashes. Executive Summary, Chapters 1–5, and the Coordination with State and Regional supporting appendices. The meeting also Partners included an overview of the proposed project Discussion also addressed coordination with portfolio and planning-level cost estimates Appendix A8 - Projects the Nebraska Department of Transportation contained in . (NDOT) on safety improvements along US-26, Participants were asked to focus feedback which functions as both a regional highway on strategic direction, priorities, and and a local city corridor. implementation feasibility rather than editorial Several operational improvements that have revisions. been completed or are currently under Implementation Priorities discussion with NDOT were noted during the City representatives confirmed agreement with meeting. Items NDOT has completed but have the implementation timeline proposed in the not yet confirmed on location by the City are: draft plan: • Installation of a Leading Pedestrian • Short-term: 1–2 years Interval (LPI) at the Avenue B and US-26 • Mid-term: 3–5 years intersection, allowing pedestrians to begin • Long-term: 5+ years crossing before vehicles receive a green During discussion of implementation priorities, signal. Task Force members emphasized the • Adjustments to signal timing at the US-26 importance of advancing School and Youth and 5th Avenue intersection to provide Safety Protection improvements early in the longer crossing intervals during school implementation process. Improving safety arrival and dismissal times. around schools and along routes used by Participants also discussed the potential for students walking and biking was identified as future safety improvements at US-26 and 14th a key community priority. Avenue, including the possibility of extending Broader Impacts of Traffic Crashes the median or testing temporary treatments to Task Force members discussed the broader limit cross-traffic movements. These concepts impacts of traffic crashes beyond fatal and would require coordination with NDOT. serious injury events. Participants noted that Additional discussion acknowledged that property-damage-only (PDO) crashes also implementation of some safety improvements create significant costs for residents and the may require coordination with BNSF Railway City, including: where rail crossings intersect major travel • Vehicle repair costs borne by individuals corridors. 324 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 448 of 657Near-Term Opportunities updates, refined cost estimates, and updated The City noted that the East Overland mapping, the plan will proceed to the public corridor is included in the City’s 1- and 6-year review phase prior to final adoption. capital improvement planning horizon, which may provide an opportunity to incorporate A11.6 NOTES FROM WORKING SESSIONS (AS NEEDED) near-term safety improvements such as pavement markings, striping, or other visibility [Add as needed in future revisions.] enhancements as projects advance. Public Review Process The Task Force discussed the next steps for A11.7 DRAFT VERSIONS AND REVISION HISTORY releasing the draft Safety Action Plan for public (AS NEEDED) review. The City expressed support for the [Add as needed in future revisions.] following approach: • Introduce the draft plan to the City Council prior to public release. • Post the draft plan online with a minimum two-week public comment period. • Conduct an open-house style public meeting to present the plan and gather feedback. • Provide outreach to schools inviting review of draft plan release. This approach will provide multiple opportunities for community members to review the draft plan and provide feedback prior to final adoption. Implementation Communication Task Force members discussed the importance of clearly communicating implementation priorities and sequencing. Participants suggested that visual tools, such as timeline or Gantt-style graphics, may help illustrate project readiness and implementation phasing for the plan’s priority safety bundles. Meeting Outcome Overall, Task Force members indicated general support for the structure, priorities, and implementation framework presented in the draft Safety Action Plan. Following completion of final formatting 325 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 449 of 657 A11.8 ACTION PLAN CHECKLIST Safe Streets and Roads for All Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet All applicants should follow the instructions in the NOFO to correctly apply for a grant. See the SS4A website for more information. Table 1 of the SS4A NOFO describes seven components of an Action Plan, which correspond to the questions in this worksheet. Applicants should use this worksheet to determine whether their existing plan(s) contains the required components to be considered an eligible Action Plan for SS4A. This worksheet is required for all SS4A Implementation Grant applications and any Planning and Demonstration Grant applications to conduct Supplemental Planning/Demonstration Activities only. Please complete the form in its entirety, do not adjust the formatting or headings of the worksheet, and upload the completed PDF with your application. Eligibility An Action Plan is considered eligible for an SS4A application for an Implementation Grant or a Planning and Demonstration Grant to conduct Supplemental Planning/Demonstration Activities if the following two conditions are met: • You can answer “YES” to Questions 3, 6, and 8 in this worksheet; and • You can answer “YES” to at least three of the five remaining Questions, 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7. If both conditions are not met, an applicant is still eligible to apply for a Planning and Demonstration Grant to fund the creation of a new Action Plan or updates to an existing Action Plan to meet SS4A requirements. Applicant Information City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Lead Applicant: ______________________________________________ UEI: ____________________________________ C1H7W6RDTLD9 Action Plan Documents In the table below, list the relevant Action Plan and any additional plans or documents that you reference in this form. Up to three plans or documents may be included. Please provide a hyperlink to any documents available online or indicate that the Action Plan or other documents will be uploaded in Valid Eval as part of your application. Note that, to be considered an eligible Action Plan for SS4A, the plan(s) coverage must be broader than just a corridor, neighborhood, or specific location. Date of Most Document Title Link Recent Update Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A 5/18/26 Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan Appendices bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A 5/18/26 SS4A Self-Certification Eligibility Worksheet | Page 1 of 5 326 Appendix 11 - Documentation Page 450 of 657 A12 supplemental assessments 331 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 455 of 657 Appendix 12 Table of Contents 12.1 Supplemental Assessments ......................................................................333 12.2 Scottsbluff Railroad Crossing Evaluation .................................................333 Key Findings by Safety Category ....................................................................335 Overall Priority Themes Identified .................................................................. 337 Targeted Upgrades ..........................................................................................338 Scottsbluff Railroad Crossings Evaluation Summary ....................................338 Railroad Crossings Project Depiction .............................................................339 12.2 North Broadway Pedestrian Crossing Assessment ................................340 12.3 East Overland Corridor Safety Improvements .........................................342 12.4 School Safety Assessment ........................................................................344 12.5 Transit Assessment - Roadrunner Public Transit .....................................354 332 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 456 of 657 around Scottsbluff. One is a process of developing their 12.1 Supplemental private crossing and was not preferred methodology for Assessments evaluated given that it has no crash prediction at railroad These assessments include public traffic per se. Two others crossings, and does not targeted technical evaluations are County Roads and were not have a readily available and conducted during development evaluated since one crosses easy to use methodology to of the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety only to the City’s Wastewater evaluate hazard at crossings. Action Plan to further examine Treatment Plant (CR 25) and Within the Federal Highway specific safety conditions identified the other crosses to access Administration Safety Programs, through crash analysis, community very limited private ownership APPENDIX C.–ASSESSMENT input, and stakeholder discussions. and has no through public OF CROSSING SAFETY AND These focused assessments traffic (CR-26). The remaining OPERATION, provides for provide additional context and 11 crossings demonstrate collection and maintenance preliminary considerations that may inform future project high variability in lighting of data, and also discusses development and implementation. quality, approach geometry, systematic methods for The supplemental assessments pedestrian accommodation, identifying crossings that have include: and crossing surface condition, the most need for safety and/ as well as several locations or operational improvements. • 12.1 Scottsbluff Railroad Crossing Evaluation where supplemental signing, Considerations for prioritizing pavement markings, or device locations for improvement • 12.2 North Broadway upgrades could meaningfully include: Pedestrian Crossing enhance safety. Assessment • The potential reduction in the As part of the Scottsbluff number and/or severity of • 12.3 East Overland Corridor SS4A Safety Action Plan, each collisions Safety Improvements of the remaining 11 public • The cost of the projects and the • 12.4 School Safety Assessment railroad crossings along the resources available Together, these assessments BNSF corridor within the study • The relative hazard of public provide additional technical area was evaluated using highway-rail grade crossings insight into locations where safety a standardized, field-based based on a hazard index formula concerns, operational challenges, assessment framework. The • Collision history of a particular or corridor conditions warrant evaluation considered warning crossing location more detailed consideration as devices, roadway geometry and • On-site inspections of public the City advances future safety condition, visibility, pedestrian crossings improvements. accommodation, including • Other criteria as appropriate in ADA provisions, quiet-zone each State/ Jurisdiction 12.2 Scottsbluff feasibility, lighting and surface To support the prioritization conditions. The goal of this Railroad Crossing process, various hazard analysis was to identify systemic indices and collision prediction safety needs, highlight locations Evaluation formulae have been developed requiring upgrades, and provide Roadways crossing Railroads to assist with ranking the prioritization of near-term and at grade are a critical portion of hazard potential of highway- long-term improvements. the Scottsbluff transportation rail grade crossings. A hazard network. There are 14 at grade The Nebraska Department of index ranks crossings in relative road/railroad crossings in and Transportation (NDOT) is in- terms (the higher the calculated 333 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 457 of 657 Avenue I — Shared-Use Pathway Crossing on West Side index, the more hazardous the crossing). These train traffic volume increases the risk of a crash are commonly used to identify crossings to be at a crossing location; that risk is lower if more investigated in the field. sophisticated protective devices are present at A 2017 review of State DOT hazard ranking that location. The primary disadvantage of the practices found that 39 out of 50 States (78 hazard index approach is that the hazard index percent) utilized some type of hazard ranking value is calculated relative to other crossings; index, collision prediction formula, or other consequently, the hazard index value for a single systematic method for prioritization. The hazard crossing without reference to other crossings index approach to prioritization of grade crossing has limited usefulness for prioritization. In the locations requires the analyst to calculate a case at hand, each crossing was analyzed using ranking metric or value that will provide insight the same metric evaluation, providing a relative into the hazard level of a particular crossing comparison between crossings. relative to other crossing locations. Perhaps the Because train traffic volume is the same at each most common index model used by State DOTs crossing location in Scottsbluff, and because the is the New Hampshire Hazard Index ranking factors related to protection are very similar and methodology. This Index is the most basic form present little contrast between the crossings, the of the hazard index model type consisting of the large variation in Annual Average Daily Traffic exposure index. (AADT) at the crossings drives the Hazard Index The formula is as follows: rating using the New Hampshire Index method. Consequently, the team elected to enhance the • HI = (V) * (T) * (PF), where: method and include additional context-based • HI = Calculated Hazard Index Value factors to help to differentiate the crossings. To • V = Highway Traffic Volume at Crossing (AADT) accomplish this, and to stay in the FHWA “simple • T = Train Movements per Day at Crossing hazard index” spirit, the formula was expanded • PF = Protection Factor based on Warning Device using: Type • Base formula: HI₀ = V × T × PF, The original New Hampshire Hazard Index • Supplemented by a Context Modifier (CM) built from formula utilized protection factors of 0.1 for discrete risk factors: automatic gates, 0.6 for flashing lights, and 1.0 for • Crash History Factor (CH); CH_mod = 1 + 0.1 × CH signs only. The primary advantage of the hazard • 0 – No reported crashes within 150 ft of the index approach is that it is easily understood. crossing An increase in either highway traffic volume or • 1 – 1–2 PDO crashes only 334 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 458 of 657 • 2 – 1+ injury crash or ≥3 total volumes, multimodal activity, are more complex, and crashes and crash risk are most relevant opportunities exist to enhance • 3 – Any fatal or serious injury for the SS4A Action Plan. safety through lighting (KSI) crash Two additional rural crossings— improvements, pavement • Geometry & Sight Distance located at the far east edge marking upgrades, pedestrian Factor (G); G_mod = 1 + 0.1 × G: of the City’s Extra-Territorial accommodations, median • 0 – Near-90° crossing, good Jurisdiction (ETJ) are STOP- treatments, approach alignment sight distance, relatively flat controlled with supplemental refinements, and quiet-zone approach crossbuck-style signs. These feasibility considerations. • 1 – Moderate skew (≈60–80°), locations function more like 2. Lighting & Visibility mild hump, some visual clutter private or limited-access Lighting is one of the most • 2 – Severe skew (<60°), driveways serving isolated inconsistent features across significant hump/grade, or residences and utility facilities. the corridor. Several high-use documented sight restrictions Because they carry very low urban crossings remain unlit or (buildings/vegetation/ traffic volumes and have poorly lit, significantly reducing curvature) no pedestrian or bicycle nighttime visibility for drivers • Final formula: HIF = V × T × PF x activity, they fall outside the and pedestrians. CH_mod x G_mod focus area for most SS4A Crossings with no or poor recommendations. Routine lighting include: Key Findings by Safety maintenance of signage and Category visibility should generally be • Berggren Rd • CR 19 1. Control Devices considered sufficient at these locations. • W 42nd / CR J Across the Scottsbluff study • 21st Avenue area, nearly all public railroad The primary emphasis of the • CR 25, and crossings are equipped railroad crossing evaluation • CR 26 with active warning devices, therefore remains on the Crossings with good lighting on including flashing lights and urban crossings along US- both sides include: 26, Broadway, South Beltline gates. These crossings form • Avenue B Highway East, W 20th Street, the core of the community’s rail • Broadway / E Railway St safety network and represent and major north–south • 5th Avenue, and the locations where traffic avenues, where traffic activity • 9th Avenue is higher, turning movements 335 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 459 of 657 9th Avenue — Quiet Zone Median This suggests that a corridor- workload: 6. Median Presence / wide systemic lighting • W 20th St – Skew Channelization enhancement program • Avenue B – Skew Only a few locations have would be beneficial to assure • Broadway – Skew medians present to discourage comparable lighting at each • 5th Ave – Skew driver “gate running” or wrong- crossing to enhance driver • 9th Ave – Skew way maneuvers. In general • 21st Ave – Slight skew expectations. crossings could benefit from • S Beltline Hwy E – Slight skew 3. Pavement Markings & • CR 25/26 – Slight skew center median channelization— Advance Warning Signs especially those with a history Skewed crossings typically Most city crossings have of violations and those near deserve enhanced signing, highway locations, and pavement markings in place, markings, illumination, or but several rural or lower- particularly those with higher corridor-based access vehicle volumes. volume crossings are missing management. key elements recommended by Crossings with medians: 5. Shoulder Availability the Manual on Uniform Traffic • Avenue I Control Devices (MUTCD): Shoulder availability improves • W 20th • Missing or worn markings: CR 19, vehicle maneuvering, snow • Avenue B 21st Avenue (noted “markings storage, and emergency • Broadway worn”), CR 25, and CR 26 recovery. Several crossings • 5th Avenue, and • 9th Avenue • Missing advance signage: have no shoulder, especially Berggren Rd, W 42nd, Avenue I, on urban approaches and 7. Pedestrian Accommodation Avenue B, 5th Ave, CR 25, and constrained corridors. Pedestrian infrastructure is CR 26 Crossings with shoulders inconsistent across the railroad Consistent application of present include: corridor: STOP bars, RR Xing symbols, • Berggren Rd • Crossings lacking pedestrian and advance warning signs is • CR 19 accommodation: recommended. • W 42nd / CR J • Avenue I • 21st Avenue 4. Roadway Alignment & • W 20th • S Beltline Hwy E Approaches • 21st Avenue • CR 25, and • CR 25, and Several crossings have skewed • CR 26 • CR 26 approaches, which reduce sight • Locations with good sidewalk distance and increase driver connections and high pedestrian 336 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 460 of 657 demand: 9. Quiet Zone Feasibility These delays often compound • 9th Avenue Quiet zone feasibility was congestion, emergency • Broadway flagged for specific urban response times, and safety • 5th Avenue, and crossings based on geometry, risks for left turns or driveway • Avenue B speeds, and demand: access and increase motorist frustration. Several crossings would benefit • Avenue I – Yes from: • W 20th – Yes Overall Priority • Sidewalk connections • Avenue B – Yes • ADA ramps • Broadway – Yes Themes Identified • 9th Avenue – Yes Based on the assessments, the • Enhanced markings/signage • S Beltline – Yes most common needs across the 8. Surface Condition (Rough • CR 26 – Yes corridor include: Crossings) These findings suggest High-Frequency Safety Needs During physical observation Scottsbluff may explore a • Lighting upgrades and driving the sections, several corridor-wide quiet zone crossings were flagged as feasibility study once other • Pavement marking refresh rough, causing driver discomfort safety upgrades are in place. • Advance warning signage and requiring maintenance: 10. Long Delays and Public • Approach warning and • Avenue I Feedback improvements at skewed intersections • W 20th The following crossings • Avenue B generated significant public • Pedestrian accommodation • Broadway, and (sidewalks, ADA ramps) • 5th Avenue concerns regarding delays: • CR 19 High Traffic Urban Crossings Albeit subjective, the • Avenue I • US-26 corridor crossings recommendation is to • W 20th (Avenue I, 5th Ave, Avenue B) enhance anything under an • Avenue B, and • Downtown crossings (Broadway, 8/10 condition assessment, • Broadway 9th Ave) Surface rehabilitation should be coordinated with BNSF • S Beltline Hwy E (high-speed rural transition) to reduce maintenance and operational issues. • CR 25 and CR 26 (only passive- control crossings) 337 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 461 of 657 21st Avenue / South Beltline Highway East only isolated residences or In addition to the general Scottsbluff Railroad utility facilities, carry minimal project list above, specific Crossings Evaluation traffic, and do not present recommended improvements Summary public safety priorities. Routine by timeline are included in the maintenance is sufficient for project spreadsheet. These Overall, the railroad crossing their needs. The findings of recommended improvements evaluation highlights that this assessment are intended are based on the findings and Scottsbluff’s highest safety to guide the identification of evaluation in the spreadsheet needs are concentrated at targeted, high-value safety entitled Railroad Crossing the urban, publicly traveled projects for inclusion in the Hazard Index Rating found in crossings, where higher SS4A Action Plan. the Appendix. traffic volumes, multimodal use, skewed approaches, worn markings, nighttime visibility gaps, and complex turning movements present Targeted Upgrades meaningful opportunities for improvement. These Street AADT Hazard Adjusted Final locations—particularly along Index Hazard Index Rank Rank Rank US-26, Broadway, Avenue B, South Beltline 2,200 3,960 4,752 8 Avenue I, and 5th Avenue— 21st Avenue 5,150 9,270 12,051 4 are where enhancements 9th Avenue 2,030 3,654 4,019 7 such as upgraded lighting, 5th Avenue 4,160 7,488 11,681 5 refreshed pavement markings, Broadway 8,535 15,363 23,966 2 pedestrian accommodations, Avenue B 5,620 10,116 14,567 3 median channelization, surface 20th Street 3,700 6,660 10,390 6 rehabilitation, and quiet-zone Avenue I 10,480 18,864 29,428 1 feasibility analysis can have the County Rd J 200 360 432 9 greatest impact. Two STOP- controlled rural crossings at the County Rd 19 150 270 351 10 edge of the City’s ETJ serve Berggren Road 120 216 216 11 338 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 462 of 657 9th Avenue uniquely positioned to improve Railroad Crossings • Upgrade Crossing Approach multimodal connectivity Project Depiction Condition by linking a lower-income Avenue I • Complete Pedestrian/ADA residential neighborhood • Upgrade Crossing Approach Facilities with essential destinations, Condition South Beltline - None including multiple grocery Broadway County Rd J - None stores, recreation facilities, • Upgrade Crossing Approach County Rd 19 - None community services, and Condition Berggren Road - None adjacent communities. The Avenue B County Road 25 current at-grade crossing • Upgrade Crossing Approach • Gate and flasher improvements presents challenges due to Condition County Road 26 skewed geometry, limited • Complete Pedestrian/ADA • Gate and flasher improvements pedestrian accommodations, Facilities All Crossings and close proximity to US- 21st Avenue • Wayside Horn Evaluation Study • Upgrade Crossing Approach • Implementation of Wayside Horn 26 traffic. A grade-separated Condition Study crossing (overpass or • Backfill Adjacent to Roadway on • Signage & Pavement Markings underpass) would create a safe, Curve on Northwest Corner Study reliable, all-ages-and-abilities • Study Crossing to determine • Implementation of Signage & connection and would also merit in Channelization Pavement Markings Study help complete the WNCC ↔ 5th Avenue • Lighting Evaluation YMCA pathway loop, a high- • Upgrade Crossing Approach • Implementation of Lighting priority project identified in Task Condition Recommendations Force and public engagement • Complete Pedestrian/ADA A key opportunity identified feedback. This improvement Facilities through the rail corridor would address both safety and 20th Street assessment is the need for equity objectives by providing • Upgrade Crossing Approach a separated pedestrian and protected access for people Condition bicycle crossing in the vicinity walking, biking, rolling, and of the 9th Avenue railroad using mobility devices along a crossing. This location is critical community corridor. Page 463 of 657 North Broadway at 24th Street should be considered dependent beneficial improvement. 12.2 North Broadway on evaluation, such as flashing 26th Street Pedestrian Crossing beacon, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB), etc.. 26th Street should be evaluated Assessment Crosswalks should be completed in detail for an enhanced north at all intersections legs with ADA bound left turn lane. Evaluation Broadway, 23rd - 27th: facilities reviewed and evaluated should include detailed peak Consideration in the analysis of for beneficial improvements. traffic counts, turning movements Broadway from 23rd to 27th was and pedestrian and gap numbers 25th Street largely dependent on review of to determine any potential for a crash data. 25th Street should be evaluated road diet to reduce speeds and in detail for left turn lanes (both increase driver awareness. 23rd & 24th Streets north and south), as well as for a 27th Street While crash data is not definitive, north bound right turn lane into it appears that 23rd & 24th should the school parking lot. Again Crash data at 27th does not be evaluated in detail for south while not definitive, there is some appear to indicate any need for bound left turn lane, and for a indication in crash data that a turn improvement in the free right north bound right turn lane into lane may have precluded crashes. turn sections, either east to south the school parking lot at 24th. Evaluation should include detailed or north to west. The majority Evaluation should include detailed peak traffic counts and turning of crashes happen at the T peak hour traffic counts, turning movements, as well as pedestrian intersection of 27th & Broadway. movements and pedestrian volumes and traffic gaps, This indicates need for detailed (& bicycle) counts along with particularly during peak student review of the intersection, a pedestrian gap study. In the use. As with 23rd & 24th, islands including peak hour counts, event that counts indicate merit, should be considered at the speeds, pedestrian numbers, and the potential exists for pedestrian medians, as well as the potential review of current signal timing. islands at medians affording refuge merit in a road diet for speed Given the volume of crashes at this in crossing a relatively wide street reduction and driver awareness. intersection, there may be benefit section. The possibility of a road Pedestrian crossing enhancements to implement a roadway diet, again diet should be evaluated while should be considered dependent dependent on detailed review. counts are on-going, to determine on evaluation. Crosswalks should Broadway merit in speed reduction and be completed at all intersections increased driver awareness. legs and ADA facilities should be Broadway and the downtown Pedestrian crossing enhancements reviewed and evaluated for any streets (from 20th to 14th/East 340 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 464 of 657Overland) do not show any need advance stop bars, yield signage, | Extend island – temporary for improvement given the work and paint-and-post channelization refuge expansion paint & posts completed in the last several years to improve driver awareness and ● Extend island footprint (with the exception of potential reduce crossing distance. These with paint improvements at the Railroad treatments can be implemented crossing, addressed separately rapidly and evaluated prior to ● Add flex posts to define under Railroads). While crash permanent reconstruction. space data does not indicate an issue, ● o Create wider Specific improvements could if the perception is that speeding pedestrian waiting area include the following: is of a magnitude that requires | RRFB prep addressing, a speed study | Paint & post channelization at ● Markings, signage, could be implemented. In the the island refuge event that there is a perceived ● Flexible delineators at need to reduce speeds, some island nose ● Install RRFB if justified by semblance of a road diet could study ● Narrow perceived lane be implemented. Care would be | width at approaching Temporary focused lighting on required to assure any planned crossing diet integrates safely with the crossing ● Solar-powered already completed diet of curb | Convert existing island to ADA- pedestrian-scale lighting bulb-outs. accessible refuge ● Sawcutting the curb ● Focus on crosswalk & Quick-build Improvements refuge island ● Adding temporary Where feasible, quick-build These treatments can be treatments should be considered asphalt wedge or modular ramp implemented rapidly and as an interim step before evaluated prior to permanent permanent lane reconfiguration, ● Installing detectable reconstruction to gain near- refuge islands, or crossing warning panels immediate improvement for enhancements are constructed. (temporary or adhesive) motorists and pedestrians. Existing median islands could be | High-visibility crosswalk with retrofitted with ADA-accessible advance stop bar openings and temporary ramp treatments to function as pedestrian refuge areas. Quick- build improvements may include high-visibility crosswalk markings, 341 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 465 of 657 East Overland —Signal at 9th Avenue 8. Redesign the Broadway Based on review and analysis 12.3 East Overland intersection at 14th Street of crash data, it appears that Corridor Safety to improve access to East the existing control is generally Overland from the west; working well, but that it could be improved. Our suggestion is to Improvements 9. Install East Overland Corridor study the intersection in detail, First consideration in the analysis gateway signage; including pedestrian counts, traffic of the East Overland Road corridor 10. Consider mixed use zoning counts, traffic gap analysis, further was review of the previous or a corridor overlay along detail of crash reports, and review 2017 East Overland Corridor portions of East Overland to of lighting at the intersection Revitalization Plan. The Executive encourage a compatible mix of and approaches. Study results Summary of that Plan provides the business and residential uses; dependent, consideration could following priorities, from highest to and be given to installation of a traffic lowest: 11. East Overland Road diet to control device, realignment of the 1. Improve code enforcement reduce four lanes of traffic to intersection, revision to the current to require property owners to two lanes with a center turn pedestrian crossing, and/or some clean up unsightly property; lane. sort of roadway diet to provide 2. Assist property owners with pedestrian protection. Diet could Of these priorities, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, making business façade include refuge area mid-roadway 5th, 7th, 9th & 10th are in essence improvements; for pedestrians, accompanied by non-traffic related and accordingly parking restriction on intersection 3. Assist property owners have not been considered approaches to reduce the crossing with making landscape germane to the Scottsbluff SS4A width thereby reducing the improvements; regardless of current status. potential for pedestrian/vehicle 4. Improve East Overland and Priorites #4, #6, #8, and #11 are interaction. 9th Avenue intersection at then considered germane, and #6. Improve pick-up and drop-off Roosevelt School; have been viewed as follows: pattern at Roosevelt School: 5. Create a marketing campaign #4. Improve East Overland The school’s grounds and to promote the East Overland and 9th Avenue intersection at surrounding roadways are Corridor; Roosevelt School: quite limited. Initial observation 6. Improve pick-up and drop-off Issue here is in essence the need indicates that the only area pattern at Roosevelt School; for pedestrian crossing of East available for enhanced pick-up and Overland north and south, and drop-off is already encorporated 7. East Overland business primarily students from the schools into the playground area, owners organize a business to the north, and the questionable potentially rendering it unusable improvement district (BID); conformity of the existing control. for other purpose(s). That said, a 342 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 466 of 657study of the school’s permiter in concern (albeit always a general issue here would most likely detail, as well as review of need/ concern), we are recommending be truck traffic and how to benefit of specific playground that no roadway diet be accommodate.) area(s) may provide a better implemented overall as the benefit 2. Lighting along the corridor understanding of what could be would likely be less than neutral appears to generally be made available, including not only with no positive influence on the good, but further evaluation the playground area but a detailed motoring public. The exception may be beneficial and is review of parking needed and to this recommendation is the recommended. used. Consequently, although recommendation to study the East the initial observation shows no Overland Road and 9th Avenue 3. ADA and sidewalk area available, a detailed review intersection, as noted above. improvements along the is recommended, including direct length of the roadway In addition to these issues brought involvement from school staff. would be beneficial. Most forward from the 2017 East all intersections have ramps #8. Redesign the Broadway Overland Corridor Revitalization although the majority of ramps intersection at 14th Street to Plan, the following issues have are not compliant with current improve access to East Overland been considered with the standards. The majority of from the west: recommendations noted: the length of radway has wide Based on work completed 1. The intersection of East sidewalk, with limited areas following the Plan (and prior to Overland Road and 21st of degradation that could SS4A), all indications are that the Avenue has existing 4-way be upgraded to encourage work that could best be done has stop control and appears to and enhance safe pedestrian been completed, resulting in this work relatively well. However, activity. issue being considered previously our recommendation is that 4. The intersection of East completed and without further an intersection study be Overland Road and Highway consideration in this Plan. completed at this location to 26 should be reviewed for determine the actual level #11. East Overland road diet to operation level. At a minimum, of operation and whether reduce four lanes of traffic to two pavement markings should be any improvements would lanes with a center turn lane: brought current with possible be beneficial/warranted. turn lane tracking striping in Based primarily on the 2024 ADT Possible improvements could place, and there likely should indicating that any reduction in be as simple as revisions to be an increase in storage in lane width would not be positive markings (moving stop bars, turn lanes for truck traffic. An for median to peak traffic on this enhanced crosswalks, etc.), investigation may need to be roadway, and after consideration or implementation of a traffic completed during Fall harvest of crash data showing no specific control device, or even a to determine peak truck indication that speed is a specific round-about. (The primary values. 343 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 467 of 657 Westmoor Elementary Westmoor Elementary • Some children cross Avenue I, 12.4 School Safety but not consistently enough to Bethany Jolliffe,Assistant Principal warrant a crossing guard Assessment 9/25/2025 • Students are not allowed to Review of schools, public and Start time is 8:00 a.m., with private, began with in-person cross the middle of the street to students allowed in the building get to their parents’ car; parents interviews at each location. MCS starting at 7:45; Pick-up starts at Team members sat in-person are encouraged to park along 3:15 p.m. with all students usually the sidewalk closest to their with staff and asked a series of picked up within 7-8 minutes. questions leading into dialogue students, or if parking farther pertaining to issues and conditions. Pick-up System away, parents are encouraged to walk to pick-up their students Notations of the discussions follow. The School has a very efficient and travel back to their car After discussions, each location pick-up system in place: was viewed critically with issues together • They provide different zones discussed among team members. Signage/School Zones for each grade level, and they The Team began discussions with ensure students are accounted • Staff expressed that School a set list of questions. Questions for until they get to parents zones would be the most useful related to Student Travel Patterns, improvement Pick-up and Drop-off Zones, • Staff has walkie talkies in order Bus Routes, School Zone Safety, to aid in communication • Increase signage of school zones to address speeding “Near Misses” and Concerns, and Walking/Crossing Guards Priorities and Ideas. Meetings were concerns and to enhance very informative with interaction • Staff members with vests and internal school pick-up system with various staff members being stop signs are present on W 16th (emphasize student zones) St on the North and South sides robust dialogue. Questions were Buses rarely discussed in order given the of the field • The school uses 3-4 buses staffs’ effort to communicate their • Additional staff members are by regularly opinions. gates monitoring students-to- parents contact • Buses are currently located by the construction, and the issue • As a rule, there are fewer than may need to be reevaluated 20 students that walk to school when the construction is complete 344 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 468 of 657 Lincoln Heights Elementary • There are currently no issues Lincoln Heights School zones are on: with parent/bus conflicts Elementary • W 22nd from Ave B to ½ block • Busses pull up on north side of between Ave D and E, and school, in a bus pullout area Jeremy Behnke Principal • W 23rd from Ave B to ½ block Crosswalks/Sidewalks 9/25/2025 between Ave D and E • Staffs’ opinion is that the number School start time is 7:55 a.m., Parents park and drive along Ave and placement of crosswalks breakfast begins 7:20 and nue D and Avenue C, W 22nd feels adequate students can then enter at the front Street and W 23rd Street. • The School is contemplating doors, Pick-up is at 3:10 p.m. Crossing Guards adding sidewalks on the internal Staffs’ opinion is that overall they • School staff act as crossing property to facilitate better and have a decent system, but with guards at Avenue C and 22nd more direct walking for students limited parking making things and 23rd Streets, while Principal to get to pick-up zones difficult Behnke and Assistant Principal ADA Better defined school zones and Mrs. Rodriguez are present at Ave. D and 22nd and 23rd • Staffs’ opinion is that the current speeding enforcement would be Streets but they are just there ADA provisions have been their priority. to help if need and do not wear adequate for the needs Buses vests • Plans for access are discussed • Buses and Daycare pick up are • It is extremely difficult to have on individual students basis with on Ave C, directly east of the morning crossing guards, but it student IEPs school doesn’t appear to be an issue • The School is all one level and • Parents not allowed to park requiring them consequently has many students there, follow signage correctly • A Staff member with a stop sign with disabilities School Zones is located at 23rd St north of the school (between Avenue C and They have limited signage. Avenue D) Increased enforcement and • A City of Scottsbluff Crossing clarification of school zones would Guard is at Avenue B and 24th be helpful. Street 345 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 469 of 657 Longfellow Elementary — 5th Avenue / E 20th Street Signal Safe Routes to School distributed). Postcards contained • Parents will flip U-Turns on 5th a link to the online survey. No Avenue • Most students that walk come direct results are known, although from the East side of the school Traffic Safety Concerns hopefully families filled it out, or at • Staff feels that a Safe Routes the very least received exposure • Speeds on 7th and 21st are fine to School program could be and were more inclined to • On E 21st and 6th a staff member beneficial complete the survey when utility was hit by a car Secondary location in case of mailers were received. Weather emergency evacuation is BMS Longfellow Elementary • Post snow, ice and slush • It is a difficult location because Lukas Benzel, Principal stagnate on E 21st by the picnic students have to cross Ave B 10/6/2025 tables (N side of school) and Broadway School Times: Parent SS4A Outreach • The School is trying to find an 7:50 a.m. to 3:05 p.m. alternative secondary location The MCS Team provided 450 Drop-off postcards to be distributed during Weather Issues • Students can arrive for breakfast parent teacher conferences (350 • Staffs’ opinion is that Snow at 7:20, otherwise 7:40 in English, 50 in Spanish, 50 removal seems good and it is bilingual) containing a link to the done in a timely manner • Drop-off is smoother than pick online survey. up • There is a major gutter issue No direct results are known, and on Ave C with poor drainage, it Pick-up families also received exposure is always waterlogged, buses • There is lots of congestion after to SS4A when utility mailers were splash through it, in the winter school received. it ices up and in nicer weather there is leaf decay and odor. • They have few Bus/Parent conflicts Parent SS4A Outreach • Parents will arrive up to two The MCS Team provided 315 hours before school ends to postcards to be distributed during get their place to pick up their parent teacher conferences (275 students in English, and 40 in Spanish were 346 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 470 of 657 Community Christian School Community Christian up and drop off is at the front additional parking on the north entrance, parents are required to side of 14th St in what is currently School (CCS) walk in to drop-off/pick-up their a gravel area students Steph Reynaga, Principal • On 15th north of the school 10/16/2025 Day Care children at play signage and additional crosswalks might be School times are 8 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. • CCS also has a Day Care—all useful (speeding along the street There are approximately 100 pick-up/drop off is at the front of is an issue) Students (Preschool to 8th Grade) the school (14th) • The school sometimes takes Safety Concerns • Day Care includes infants students to McCaffree Park for (starting at 6 weeks) to toddler • Foot traffic in the area raises PE, but they have seen no issues some safety concerns, especially • Drop off is between 7:00 and with it for teachers going to cars at 8:00 a.m.; Weather Concerns night (windows have been • Most are picked up between • School experiences flooding and bashed in, etc) 3:30 and 5:00 p.m., but they are snow on the playground • Security is also a concern on open until 6:00 p.m. when the 14th, they would love cameras last students are gone • City does a good job on 15th, but but do not know how to fund 14th can take a while to clear Crossing Guards them Parent SS4A Outreach They have no Crossing Guards, • Poor lighting on 14th and none are needed The MCS Team took postcards speeding on 15th are large to Parent-Teacher Conferences Traffic Flow, Parking, Crossings concerns during the last week of October Pick-up & Drop Off In the summer, the Day-Care will 2025 (28th, 30th). No direct results walk to the Zoo and the Park, and are known. • All pick-up of 1st to 8th grade is sometimes downtown on Ave E, East of the School • They have no real congestion • Staff ensures that students aren’t issues crossing street to get to parents’ vehicles (Ave E for pick up) • Parking is the biggest challenge, the School is considering • Preschool and Kindergarten pick- 347 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 471 of 657 Bluffs Middle School Bluffs Middle School • Before and after school, Parking parents trying to turn left • Parking access and getting out (BMS) from East 23rd Street onto after football games seems to be Broadway are unable to turn Jana Mason, Principal okay; it is what it is, goes fairly and they completely congest James Todd, SBPS Safety Officer steadily 9/25/2025 traffic to a standstill Students Walking School starts at 7:45 a.m. and • Staffs’ opinion is that 2nd dismissal is at 3:00 p.m. Avenue has problems • There are Crossing Guards on Broadway & 24th, and at 2nd • There are huge congestion Circulation & 24th issues on the north-south route • Staff regularly observes • There are City crossing guards • A lot of people talk about congestion and traffic issues in as the City collaborates with making 2nd Avenue a one-way both the AM and PM the School street • Buses pick up in the parking • After School, students go down • Staff believes that having two- lot, right by the west entrance to Pioneer Park, Library, Runza (gym doors) way traffic keeps speeds down because of the congestion • Have worked with the City to • Students are gone by 3:08 p.m. and that a one-way street may establish where responsibility • Parents park in the 2nd move traffic better, but would lies for student behavior in the Avenue and 3rd Avenue row of increase speed and raise park after school (ie – fights) parking until buses leave safety issues • Students do not use direct routes • Parents in the circle on the Traffic Concerns walking to school, so there is south side of the school often not really a need for pedestrian • People traveling north on line up starting between 2:15 routing plans Broadway, merge right onto and 2:30 p.m. 27th St., and then turn left onto • Students walk from the Avenues, • Parents frequently double park, 1st Ave, and it can cause traffic some come from south of BMS sometimes the circle ends up issues (uncommon route) • Staff believes it may be completely blocked and traffic beneficial to have a crosswalk on flow is stopped 23rd/24th and 5th (BMS students walking to Longfellow/Roosevelt) 348 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 472 of 657 St Agnes Catholic School Weather Issues • Students walk to and from Summary school, they come from all over Sometimes after snow, turning • Crosswalks and Speeding are onto/off of Broadway can be rough Parking the main issues on 2nd and 3rd (if side-street cutouts take a while • Parking on both sides of street in • Scottsbluff Senior High School to plow through) Avenues causes visibility issues students speed on their way to St. Agnes Catholic School and congestion the high school Julie Brown, Principal • Staff suggests that for visibility an • Parking in the avenues is a big 10/7/2025 increase no-parking zone from issue for the residents in the intersection corners would help avenues School times are 8:00 a.m. – 3:15 with additional sight distance Weather p.m., and at 7:30 a.m. the school improvements picks up students with the bus. • At 24th St and 2nd Avenue snow • Having a cut out along the collects during bad storms School times are offset 15 minutes BMS side of the street would from BMS start/end times to potentially be useful – many • Snow builds up against the reduce conflict potential. parents use St. Agnes pull-out building and into the intersection Crossing Safety Uncontrolled Intersections Parent SS4A Outreach • The large issue is on 2nd and E • School believes it would also be The SS4A Team provided 75 23rd St, a Crossing Guard at 2nd useful to have yield/stop signs postcards for distribution to at 24th St has helped to slow on some of the uncontrolled families during parent teacher down traffic at 23rd intersections conferences containing a link to the online survey. No direct results • It would likely be beneficial to • Along 3rd Avenue stop signs are known. look at 2nd and 23rd as a 4-Way would help slow down speeding Stop traffic • At 23rd St and 3rd/4th Avenue it Buses is difficult for kids to cross • St. Agnes students are on the • Crosswalks are missing along BMS route, Principal Brown E 23rd and 24th down to 5th goes to BMS parking lot to walk Avenue students back to St. Agnes 349 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 473 of 657 Roosevelt Elementary — 9th Avenue Roosevelt Elementary • Targeted pedestrian lighting as important concerns near improvements Francis Burkhalter, Principal Roosevelt Elementary. Brittni Chancellor, Assistant • Sidewalk and ADA connection Particular emphasis was placed Principal, 9/16/2025 upgrades on student exposure during Primary Concerns Identified • Coordination with broader Safe arrival and dismissal periods, Routes to School efforts where vehicle congestion, • Student exposure during pick-up turning movements, and and drop-off periods As a result of school limited driver awareness • Vehicle congestion and turning interviews and increase potential conflicts near conflicts near the school discussions and crossings and school access points. • Driver speeds and limited additional site visits school-zone awareness and observation, Concerns were also raised • Pedestrian crossing visibility and the following regarding consistency of crossing comfort school-zone treatments and the recommendations are need for improved visibility and • Sidewalk and ADA connectivity made for each school. gaps speed awareness along nearby corridors. • Safe access for students walking School Safety from nearby neighborhoods Parents and school Recommendations stakeholders emphasized Potential Improvement Strategies the importance of creating • Enhanced school-zone signage Roosevelt Elementary safer and more predictable and pavement markings Discussions with school walking conditions for students • High-visibility crosswalk representatives and parent traveling to and from the improvements feedback from Parents- school, particularly at crossings Teachers Meeting with connected to neighborhood • Speed awareness and traffic SS4A Team identified school calming measures streets and nearby arterial circulation, pedestrian visibility, corridors. and safe crossing access 350 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 474 of 657 East 24th Street / 3rd Avenue — Recommended strategies — Recommend study of existing development of a site wide plan include: school zones and signage for school zones and parking, and shortcomings, followed by followed by implementation of the • Reviewing school-zone signage development and implementation derived plan. and pavement markings, of a plan to complete zones. • Evaluating pedestrian crossing Safe Routes to School ADA visibility, Most students that walk come from ADA ramps around the school the East side of the school. Staff • Considering targeted lighting or could be added on many of the feels that a Safe Routes to School speed-feedback treatments, and corners. program could be beneficial. • Coordinating future sidewalk — Recommend detailed field — Recommend development and ADA improvements with review of immediate area and of a Safe Routes to School Plan broader Safe Routes to School potential student routes to coordinated closely with School and corridor safety efforts determine shortcomings in ADA/ staff, then presentation of that identified in the Safety Action pedestrian access, followed Plan to the School for their Plan. by a staged plan to reduce the implementation. shortcomings. Westmoor Elementary Weather Issues Signage/School Zones Lincoln Heights There is a major gutter issue on Staff expressed that School Elementary Avenue C with poor drainage, it is zones would be the most useful always waterlogged, buses splash Better defined school zones and improvement and to increase through it, and in the winter it ices speeding enforcement would be signage of school zones to up, while in nicer weather there is their priority. address speeding concerns as leaf decay and odor. well as to enhance internal school — Initial recommendation is — Recommend on-site review pick-up system (emphasize student to request additional speed of existing curb and gutter with zones). enforcement from the City, analysis of grades/drainage followed by a site-wide study potential and possible repair/ of school zones, including replacement of curb and gutter to parent parking patterns, and eliminate the issue. 351 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 475 of 657 Bulffs Middle School — Broadway pedestrian crossing at 24th Street Longfellow Elementary Bluffs Middle School St. Agnes Catholic Pick-up (BMS) School There is a lot of congestion after Traffic Flow Crosswalks, Speeding, and school. Parking Staff regularly observes — Recommend a study of traffic congestion and traffic issues in Crosswalks and speeding are the circulation on-site and exiting onto both the morning and afternoon. main issues, along with parking in 5th Avenue. the avenues. — Recommend a site-wide Weather study of traffic circulation on-site — Recommend a comprehensive and exiting onto E 23rd Street study of crosswalks in the area Post snowfall events, ice and slush and continuing to Broadway, in surrounding the school and some stagnate on E 21st Street by the addition to observation of 2nd blocks out to determine off site picnic tables (North side of school). Avenue congestion with an eye potential needs, study should — Recommend requesting the toward the potential for, or not, include traffic routing, potential City to observe the complaint area making it a one-way street; study for changes to traffic control following a snow event to assess should include the potential of (4-way stop(s), yield or stop sign and determine potential solution a new crosswalk on 23rd Street placement, potential parking /24th Street and 5th Avenue. restrictions, particularly for sight distance at intersections) 352 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 476 of 657At 24th Street and 2nd Avenue Community Christian — Recommend review of snow collects during bad storms, it crosswalks and signage on the builds up against the building and School (CCS) school periphery into the intersection. Student Pedestrian Safety — Recommend observation of — Recommend requesting the • On 15th Street, north of the ADA/pedestrian facilities from the City to observe the complaint area school, children at play signage School to McCaffree Park, and following a snow event to assess and additional crosswalks would from the School to the Zoo for and determine potential solution be useful potential shortcomings, potentially followed by an improvement plan Having a cut out along the BMS • Speeding along the street is an for the facilities side of the street would potentially issue be useful – many parents use St. — Recommend review of lighting • The school sometimes takes Agnes pull-out. on 14th Street, potentially followed students to McCaffree Park for by a lighting improvement plan — Recommend a study for the physical education. and implementation possible implementation of a bus • In the summer, the Day-Care will cut-out on the Bluffs Middle School — Recommend requesting walk to the Zoo and the Park, side of the street (west side of 2nd additional speed enforcement and sometimes downtown Avenue, adjacent to BMS) on 15th Street from the City; • Poor lighting on 14th and and suggest a conversation speeding on 15th are large with the City regarding any concerns recommendations to improve safety in the area • Security is also a concern on 14th Street—the school administration would love cameras but do not know how to fund them 353 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 477 of 657 12.5 Transit Transit representatives ● 27th Street corridor identified several recurring ● Avenue I / Highway 71 Assessment - safety issues affecting both drivers and passengers, ● YMCA & South Beltline Roadrunner Public particularly along high-volume area arterial corridors and at bus ● Walmart commercial area: Transit stop locations lacking adequate Public transportation in ● Roosevelt area transit space, lighting, or pedestrian stops Scottsbluff is provided by infrastructure. Roadrunner Public Transit ● Eastwood and Family through partnerships involving Key Transit Safety Dollar stop areas Scotts Bluff County, the Cities Concerns Identified Transit drivers reported of Scottsbluff, Gering, and ● Buses stopping in active recurring conflicts involving Terrytown, the Nebraska travel lanes along East speeding, limited sight distance, Department of Transportation, Overland and 27th Street turning conflicts, and failure- the Federal Transit due to limited pull-out to-yield behavior at several Administration, Walmart, and space or lack of parking locations throughout the Western Nebraska Community lanes system. Particular concern College. Bus stops serve a was expressed regarding ● Limited pedestrian-scale low-income, elderly, multi-family stops along East Overland and lighting and shelter housing complex in Scottsbluff, 27th Street where buses must infrastructure at high-use as well as the Housing Authority frequently stop within active stops of Scottsbluff County, senior traffic lanes. assisted living center, and ● Vehicles parking too close residential areas. to bus stops, reducing Transit Safety Concern Roadrunner operates two accessibility and forcing Locations Identified by flexible fixed routes with buses to block traffic Drivers and Staff approximately 60-minute during boarding Recurring operational and service intervals and provides ● Driver non-compliance at safety concerns were identified curb-to-curb demand response intersections and around by drivers and staff at the service throughout Scotts Bluff stopped buses following locations: County. Flexible routes allow ● ADA accessibility 27th Street Corridor limited off-route deviations by deficiencies near bus reservation, helping improve ● Southbound Pawnshop stops and boarding areas accessibility for riders with stop mobility or access limitations. ● Congestion and ● Southbound Subway stop operational conflicts near Operational needs, safety schools and commercial ● Northbound Arby’s stop concerns, and transit-related corridors ● Northbound Essential Fuel improvement opportunities stop were discussed during Transit Corridors and coordination meetings between Locations Frequently ● Heavy traffic and Roadrunner staff and the SS4A Identified limited pull-out space team in October 2025. create unsafe boarding ● East Overland corridor conditions 354 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 478 of 657 East Overland Corridor Walmart Commercial Area ● Evaluation of no-parking ● Roosevelt stop area ● High traffic volumes and setbacks near bus stops ● Eastwood stop area multiple vehicle conflict ● Continued coordination points associated with lot between transit operations ● 5th & O stop area access and circulation and corridor safety ● Family Dollar stop area Key Recommendations improvements ● Drivers reported frequent and Priorities The transit assessment failure of motorists to slow reinforced the importance of or yield near stopped Transit-related priorities integrating public transportation buses identified for inclusion in the needs into corridor safety Safety Action Plan include: Avenue I / Highway 71 planning, particularly along ● Bus turnout and pull- high-exposure arterial corridors ● Four-way stop operations out improvements at and in areas serving older and failure-to-yield onstrained stops adults, students, and residents conflicts without reliable vehicle access. ● Pedestrian lighting and ● High-speed traffic near shelter enhancements These findings directly informed 42nd Street with limited projects related to transit sight distance ● Consistent ADA boarding BUS SHELTER Pand landingR improvementsOJEstopC upgrades,T pedestrian YMCA & South Beltline Area accessibility, corridor lighting, ● Bus stop accessibility ● Difficult turning and multimodal connectivity upgrades coordinated with movements and visibility within the Safety Action Plan. sidewalk projects SHELTER RENconstraintsDERING Roadrunner Public Transit rendering of planned bus stop improvements 355 Appendix 12 - Supplemental Assessments Page 479 of 657Page 480 of 657Scottsbluff Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan SAFE STREETS | STRONG COMMUNITY Page 481 of 657 For those we have lost — and for those we will protect ii Page 482 of 657Acknowledgements A special thank you to all of our City Officials partners and stakeholders who contributed to this Safety Action Plan: Betsy Vidlak, Mayor Jeanne McKerrigan, Vice-Mayor Jerry Stricker, City Council Member Matt Salomon, City Council Member City of Scottsbluff (SB) Scott Phillips, City Council Member Administration Kevin Spencer, City Manager Police Department Fire Department Public Works Department Finance Department Task Force Kevin Spencer, SB City Manager Doug Gompert, SB Public Works Director Nebraska State Patrol Lane Kizzire, SB Finance Director Zachary Glaubius, SB Development Services Director James Todd, Safety & Security, SB Public Schools Regional West Medical Molly Bonuchi, Student Life Director, Western Nebraska Community College (WNCC) Center (RWMC) Emergency Janelle Visser, PPHD Medical Services (EMS) Melissa Lally, Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) District 5 ROW/Utilities/Maintenance /Environmental Liaison Scottsbluff Public and Private Schools Scottsbluff High School Stakeholders Bluffs Middle School Community Christian School Nebraska State Patrol Lincoln Heights Elementary RWMC EMS (RWMS) Longfellow Elementary Scottsbluff Public School District Roosevelt Elementary Tri-City Roadrunner Transit St. Agnes Catholic School Panhandle Public Health District Westmoor Elementary Panhandle Public Health District (PPHD) This Safety Action Plan was developed with support from the U.S. Department of Tri-City Roadrunner Transit Transportation’s SS4A program and reflects the Safe System Approach. Scottsbluff is committed to using this plan to pursue Consultant Partners future SS4A implementation funding and M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc carry out data-driven, equity-focused safety JNW Consulting improvements across our community. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN iii Page 483 of 657VISION ZERO Our community commitment to a future where no one is killed or seriously injured on our streets. iv Page 484 of 657 A Place of Opportunity 308-632-4136 2525 Circle Drive A Place of Opportunity Scottsbluff, NE 69361 A Place of Opportunity 308-632-4136 2525308-632 Circle-4136 Drive The safety of our residents is one of the City of Scottsbluff’s highest Scottsbluff,2525 Circle NE Drive 69361 The safety of our residents is one of the City of Scottsbluff’s highest priorities. Every crash affects more priorities. Every crash affects more than statistics—it impacts families, Scottsbluff, NE 69361 than statistics—it impacts families, businesses, and our broader community. While many crashes result businesses, and our broader community. While many crashes result only in only in property damage,The even safety one of serious our residents injury or is fatalityone of theis too City many. of Scottsbluff’s highest priorities. Every crash affects more property damage, even one serious injury or fatality is too many. Thethan safety statistics of our— residentsit impacts is families,one of the businesses, City of Scottsbluff’s and our broader highest community. priorities. While Every manycrash crashes affects result more Even crashes that do not result in serious injury carry significant consequences. Property damage, rising Eventhanonly statisticscrashes in property— thatit impacts damage, do not families, result even onein businesses, serious serious injuryinj andury ourcarryor fatality broader significant is community.too many. While many crashes result insurance costs, emergency response demands, traffic delays, and damage to public infrastructure—such consequences.only in property damage,Property even damage, one serious rising injinsuranceury or fatality costs, is tooemergency many. as signal cabinets, signage,responseEven and crashes demands, roadway that dofeature traffic not results— placedelays, in serious financial and injurydamage and carry operational to significant public infrastructure— burdens consequences. on our Property damage, rising community. Every crashsuchEveninsurance has crashesas a signal cost. costs, that cabinets, do emergency not result signage, response in serious and demands, roadwayinjury carry traffic features—place significant delays, consequences. and financial damage toProperty public infrastructuredamage, rising—such andinsuranceas operational signal costs, cabinets, emergency burdens signage, on response andour roadwaycommunity. demands, feature trafficEverys— placecrash delays, financial has and a cost.damage and operational to public infrastructure burdens on— oursuch Over the past year, Scottsbluff has taken a comprehensive, data-driven look at where and why crashes Overas community.signal the cabinets,past Everyyear, signage, crashScottsbluff has and a roadwaycost. has taken feature a comprehensive,s—place financial data-driven and operational burdens on our occur. By analyzing ten years of crash data, mapping our High Injury Network, and listening to more than lookcommunity. at where Every and crash why has crashes a cost. occur. By analyzing ten years of crash a thousand residents,data, stakeholdersOver mapping the past and ouryear, regional High Scottsbluff Injury community Network, has takenmembers, and a comprehensive, listening this Safety to moreAction data- driventhan Plan a lookreflects at where and why crashes both lived experiencethousandOver andoccur. theobjective Bypast residents, analyzing year, analysis. Scottsbluff stakeholdersten Theyears findings ofhas crash andtaken are data, regional clear:a comprehensive, mapping crashes community our are High concentrateddata -members, drivenInjury Network,look thison at a where and listeningand why tocrashes more than limited number of corridorsSafetyoccur.a thousand By andAction analyzing intersections, residents,Plan ten reflects years stakeholders speed ofboth crash plays lived anddata,a critical experienceregional mapping role co inour mmunityand crash High objective severity, Injurymembers, Network, analysis.and this vulnerab Safety and le listening Action toPlan more reflects than road users—includingThea pedestrians,thousandboth findings lived residents, experience bicyclists,are clear: stakeholders andchildren, crashes objective and andare older concentratedanalysis.regional adults coThe—mmunity facefindings on disproportionatea limited members, are clear: number this crashes Safetyrisk. of are Action concentrated Plan reflects on a corridorsbothlimited lived numberandexperience intersections, of corridors and objective speedand intersections, analysis.plays a criticalThe speedfindings role plays in are crasha clear:critical severity, crashes role in and arecrash concentrated severity, and on a vulnerable This plan moves beyondvulnerable identifying road problems. users—including It outlines pedestrians,targeted, systemic bicyclists, strategies children, to reduce and fatalolder limitedroad numberusers—including of corridors pedestrians, and intersections, bicyclists, speedchildren, plays and a oldercritical adults role —in facecrash disproportionate severity, and vulnerab risk. le and serious injury crashesadults—face through disproportionatesafer street design, risk. improved crossings, speed management, and road users—including pedestrians, bicyclists, children, and older adults—face disproportionate risk. stronger community partnerships.This plan moves Just as beyond importantly, identifying it reinforces problems. that It streetoutlines safety targeted, is a shared systemic strategies to reduce fatal This plan moves beyond identifying problems. It outlines targeted, systemic This plan moves beyond identifying problems. It outlines targeted, systemic strategies to reduce fatal responsibility. Together,strategiesand we seriouscan reachto reduceinjury a future crashes fatal with and through zero serious fatalities safer injury street or crashesserious design, injuries throughimproved on safer crossings,Scottsbluff street speed management, and roadways. design,andstronger serious improved communityinjury crashes crossings, partnerships. through speed safer Just management, street as importantly, design, and improved it strongerreinforces crossings, community that street speed safety management, is a shared and partnerships.strongerresponsibility. community Just Together, as partnerships. importantly, we can reachJust it reinforces as a importantly,future withthat zerostreetit reinforces fatalities safety that isor a streetserious shared safety injuries is aon shared Scottsbluff On behalf of the City of Scottsbluff, I thank every resident, school, business, and community partner who responsibility.responsibility.roadways. Together, Together, we we can can reach reach a future a future with with zero zero fatalities fatalities or serious or serious injuries on Scottsbluff contributed to this effort. Together, we are building a safer transportation system that protects all who injuriesroadways. on Scottsbluff roadways. live, work, and travel here.On behalf of the City of Scottsbluff, I thank every resident, school, business, and community partner who On behalf of the City of Scottsbluff, I thank every resident, school, business, Oncontributed behalf of the to Citythis ofeffort. Scottsbluff, Together, I thankwe are every building resident, a safer school, transportation business, andsystem community that protects partner all whowho We are committed notand just community to planning, partner but to whoaction. contributed to this effort. Together, we are contributed to this effort. Together, we are building a safer transportation system that protects all who buildinglive, work, a safer and transportationtravel here. system that protects all who live, work, and Sincerely, live, work, and travel here. travelWe arehere. committed not just to planning, but to action. We are committedcommitted not just just to to planning,planning, but but to toaction. action. Sincerely, Sincerely, Sincerely, Betsy Vidlak Mayor, City of Scottsbluff Betsy Vidlak Betsy Vidlak BetsyMayor, Vidlak City of Scottsbluff Mayor, City of Scottsbluff Mayor, City of Scottsbluff SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN v Page 485 of 657 Eliminate fatal and severe crashes by2036. Reduce the number of severe roadway crashes and fatalities 50% by 2031. Implement a Safe System Approach, emphasizing safer speeds, safer streets, and safer people. Utilize data-driven decision making to prioritize and implement safety improvements. vi Page 486 of 657 Contents Building a Safer Transportation System for All ii Dedication Appendices iii Acknowledgements A1 Engagement v Letter from Mayor a2 collisions vi Leadership Commitment and Goals xv Executive Summary a3 crash maps xxiii Introduction a4 findings a5 baseline data 1. Why Scottsbluff Needs 01 Safer Streets a6 maps a7 methods 2. Everyone Has A Role In Street Safety 15 a8 projects 3. Where And Why a9 countermeasures 27 Crashes Happen a10 support 4. What We Can Do To 63 Make Streets Safer a11 documentation 5. Implementing and Sustaining a12 supplemental 85 safer Streets in Scottsbluff Assessments Appendices can be found Online at: bit.ly/ScottsbluffSS4A SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN vii Page 487 of 657Chapter Subsections 1 3 Why Scottsbluff Needs Where And Why Safer Streets Crashes Happen 1.1 The Importance of Safe Streets 1 3.1 Understanding patterns to Prevent 1.2 The Safe System Approach 3 Serious Injury 27 1.3 A Shared Vision for Change 5 3.2 Crash Overview 28 1.4 Comparison cities 7 3.3 The High Injury Network (HIN) 29 1.5 Equity and Urgency 11 3.4 Spacial Distribution of Crashes 1.6 Neighborhood Context and Equity Throughout Time 35 Considerations 14 3.5 5-Year KSI Crash Trend Analysis 37 1.7 Federal Support for Local Action 14 3.6 Enforcement Data Integration 38 3.7 Crash Type Breakdowns 39 3.8 Angle Crashes 41 3.9 Single Vehicle Crashes 42 3.10 Front-Rear Crashes 43 2 3.11 Front-Front Crashes 44 Everyone Has A Role 3.12 Sideswipe (Same) Crashes 45 3.13 Sideswipe (Opposite) Crashes 46 In Street Safety 3.14 Rear-Rear and Rear-Side Crashes 47 2.1 Community Input Summary 16 3.15 unknown/Other Crashes 48 2.2 Who We Heard From 19 3.16 Crash specifics and Contributing 2.3 What People Said 21 Factors 49 2.4 Perception vs. crash Data 23 3.17 Who Is Most Affected 53 2.5 Engagement Timeline 26 3.18 Age and Gender 54 2.6 How Input Shaped the Plan 26 3.19 when crashes occur 55 2.7 Ongoing Role of the Community 26 3.20 Vulnerable Road Users — Pedestrians, Bicyclists, & Motorcyclists 57 3.21 What the Data Tells Us 62 viii Page 488 of 657 4 5 What We Can Do To Implementing and Sustaining Make Streets Safer Safer Streets in Scottsbluff 4.1 From Findings to Strategy 63 5.1 FROM STRATEGY TO SAVED LIVES 85 4.2 A Safe System Framework 63 5.2 Implementation framework 86 4.4 Safer Intersections 64 5.3 who does what: Governance & Roles 87 4.5 Corridor Safety Improvements 65 5.4 what happens first: Phased delivery 4.6 School Zone and Youth Safety plan 89 Enhancements 67 5.5 Action Plan Actions & 4.7 Vulnerable Road User Protection 67 Implementation Guide 90 4.8 Regional connectivity and multimodal 5.5.1 Action Categories 90 spine improvements 67 5.5.2 Implementation Action Matrix 91 4.9 Behavioral and Policy Strategies 68 5.6 how we pay for it: funding & Grant 4.10 Project Prioritization Framework 68 Readiness 97 4.11 Short-, Mid-, and Long-Term Action Plan 69 5.7 how we measure success Performance 4.12 Implementation Tiers: From Priority to & Accountability 99 Delivery 70 5.8 working across boundaries: 4.13 project, program & policy action Inter-agency Coordination 100 summaries 71 5.9 sustaining momentum: 4.14 Governance, Monitoring, and From Plan to Action 100 Plan Updates 84 5.10 federal compliance & SS4A alignment 101 5.11 Council Adoption Summary Purpose 103 Glossary of Acronyms • ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act • Injury C (Inj-C) – Possible Injury • BNSF – Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway • KSI – Killed or Seriously Injured • CIP – Capital Improvement Planning • LTAP – Local Technical Assistance Program • CM – Countermeasure • LTL – Left Turn Leaving • EMS – Emergency Medical Services • NDOT – Nebraska Department of Transportation • ETJ – Extraterritorial Jurisdiction • PDO – Property Damage Only • FHWA – Federal Highway Administration • RRFBs – Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons • GIS – Geographic Information System • RWMS – Regional West Medical Services • HIN – High Injury Network • SAP – Safety Action Plan • HSIP – Highway Safety Improvement Program • SBPS — Scottsbluff Public Schools • HSO – Highway Safety Office • SS4A – Safe Streets for All • Injury A (Inj-A) – Severe Injury • TAP – Transportation Alternatives Program • Injury B (Inj-B) – Observed Injury • USDOT – United States Department of Transportation SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN ix Page 489 of 657List of Figures Figure 1-1. Ten Year Average - Fatalities per 100k Population (2014-2023) ..........................................2 Figure 1-2. Scottsbluff Fatalities vs. National Average (2014-2023) .......................................................2 Figure 1-3. The Safe System Approach (FHWA)............................................................................................3 Figure 1-4. Project Area: Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan .................................................................6 Figure 1-5, 1-6, and 1-7. Scottsbluff and Comparison City Crash Rates ..................................................8 Figure 1-8. Crash Heat Maps by Community .................................................................................................9 Figure 1-9. Community Engagement Areas .................................................................................................. 11 Figure 1-10. Income Overview .......................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 1-11. Ethnicity and Population by Census Tract ............................................................................... 12 Figure 1-12. Disadvantaged Census tracts in Scottsbluff, NE. ................................................................. 13 Figure 2-1. Community Engagement Event Locations .............................................................................. 16 Figure 2-2. Survey Participation by Area ....................................................................................................20 Figure 2-3. Scottsbluff Population by Area .................................................................................................20 Figure 2-4. Survey Response Compared to Population ..........................................................................20 Figure 2-5. Public Comment Heat Map ....................................................................................................... 23 Figure 2-6. Crash Density Heat Map (2014–2023) ................................................................................... 24 Figure 3-1. Crash Severity Distribution for the Project Area (City and ETJ, 2014–2023) ...............28 Figure 3-2. Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN (2014–2023) ..............................................................................................29 Figure 3-3. HIN Network Statistics ................................................................................................................29 Figure 3-4. High Injury Network and Traffic Control .................................................................................. 31 Figure 3-5. KSI Crashes, Posted Speed Limits and Traffic Control ...................................................... 32 Figure 3-6. Disadvantaged Census tracts and Killed and Seriously Injured Crash Locations. .... 33 Figure 3-7. Hot Spots ......................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 3-8. 2017 - 2021 KSI Crashes ............................................................................................................. 37 Figure 3-11. 2020 - 2024 KSI Crashes .......................................................................................................... 37 Figure 3-9. 2018 - 2022 KSI Crashes ............................................................................................................ 38 Figure 3-10. 2019 - 2023 KSI Crashes .......................................................................................................... 38 Figure 3-12. 2021 - 2025 KSI Crashes .......................................................................................................... 38 Figure 3-13. Angle Crashes ............................................................................................................................ 39 Figure 3-14. Single Vehicle Crashes ..............................................................................................................40 Figure 3-15. Total Crash Type Distribution (2014–2023) .........................................................................40 Figure 3-16. Angle Crashes .............................................................................................................................. 41 Figure 3-17. Single Vehicle Crashes .............................................................................................................. 42 Figure 3-18. Front-Rear Crashes .................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 3-19. Front-Front Crashes ................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 3-20. Sideswipe Same Crashes ........................................................................................................ 45 Figure 3-21. Sideswipe Opposite Crashes .................................................................................................. 46 Figure 3-22. Rear-Rear & Rear-Side Crashes ............................................................................................. 47 Figure 3-23. Unknown/Other Crashes ......................................................................................................... 48 Figure 3-24. Why Speed Matters .................................................................................................................50 Figure 3-25. Crash Severity Key Factors ...................................................................................................... 51 Figure 3-26. Clear Weather KSI Crashes ....................................................................................................52 Figure 3-27. Lighting: Non-KSI Crashes .......................................................................................................52 Figure 3-28. Lighting: KSI Crashes ................................................................................................................52 x Page 490 of 657Referenced Documents Scottsbluff Comprehensive Plan Tri-City Sustainability Plan City of Scottsbluff and Panhandle Area Tri-City Sustainability Task Force, Development District, 2016 November 3, 2009 East Overland Corridor Revitalization Plan Regional Economic Development City of Scottsbluff, studioINSITE, Strategic Plan Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, May 2017 Thomas P. Miller & Associates, 2014 Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Economic and Demographic Trends dropseed studio, Water Scape, Melissa Trueblood, PhD, Nebraska Public City of Scottsbluff, March 31, 2014 Power District Economic Development Department, February 2021 Master Pathways Plan Drawing Baker & Associates, Inc., Multi-county Regional Housing Study with City of Scottsbluff, June 1, 2004 Strategies for Affordable Housing - 2027. Hanna:Keelan Associates, P.C. Community City of Scottsbluff Standards and Planning & Research, August 2022 Specifications for Design & Construction of Public Improvements City of Scottsbluff, 1996 Edition Formal Citations Figure 1.3 The Safe System Approach Source: Federal Highway Administration. Safe System Approach Framework. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, 2021. Available at: https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths/ Page 45: Lane Departure Warning Systems Reduction in Crashes Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). Lane departure warning, blind spot detection help drivers avoid trouble. 2017. Available at: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/stay-within-the-lines- lane-departure-warning-blind-spot-detection-help-drivers-avoid-trouble Page 49: Distracted Driving is a persistent issue. Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Distracted Driving. Accessed March 2026. Available at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving Page 49 and Figure 3-24: The Relationship Between Speeding and Pedestrian Fatalities Source: Vision Zero Network. Landmark National Study Urges Safety Over Speed. Kathleen Ferrier, 2017. Available at: https://visionzeronetwork.org/safety-over-speed/ xii Page 492 of 657 This page intentionally left blank SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xiii Page 493 of 657 Severe crashes are not random. They are predictable — and preventable. xiv Page 494 of 657Executive Summary Scottsbluff serves as the economic and mobility flow, strain emergency services, damage public hub of Western Nebraska. Major corridors, infrastructure, increase insurance premiums, including US-26, Avenue I (Highway 71), and impose financial hardship on families and Broadway, and 20th Street carry regional traffic, businesses. The economic and operational cost freight movement, school travel, and local trips of crashes extends far beyond the crash scene. that support commerce and community life. However, these corridors also carry predictable The Scottsbluff Safe Streets and Roads for All safety risks. (SS4A) Safety Action Plan establishes a Vision Zero–aligned roadmap to eliminate fatal and Between 2014 and 2023, Scottsbluff serious injury crashes on Scottsbluff City streets. experienced 5,361 reported crashes, including Grounded in crash data, High Injury Network 79 serious injury crashes and 14 fatal crashes. (HIN) analysis, school safety assessments, and extensive community engagement, the plan Analysis of ten years of crash data (2014–2023) applies Safe System principles to manage speed, confirms that fatal and serious injury crashes reduce conflict exposure, improve visibility, and are concentrated along a limited number of protect vulnerable road users. corridors and intersections. From Data to Action These patterns are not random— they are systemic, predictable, and The plan translates documented risk into a coordinated implementation framework that preventable� includes: Between 2014 and 2023, severe crashes ● Targeted corridor and intersection clustered along US-26, Avenue I, Broadway, modernization along Tier 1 High Injury and East Overland, and near school campuses Network segments and rail crossings. These locations share ● School zone and youth mobility protections common characteristics: ● Sidewalk, ADA, and pathway network ● Higher operating speeds improvements ● Multi-lane crossings ● Rail crossing safety and system resilience ● Complex turning movements at signalized strategies intersections ● Lighting and visibility upgrades ● Limited pedestrian protection and crossing ● Quick-build and interim treatments enhancements ● Education, enforcement coordination, and ● Visibility challenges at night performance monitoring ● Exposure near schools and commercial ● Policy and ordinance updates to centers institutionalize safety While eliminating fatal and serious injury Rather than focusing solely on isolated crash crashes is the central goal of this plan, all locations, the plan prioritizes corridor-level and levels of traffic crashes impact the community. network-level strategies where severe crashes Property-damage-only crashes disrupt traffic are most likely to occur. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xv Page 495 of 657 How Scottsbluff Will Act: A Systemic Implementation A Shared Commitment Strategy In a community the size of Scottsbluff, To move from planning to measurable serious crashes have personal impact. safety improvements, Scottsbluff has This Safety Action Plan recognizes organized its highest-priority actions that reality and commits to proactive, into three coordinated Safety Focus data-driven change—ensuring Areas. Together, these focus areas that roadway design, policy, and address immediate risk, protect operations work together to prevent vulnerable users, and modernize high- future tragedies. severity corridors. By focusing on predictable risk 1. School & Youth Safety environments and applying proven Protection countermeasures consistently across the network, Scottsbluff is positioned 2. High-Severity Corridor to make measurable progress toward Modernization eliminating fatal and serious injury crashes. 3. Systemic Citywide & Network Improvements Detailed projects, programs, policies, cost estimates, and implementation These focus areas allow the City to: matrices are provided in Chapter 4 and ● Advance near-term quick-build Appendix A8. improvements ● Pursue major corridor and signal upgrades To implement this Safety ● Strengthen school environments Action Plan, the City of Scottsbluff has organized ● Improve pedestrian and ADA its highest-priority actions continuity into three coordinated ● Coordinate with NDOT and rail implementation safety focus partners areas� Each focus area ● Build long-term institutional addresses a different aspect safety capacity of traffic safety risk, while This scalable framework supports working together to reduce phased implementation and aligns fatal and serious injury with SS4A Implementation Grant crashes across the city� priorities. xvi Page 496 of 657Priority Safety focus areas Focus area 1 — School & Youth Focus area 2 — High-Severity Focus area 3 — Systemic Citywide Safety Protection Corridor Modernization & Network Improvements Critical Community Focus High Impact Priority Foundational System Strategy Why This Matters Why This Matters Why This Matters School travel creates predictable, A disproportionate share of Many severe crashes are high-exposure conditions during Scottsbluff’s fatal and serious injury linked to underlying network- concentrated arrival and dismissal crashes occur along major arterial wide conditions—lighting periods near campuses and corridors, including US-26, Avenue I, gaps, incomplete sidewalks, along walking routes. Children Broadway, and 20th Street. rail interfaces, and speed are among the most vulnerable management inconsistencies. Primary Risks Addressed roadway users. ● Signal visibility and turning Primary Risks Addressed Primary Risks Addressed conflicts ● Nighttime severity ● Peak-hour pedestrian ● Angle and rear-end crashes ● Discontinuous pedestrian congestion near campuses ● Red light running facilities ● Child pedestrian exposure at ● Multi-lane pedestrian crossings ● Rail crossing exposure crossings ● High operating speeds ● Neighborhood speeding ● Inconsistent crossing visibility ● Freight and truck interactions ● Inconsistent treatments across ● Sidewalk gaps near schools corridors Core Strategies ● Vehicle turning conflicts during Core Strategies drop-off/pick-up ● Signal modernization and visibility upgrades (backplates, ● Targeted lighting upgrades Core Strategies improved timing, advance ● Sidewalk and ADA gap ● School zone standardization warning) elimination ● Crossing visibility upgrades ● Intersection design ● Pathway network completion ● Circulation and access enhancements (protected turns, ● Rail crossing enhancements improvements conflict reduction treatments) ● Quick-build traffic calming ● ADA ramp and sidewalk gap ● High-visibility pedestrian ● Ongoing safety performance closure crossings and refuge monitoring ● Education and enforcement improvements Who Benefits coordination ● Corridor lighting and nighttime visibility upgrades ● Residents across all Who Benefits ● Access management and turn- neighborhoods and travel ● Students, families, school staff, lane improvements modes. and nearby residents. ● NDOT coordination for phased corridor modernization Focus area 3 strengthens the Focus area 1 protects children entire transportation network and vulnerable users. Who Benefits for lasting safety. ● Drivers, freight operators, pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, regional travelers. Focus area 2 reduces risk on the highest crash severity corridors. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xvii Page 497 of 657 Table ES-1. Priority Projects (J1–J6): Near-Term and High-Impact Safety Investments Priority infrastructure projects J1—J6 focus on corridor modernization, intersection safety, school access, and early implementation opportunities. Many Tier 1 actions include quick-build treatments that can be deployed rapidly to address immediate risk while longer-term improvements are developed. Quick Projects Tier Build                                     SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xix Page 499 of 657 Table ES-3. Programs and Policies (P1–P5, O1): Supporting Implementation and Long-Term Safety Programs P1—P5 and policy actions included in O1 reinforce infrastructure investments through education, enforcement, coordination, and institutional change. These actions are essential to sustaining safety improvements and aligning the transportation system with Safe System principles. Quick Tier Build                          Quick Tier Build        SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xxi Page 501 of 657 Understanding the Risks. Designing the Response. xxii Page 502 of 657 INTRODUCTION Building a Safer Transportation System for All A Comprehensive Safety Action Plan The City of Scottsbluff received funding through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program to develop this Safety Action Plan. The purpose of this plan is simple and urgent: eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes on Scottsbluff’s transportation network. Grounded in ten years of crash data (2014–2023), High Injury Network analysis, school safety assessments, and extensive community engagement, this document establishes a data-driven, implementation- ready framework aligned with the Safe System Approach. This plan moves beyond identifying problems. It defines clear priorities, measurable outcomes, and coordinated strategies designed to reduce risk where it is highest. Understanding the Risks. Designing the Response. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xxiii Page 503 of 657 Between 2014 and 2023, a neighbor, classmate, A Community- Scottsbluff experienced 5,361 coworker, or family member. reported crashes within the City Driven and its three-mile extraterritorial Grounded in the Safe jurisdiction, including 93 System Approach, this plan Commitment to crashes involving fatal or recognizes that: serious injuries, which resulted ● People make mistakes. in a total of 14 fatalities and 146 Safer Streets ● Roadway design influences severe injuries. The City of Scottsbluff behavior. received federal funding Severe crashes are not ● Speed determines injury through the U.S. Department random—they concentrate severity. along specific corridors, at of Transportation’s (USDOT) ● Serious injuries are complex intersections, near Safe Streets and Roads for All preventable. (SS4A) program to develop schools, and at rail interfaces. this comprehensive Safety By combining crash data And while most crashes Action Plan. The SS4A initiative analysis, High Injury Network result in property damage supports communities across (HIN) mapping, school safety only, these incidents still carry the country in reducing assessments, stakeholder real consequences—vehicle fatal and serious injury collaboration, and extensive repair costs, damaged signal crashes through data- public engagement, Scottsbluff equipment, emergency driven analysis, meaningful has developed a coordinated response time, traffic delays, public engagement, and framework to eliminate fatal and and long-term financial strain for implementation-focused serious injury crashes. those involved. planning. This document moves This Safety Action Plan beyond identifying problems. identifies crash patterns It establishes prioritized Every serious and establishes targeted, projects, policy actions, crash impacts a implementable strategies to performance measures, family, a school, or reduce crash risk systemwide. a neighborhood. governance structures, and Safer streets These are not abstract funding pathways to guide protect us all. statistics. Each crash represents safety improvements over the next decade. xxiv Page 504 of 657 Public comments received through the online commenting map ● Stakeholder sessions with youth, seniors, working families, Built With the Police, Fire, EMS, and regional commuters, and Nebraska State Patrol community members from Community ● Discussions with all public neighboring communities including Gering and Terrytown The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety and private schools in Scottsbluff who live, work, shop, walk, Action Plan was not just bicycle, and drive in Scottsbluff. developed behind a desk. It ● Classroom presentations at was shaped in classrooms, at Scottsbluff High School and To support inclusive geographic community festivals, in school middle schools input, the City was divided gyms, at Rotary meetings, at ● School PTO meetings and into five engagement hospital employee fairs, and student orientation events zones separated by census through conversations with tracts. Participants could first responders, educators, ● Community pop-ups at identify their general area business leaders, and families. National Night Out, Oregon of residence, allowing Trail Days (Gering), Beef, responses to be mapped A multi-disciplinary team— Beans & Bluegrass, Bands and cross-referenced with including City staff, a four- on Broadway, Cinco de crash data and demographic meeting SS4A Task Force, Mayo Festival, and 18th characteristics. This approach public safety partners, school Street Plaza events ensured representation across administrators, regional health ● Rotary presentations and neighborhoods. representatives, and residents— employee benefit fairs worked collaboratively to When classrooms, identify Scottsbluff’s most ● Two online surveys and first responders, urgent safety needs and a crowdsource public families, and business realistic implementation comment map leaders all point to strategies. ● Direct mail postcards, the same concerns, newspaper notices and the direction Community engagement was stories, website updates, becomes clear. intentionally broad and place- and social media outreach All engagement activities— based. Outreach included: This strategy met residents including methods, ● Four formal Task Force where they already gather— attendance, comments, and meetings ensuring participation from reoccurring themes—are fully documented in Appendix A1. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xxv Page 505 of 657 Severe crashes road width, and parking How This Plan are concentrated, conditions predictable, and ● Pathway networks and Was Built preventable. This plan turns data sidewalk gaps A Data-Driven and Policy- into action. ● Transit stops and points of interest Aligned Process High Injury Network (HIN) ● Signage inventories The identification of screening was conducted Scottsbluff’s key safety issues to identify corridors where ● 2020 U.S. Census followed a comprehensive, fatal and serious injury demographic data layered process consistent with crashes are concentrated. This integrated crash data USDOT SS4A guidance. Citation data (2025), Annual model allowed safety conditions Average Daily Traffic (AADT), to be analyzed not only by Crash data from 2014–2023 functional classification, severity, but also by exposure, were analyzed to identify: speed limits, and roadway land use, and community geometry were incorporated context. ● High-severity corridors and into a GIS-based crash risk intersections model. Building on Previous Work ● Contributing factors such as speed, turning conflicts, and Additional datasets were The Safety Action Plan builds visibility integrated to evaluate safety upon extensive prior planning in context, including: and policy efforts, including: ● Patterns involving vulnerable road users ● Land use and corporate ● Scottsbluff Comprehensive ● Temporal trends and limits (City of Scottsbluff) Plan (2016 & 2026 Update) exposure conditions ● Roadway centerlines and ● Scottsbluff Municipal Code functional classifications ● East Overland Corridor ● Speed limits, lane counts, Revitalization Plan (2017) xxvi Page 506 of 657● Downtown Streetscape ● Nebraska Complete Streets ● Locations with Master Plan (2014) initiatives documented crash severity ● Multi-County Regional By aligning with these policies By focusing on predictable Housing Study (2022) and initiatives, the City ensures exposure environments and that its safety investments vulnerable users—including ● Scottsbluff School Safety complement broader regional youth, seniors, transit users, Assessment (2020) and state safety objectives and individuals without access ● Master Pathway Map while positioning Scottsbluff for to private vehicles—the plan ● Standards & Specifications future funding opportunities. advances both safety and (1996) Detailed documentation of prior mobility equity. The plan also aligns with state- plans and policy alignment is The engagement strategy level initiatives, including: provided in Appendix A4 (Findings) intentionally included Appendix A10 ● Nebraska Department of and (Support & students, families, seniors, Alignment). Transportation (NDOT) public safety personnel, Strategic Highway Safety Equity and Accessibility business owners, and regional Plan (SHSP) partners to ensure that safety Equity considerations were improvements reflect the ● Nebraska Vision Zero central to the planning process. Initiative lived experience of the entire Safety improvements prioritize: community. ● Safe Routes to School ● Routes to schools and Program youth-serving facilities This plan is ● Nebraska Bicycle and ● Access to parks and grounded in Pedestrian Master Plan recreation data, shaped by community input, ● Nebraska Local ● Connections to downtown and built for Transportation Assistance and commercial areas implementation. Program (LTAP) ● Neighborhoods with elevated pedestrian exposure SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xxvii Page 507 of 657 Chapter 3 — Crash Chapter 5 — Turning How This Plan Is Analysis and Findings Strategy into Action Organized Chapter 3 presents a Chapter 5 outlines detailed review of crash implementation structure, This Safety Action Plan is data (2014–2023), including roles and responsibilities, structured to move from vision the High Injury Network, phased delivery, funding to implementation: contributing factors, strategies, performance vulnerable user impacts, measures, and federal Chapter 1 — Community and temporal trends. This alignment. Context and Vision chapter identifies where and Chapter 1 introduces why severe crashes occur. Scottsbluff’s transportation environment, establishes the Chapter 4 — Strategies Vision Zero commitment, and and Priority Safety outlines why equity, urgency, Bundles and federal partnership matter Chapter 4 translates data in advancing safety. findings into coordinated strategies aligned with the Chapter 2 — Community Safe System Approach, Engagement including corridor Chapter 2 summarizes modernization, school safety The streets we public outreach, stakeholder protection, and systemic design today shape input, and key themes heard network improvements. the lives we protect from residents, schools, tomorrow. businesses, and regional partners who live, work, and travel in Scottsbluff. xxviii Page 508 of 657Technical Foundations Appendices include: Together, the chapters and Appendices and appendices provide ● A1 — Engagement a complete, data-driven, Supporting materials are Documentation and implementation-ready provided in the Appendices to ● A2 — Collision Data Tables roadmap to reduce fatal and ensure transparency, technical ● A3 — Crash Maps and serious injury crashes in rigor, and federal compliance. High Injury Network Scottsbluff. These include: Analysis ● Detailed crash data tables ● A4 — Findings and and methodology Previous Planning Review ● High Injury Network ● A5 — Baseline Conditions calculations and severity and Metrics scoring ● A6 — Supporting Maps ● Public engagement ● A7 — Methods and summaries and survey Analytical Approach instruments ● A8 — Projects, Programs, ● Project scoring criteria and and Policy Actions, and prioritization matrices Cost Estimates ● Cost assumptions and ● A9 — Countermeasure implementation timelines Toolbox ● Performance monitoring ● A10 — Project Support framework and Alignment ● Federal SS4A compliance ● A11 — Federal documentation Documentation and ● Supplemental technical Compliance Materials assessments ● A12 — Supplemental Assessments SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN xxix Page 509 of 6571Why Scottsbluff Needs Safer Streets 1.1 The Importance of Even crashes that do not 71 fatal or severe injury crashes Safe Streets result in fatal or serious injury that resulted in 9 fatalities and reshape lives. A damaged 128 severe injuries—collectively Every day, people in Scottsbluff vehicle can mean missed work, referred to as KSI (Killed or walk, bike, drive, or roll along missed school, unexpected Seriously Injured) crashes. our community’s streets to get repair bills, higher insurance When including the City’s full where they need to go—work, premiums, and lost mobility. 3-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction, school, the grocery store, a When crashes damage signal the total rises to 5,361 crashes neighbor’s house. These are cabinets, signage, or roadway over the same ten-year period. ordinary trips on familiar roads. infrastructure, taxpayers Within that area, 93 KSI crashes But too often, these routine trips bear the cost. When traffic resulted in fatal or serious injury, come with real risk. Crashes is shut down along US-26 leading to 14 lives lost and 146 occur in predictable places, or near a school, commerce people severely injured. Across under predictable conditions, slows, emergency response all crashes, 1,690 people and sometimes with devastating is delayed, and daily life is received some level of injury. consequences. disrupted. The impact of crashes—large and small— These numbers underscore the These are not just numbers on touches the entire community. urgent need for a more focused a spreadsheet—they are real and comprehensive approach families, friends, and neighbors Between 2014 and 2023, the to traffic safety. whose lives are changed in City of Scottsbluff experienced Scottsbluff’s 10-year average lasting ways. 4,907 traffic crashes, including fatal crash rate is 5.59 per 1 Page 510 of 657 Figure 1-1. 100,000 residents. Compared to (left) similar-sized Nebraska communities, Ten Year this rate is concerning (see Figure Average - 1-1). While year-to-year fatality rates Fatalities can fluctuate significantly in smaller per 100k communities, the data shows that in Population 2015, 2018, and 2022, Scottsbluff’s (2014- fatality rate exceeded the national 2023) average (see Figure 1-2). The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan is built on the belief that these tragedies are preventable. Even one life lost is one too many. That is where this plan — and a new way of thinking about street safety — begins� Figure 1-2. Scottsbluff Fatalities vs. National Average (2014-2023) SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 2 Page 511 of 657 Figure 1-3. The Safe System Approach (FHWA) 1.2 The Safe System crashes as unavoidable to Severe crashes are not random Approach recognizing that they follow — they occur where speed, predictable patterns and can exposure, and conflict intersect. Scottsbluff is embracing the be prevented through better This means they can be Safe System Approach — a design, data-driven decision- predicted and reduced. strategy rooted in the belief making, and community- Across the country, that while human mistakes are informed solutions. That communities are already inevitable, deaths and serious shift is the core of Vision applying Vision Zero strategies injuries are not. A Safe System Zero: a public commitment to reduce speeds, improve works by building layers of to eliminate fatal and serious crossing visibility, modernize protection: safer roads, safer injury crashes. intersections, and strengthen speeds, safer vehicles, and The old approach accepted enforcement and emergency improved post-crash care, all crashes as the cost of mobility. response. supported by a culture that We now understand that prioritizes safety for everyone crashes also carry financial, Scottsbluff refuses to (see Figure 1-3). operational, and community- accept traffic deaths This plan marks a shift in wide costs that no community as inevitable� We are mindset — from viewing should accept as inevitable. aiming for zero� Figure 1.3 Source: Federal Highway Administration, Safe System Approach Framework, 2021. 3 Page 512 of 657 No one should die or be seriously injured while using our streets — every life matters. Because people will make mistakes, our transportation system must be designed to reduce the consequences of those mistakes. Death/Serious Injury Humans Our bodies can only withstand so much is Unacceptable Make Mistakes force; the system must protect everyone, especially those most at risk. Creating safer streets is a shared responsibility — between planners, engineers, policymakers, enforcement, emergency responders, and every road user. Humans Responsibility We prevent crashes Are Vulnerable Is Shared before they happen by identifying risk patterns and addressing them early. Multiple layers of protection — design, enforcement, education, and emergency response — help keep people safe even when one layer fails. Safety Redundancy Is Proactive Is Critical SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 4 Page 513 of 657The Scottsbluff SS4A Task Force meets to discuss street safety 1.3 A Shared Vision for busy intersections and decision-making processes. Change ● An older adult crossing the This Safety Action Plan serves street with a walker as the roadmap for achieving This Safety Action Plan lays that goal. When one person is seriously the foundation for meaningful injured or killed in a crash, our To achieve this shared vision, progress. Our vision is clear: entire community feels the we must understand the area eliminate fatal and serious injury impact. Any life lost is one too we are working to improve. The crashes by 2036. Achieving this many. Safety Action Plan covers not goal will take time, coordination, only the City of Scottsbluff but and investment, but it begins by In alignment with the federal also its 3-mile extraterritorial changing how we view traffic Safe Streets and Roads for All jurisdiction (ETJ), which includes safety. We must treat safety as (SS4A) grant requirements, key corridors, neighborhoods, a shared responsibility—one the City of Scottsbluff formally and regional destinations. that affects people of all ages, adopted a Vision Zero goal to The map in Figure 1-4 shows abilities, and backgrounds. eliminate traffic-related fatalities the full project area where and serious injuries by 2036. Streets should be safe for crash data was analyzed and This commitment was approved everyone: safety improvements will be by the City Council on May 4, prioritized. ● A child walking to school 2026 through resolution 26- 05-02 (see Appendix A10 - Support) ● A teenager biking to the This plan is and establishes the City’s intent park Scottsbluff’s to integrate safety into future commitment to act� ● A delivery driver navigating planning, project development, 5 Page 514 of 657 Figure 1-4. Project Area: Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan This map shows the geographic area included in the plan: the City of Scottsbluff corporate limits and its 3-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ)� These boundaries reflect where crash data analysis, safety improvements, and community engagement efforts were concentrated� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 6 Page 515 of 657 Figure 1-5 – Crash Trends by Community (2014–2023) A comparison of total crashes, injury crashes, and KSI crashes across Scottsbluff, Beatrice, Gering, North Platte, and South Sioux City. 1.4 Comparison cities • North Platte is the largest comparison city, with a population of 22,523, and is To better understand how local crash trends intersected by I-80 compare regionally, the planning team analyzed data from four peer cities: Beatrice, Gering, North Because the cities vary in population, crash rates Platte, and South Sioux City. These communities were compared in order to get an accurate sense were selected based on similar population size, of the relative number of crashes occurring. regional function, and roadway context. Rates are expressed as crashes per year per 100,000 residents to provide a consistent basis • Gering has a population of 8,531, making it for evaluation.. The graphs shown in Figure 1-5, the smallest of the comparison cities selected 1-6, and 1-7 are set at a standard of the expected for comparison. However, there is an overlap number of crashes per 100,000 people. of drivers in Scottsbluff and in Gering. Including Gering ensures representation of Heatmaps of the crashes for each city with an the broader Panhandle region. overlay of KSI crashes are shown in Figure 1-8. • Beatrice is close to Scottsbluff in population Compared to Nebraska with a size of 12,262, and is on several well communities of similar sizes, traveled highways. Scottsbluff’s crash rate is • South Sioux City has a population of 13,856, concerning� and is a southern sister city of Sioux City, Iowa (pop. ~86K). 7 Page 516 of 657Figure 1-5. The comparison city analysis included: ● Crashes resulting in fatalities or serious injuries (KSI) ● Crashes involving injuries ● Total reported crashes (regardless of severity) The crash rate for each category was analyzed to determine which cities have the most prevalent crash types. Normalization ensures that population size Figure 1-6. does not distort the comparison. Scottsbluff has the highest rate of crashes in most categories analyzed. Scottsbluff has the highest rate of crashes overall, as well as the highest rate of Fatal, Observed Injury (Inj-B), Possible Injury (Inj-C), and Property Damage Only (PDO) crashes. The only category in which Scottsbluff did not rank highest was Serious Injury crashes (Injury A), where North Platte recorded a slightly higher rate. Figure 1-7. This comparison reveals that, while all communities face safety challenges, Scottsbluff experiences a disproportionately high frequency of serious injury crashes per capita. These findings confirm what residents and local data already indicate: the risk of severe crashes is real and systemic. Under a Safe System Approach, this data becomes a call to action. Figure 1-5, 1-6, and 1-7. Scottsbluff and Comparison City Crash Rates Graphs showing the breakdown of crashes by crash rate (crashes per person per year - based on a standard population of 100,000 people) for Scottsbluff and the comparison cities SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 8 Page 517 of 657 Figure 1-8. Crash Heat Maps by Community Crash density maps illustrate where collisions concentrate within each city, with severe crashes overlaid to highlight high-risk intersections and corridors� City of Scottsbluff Across all comparison cities, 71), Broadway, 20th Street, and Severe crashes crash density patterns East Overland. The concentration are not evenly concentrate along major of serious injury crashes along distributed — they corridors and signalized these corridors reinforces the intersections. In Scottsbluff, these need for corridor-level and cluster along specific clusters are especially prominent systemic safety strategies rather corridors and along US-26, Avenue I (Highway than isolated spot treatments. intersections� Note: In NDOT crash data, “Injury A (Inj-A)” refers to Serious Injury, as defined by the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) 5th Edition, adopted by Nebraska in January 2021. 9 Page 518 of 657North South Platte Sioux city Beatrice Gering SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 10 Page 519 of 6571.5 Equity and Urgency safety in mind. This allowed the planning team Children, older adults, people to analyze key demographic While crashes affect the entire with disabilities, and those indicators, including median community, the impacts are without access to a car are income (Figure 1-10), ethnicity not felt equally. In Scottsbluff, more vulnerable — and more (Figure 1-11), and population residents living in low-income likely to be left behind if safety distribution. neighborhoods, walking along improvements are not made with high-speed roads without equity in mind. This analysis supports more sidewalks, biking without intentional decision-making protected lanes, or using A truly safe system must identify by identifying areas where scooters to get around face who is most at risk and ensuring transportation safety challenges greater risk. safety investments are distributed intersect with social and where they are needed most. economic vulnerability. Many lower-income residents rely on bikes, scooters, In order to fully understand risk Additional demographic and or walking as affordable patterns across Scottsbluff, the community context information transportation options — yet they project area was divided into five relevant to transportation safety often must navigate streets that sub-areas (Figure 1.9). planning is provided in Appendix A1 - were not designed with their engagement and Appendix A6 - Maps. Figure 1-9. Community Engagement Areas 0 The project area was divided into five sub-areas to support survey tracking and public input� Residents, workers, business owners, and visitors — including those from neighboring communities such as Gering and Terrytown (Area 0) were invited to provide feedback based on where they live, work, or travel� 11 Page 520 of 657 This map displays total population and demographic distribution across Scottsbluff’s census tracts, providing context for understanding where transportation safety investments may intersect with community vulnerability and travel patterns. Figure 1-10. Income Overview From the 2020 census, income data was visualized in order to show which census tracts have higher median incomes� Each census tract has a black label showing the median income of the area, as well as being visualized via color� The darker the purple, the higher the median income, the lighter the purple, When looking at traffic the lower the median safety and working toward income� The Scottsbluff safer streets, it is vital to corporate limits are understand the underlying shown by a dashed line� social pressures that may exist in a community. In Scottsbluff, identifying lower-income areas allows for a deeper understanding of project need. Lower-income areas often experience increased exposure to traffic risk due to higher rates of walking, biking, and reliance on transit. Understanding these patterns helps ensure that safety investments reduce risk where vulnerability is greatest. Population totals and demographic distribution are shown by census tract to help identify areas where safety improvements may have the greatest impact for historically underserved or higher-risk communities Figure 1-11. Ethnicity and Population by Census Tract (see Figure 1-10 and 1-11). SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 12 Page 521 of 657 This map displays total population and demographic distribution across Scottsbluff’s census tracts, providing context for understanding where transportation safety investments may intersect with community vulnerability and travel patterns. Figure 1-12. Disadvantaged and Underserved Census tracts in Scottsbluff, NE. Disadvantaged census tracts according to the USDOT� Disadvantaged areas may include transportation, health, economic disadvantage, and equity� Source: SS4A Underserved Communities Census Tracts (Historically Disadvantaged Communities) 13 Page 522 of 6571.6 Neighborhood where housing patterns are 1.7 Federal Support for Context and Equity more compact, and on-street Local Action parking is more common. Considerations These characteristics often This Safety Action Plan was The USDOT Equitable result in higher pedestrian made possible through a Safe Transportation Communities activity and greater interaction Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) (ETC) Explorer was used as between roadway users, planning grant of $240,000 one of several tools to help particularly near schools, local from the U.S. Department of understand neighborhood businesses, and community Transportation. destinations. conditions that may influence The SS4A program empowers transportation safety within Safety improvements in these communities like Scottsbluff to Scottsbluff Figure( 1-12). areas—especially along take bold steps toward Vision The ETC screening evaluates key pedestrian corridors Zero by providing funding census tracts across five and school routes—can to develop Action Plans that components: therefore provide meaningful lead to measurable safety benefits by improving improvements. ● Transportation Insecurity visibility, reducing conflicts With federal support, local ● Climate and Disaster Risk between travel modes, and leadership, and strong Burden strengthening connections to everyday destinations. community engagement, ● Environmental Burden Scottsbluff is taking a proactive ● Health Vulnerability It is important to note that approach to creating safer these neighborhoods receive streets for everyone. ● Social Vulnerability street maintenance and Together, these indicators infrastructure improvements This plan identifies priority provide insight into on the same schedule as projects, aligns funding community characteristics that other areas of the city. opportunities, and establishes a may affect how people travel, However, the combination of clear path toward reducing fatal access daily destinations, and older street layouts, higher and serious injury crashes in the experience transportation residential density, and city. safety risks. greater pedestrian activity This plan moves Scottsbluff can create conditions where from understanding the Analysis of socioeconomic targeted safety improvements indicators and USDOT problem to acting on it — may provide additional identifying where risk is equity screening tools benefit. identified several census highest, selecting proven block groups in central Historically countermeasures, and establishing a clear roadmap to and eastern Scottsbluff disadvantaged eliminate fatal and serious injury that meet or approach neighborhoods often federal disadvantaged crashes. community thresholds. align with areas of Scottsbluff’s Vision Zero These areas generally higher pedestrian target year of 2036 aligns correspond with older, activity and greater with the City’s long-range established neighborhoods transportation safety planning horizon and provides near downtown and along needs� a measurable timeframe for the East Overland corridor, sustained implementation. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 14 Page 523 of 6572Everyone Has a Role in Street Safety Creating safer streets isn’t just about engineering, enforcement, or policy — it’s about people. This plan was built on the voices, concerns, and ideas of those who know Scottsbluff best: families, students, Creating safer workers, business owners, and neighbors who use these streets every day. streets isn’t Throughout this process, the community just about played a central role in shaping the plan’s engineering, direction, identifying safety challenges, and defining what safer streets should look like in enforcement, or Scottsbluff. policy — it’s about Vision Zero and the Safe System Approach people� emphasize shared responsibility — from City leaders and planners to drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Everyone has a role in making our streets safer. 15 Page 524 of 657 Figure 2-1. Community Engagement Event Locations The planning team was present at more than 20 events throughout the community� A detailed table can be found on page 25� 2.1 Community Input Engagement activities In addition to SS4A-specific Summary included: outreach, the City’s ongoing Comprehensive Plan Update ● Open house events and From the very beginning, this Survey (October 2024 pop-up booths planning effort was grounded – March 2025) included in public engagement. The ● School outreach meetings transportation and traffic first public-facing event was with staff, students, and safety questions. Findings held on July 10, 2025, and parents from that effort were reviewed since then, the project team ● Stakeholder meetings with and integrated into this Safety has gathered input at more local agencies, businesses, Action Plan. than 20 events throughout and civic groups More than 480 survey the community (see Figure ● Social media outreach responses and 2,100 map 2-1.), as well as through comments were received ● Citywide bilingual mailers online outreach and targeted during the SS4A engagement stakeholder meetings. ● Community bilingual process. surveys (online and in- person) ● An interactive bilingual Traffic Safety Comment Map SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 16 Page 525 of 657 1300+ 483 3,213 2,166 total participants total long and short in-person jar votes location-specific across surveys, community survey over three distinct comments on the events, and responses voting locations interactive safety stakeholder input (online and in-person) map community engagement at a glance Hundreds of Scottsbluff residents This Community participated, sharing their Engagement at a experiences, frustrations, and ideas Glance summarizes for improvement. This input provided key participation US & NEBRASKA a foundation for identifying key safety metrics, themes, HIGHWAY CORRIDORS issues and developing a plan that and takeaways reflects local needs. Supporting across engagement 246 Comments Stakeholder participants— methods. Most Cited Issues including school administrators, • US 26 repeatedly identified as most law enforcement officers, fire and dangerous corridor See Appendix A1 - • High-speed angle and rear-end EMS responders, hospital staff, Engagement for more crashes • Heavy truck volumes and stopping and public health professionals— information on offered additional perspective distance all engagement • Difficult pedestrian crossings on emergency access, school and stakeholder • Signal spacing and visibility concerns operations, visibility constraints, activities, seasonal conditions, and response summaries, totals, Stakeholder Reinforcement: delays that are not always reflected Public Safety and transit stakeholders methods. independently identified US 26 in crash data alone. as the highest-risk corridor due to crash severity, freight exposure, and pedestrian conflict. 17 Page 526 of 657 This page is set up, all numbers/ text need updated key takeaways across all engagement methods SPEEDING INTERSECTION SCHOOL ZONE PEDESTRIAN & AGGRESSIVE & SIGNAL & YOUTH INFRASTRUCTURE & DRIVING OPERATIONS SAFETY CROSSINGS Documented Documented Documented Documented 195 Comments 178 Comments 164 Comments 160 Comments Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues • Excessive speeds on major • Inadequate protected left-turn • Congestion during arrival and • Missing or uneven sidewalks corridors phases dismissal • Unsafe crossings of US 26 and • Distracted driving • Short yellow intervals • Inconsistent school-zone signage Broadway • Red-light and stop-sign violations • Poor visibility at skewed and speeds • ADA gaps • Aggressive behavior and unsafe intersections • Crossing visibility and guard • Drivers failing to yield passing • Angle crashes at signalized coverage • 139 “cars going too fast” • 146 distracted driving mentions locations • Parent queuing conflicts (pedestrian context) • 111 speeding mentions • 131 requests for dedicated left- • All six school meetings • 128 failure to stop at crosswalks • 106 red-light/stop sign violations turn arrows referencing congestion and safety • 89 sidewalk condition issues • Short survey reinforcement • 96 signal timing concerns • Structured pedestrian crossing • 84 difficulty crossing busy roads • Map comments referencing • 95 roundabout/operational concerns near schools • Map ADA gap comments excessive speed improvements • School-zone signage consistency Stakeholder Reinforcement • School intersection-specific concerns Stakeholder Reinforcement Transit and school stakeholders Police identified speeding, feedback • Parent queuing behavior themes highlighted accessibility gaps and • High-injury intersection references distraction, and impairment as Stakeholder Reinforcement visibility limitations as systemic primary crash contributors across Stakeholder Reinforcement Every school stakeholder safety barriers. Scottsbluff. Crash patterns show angle session emphasized predictable, collisions at high-volume signalized standardized school-zone intersections as a leading severe operations and enhanced crossing crash type. visibility. LIGHTING ENFORCEMENT, EDUCATION & BICYCLE & ACTIVE RAILROAD CROSSINGS & & VISIBILITY DRIVER BEHAVIOR TRANSPORTATION GAPS EMERGENCY ACCESS Documented Documented Documented Documented 120 Comments 83 Comments 80 Comments 47 Comments Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues Most Cited Issues • Dark crossings near schools • Desire for visible enforcement • Dedicated bike lanes • Train delays blocking response • Corridor lighting deficiencies • Youth driver education gaps • Trail connectivity • Rough crossings • Faded pavement markings • Signal compliance issues • Lack of separation from traffic • Visibility limitations • Nighttime railroad crossing visibility • 183 requests for stronger • 80 requests for dedicated bike • Interest in grade separation • 120 lighting upgrade responses enforcement presence lanes • Map comments regarding train • 19 subpar lighting pedestrian • Youth driver education gaps • 59 trail-width sidewalks delay mentions • Transit stop compliance issues • 50 share-the-road signage • Public safety emergency response • Railroad crossing nighttime visibility • Short survey emphasis • Safe Routes to School interest concerns • Map comments referencing dark • Rough crossing complaints Stakeholder Reinforcement Stakeholder Reinforcement corridors Public safety partners emphasized Schools and transit partners • Grade separation interest Stakeholder Reinforcement enforcement sustainability and expressed interest in improved walk/ Stakeholder Reinforcement Police and school stakeholders noted ordinance clarity as essential bike connectivity for students and Fire and police partners cited poor nighttime visibility at major complements to engineering riders. rail blockages as contributors to corridors and crossings as recurring improvements. delayed emergency response and concerns. congestion. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 18 Page 527 of 6572.2 Who We Heard From ● Teenagers and students contributed input that helped ● Older adults shape the plan. The planning team prioritized inclusive engagement to ● People with disabilities A special effort was made ensure broad representation ● Residents of low-income to engage areas with across Scottsbluff and its and underserved elevated crash risk or known 3-mile ETJ. Outreach efforts neighborhoods infrastructure gaps. A transit- included events in all five sub- focused survey was developed ● Local business owners and and distributed. Materials were areas of the City and in the employees adjacent community of Gering, provided in both English and bilingual mailers to households, ● City staff and emergency Spanish, and physical copies targeted school engagement, responders were made available at the stakeholder meetings, and pop- Importantly, participation public library to reach residents up events across age groups extended beyond Scottsbluff with limited internet access. and neighborhoods. residents. As the regional In addition to the surveys employment and service hub Input was sought from collected specifically for this for Western Nebraska and effort, input was also received individuals who walk, bike, parts of eastern Wyoming, drive, use scooters, ride transit, from the 2025 Comprehensive Scottsbluff’s transportation Plan Update Survey. The or rely on mobility aids. The system serves a broader team heard from: Comprehensive Plan Update daily population. Residents Survey captured feedback ● Families with school-aged from Gering, Terrytown, and from a broad cross-section of children surrounding communities residents across age groups, 19 Page 528 of 657 Figure 2-2. Survey Participation by neighborhoods, and travel modes, Area providing additional perspective Survey responses were tracked on everyday transportation safety by geographic sub-area to ensure balanced representation across concerns experienced throughout Scottsbluff and its ETJ� the community. A full overview of the survey can be found in Appendix A1 - Engagement. By collecting input across geographic areas, age groups, income levels, and Figure 2-3. Scottsbluff Population by travel modes, the planning process Area achieved broad representation In order to compare survey responses, the population of five areas of Scottsbluff across the community. Survey were collected from U�S� Census Data distribution and event placement were intentionally structured to reduce geographic or demographic bias and ensure balanced participation. Figure 2-4. Survey Figure 2.4 shows the number of Response surveys received versus population Compared to in each subarea. Although survey Population response may seem low in Tract Survey responses were 5 (light blue), substantial outreach compared to occurred with individuals from population in Tract 5 at the Empowering Families order to get a Halloween Event. This event included sense of over voting for project categories with jars, and under- but is not included in the survey totals. represented areas� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 20 Page 529 of 6572.3 What People Said where children walk to school ● Improved signal timing and or families cross major streets. visibility Public input revealed consistent ● Protected left-turn phasing and recurring safety concerns These lived experiences ● Longer clearance intervals provided important context to across all engagement methods ● Clearer lane guidance and —including surveys, pop- the crash analysis and helped elevate concerns that may not “turn into nearest lane” up events, school outreach, signage stakeholder meetings, and the always be fully captured in online comment map. While reported crash data. Concerns were not limited residents referenced different to major corridors. Survey neighborhoods and corridors, respondents also highlighted the themes were strikingly school areas and residential similar. neighborhoods, noting speeding during pick-up and “Highway 26 is drop-off times, blocked or dangerous� People run SS4A Community poorly marked crosswalks, and red lights constantly, Survey inconsistent traffic control. and trucks can’t stop in In addition to in-person School pickup and time�” outreach, the City conducted drop-off times are a detailed SS4A community chaos� We need survey to gather structured Common concerns slower speeds and input on traffic safety concerns, included: perceived high-risk locations, better crossings� ● Speeding in residential and priorities for improvement. Respondents also expressed neighborhoods Survey responses consistently discomfort walking or ● Red-light running and stop identified Highway 26 and bicycling due to missing or sign violations other major corridors as discontinuous sidewalks, ● Distracted driving the most significant safety inadequate lighting, and ● Unsafe or unclear concerns in Scottsbluff. limited separation from pedestrian crossings Residents cited speeding, vehicle traffic. These concerns ● Sidewalk gaps and red-light running, distracted reinforced the plan’s emphasis accessibility barriers driving, heavy-truck braking, on corridor-based safety ● Limited lighting at and limited visibility at improvements, school zone intersections and along signalized intersections as enhancements, pedestrian corridors recurring issues. High-volume and bicycle infrastructure, “Speed limits intersections — including lighting upgrades, and a balanced approach combining don’t work without Avenue I, 27th Street, 5th engineering, enforcement, and enforcement�” Avenue, Avenue B, and connections to Highway 71 education. Participants frequently and West Overland — were “I am scared to bicycle described near-miss frequently mentioned. experiences, unsafe turning in most parts of town… Participants emphasized the movements, and difficulty cars and bikes don’t need for: crossing higher-speed know how to share the roadways — particularly in areas ● Stronger enforcement road�” 21 Page 530 of 657 “Pathway network “Broadway & 24th Residents emphasized: completion�” Street: frequent driver ● Speeding and unsafe non-compliance with intersections, particularly the crossing guard�” along Highway 26 ● School-area safety concerns School areas and neighborhood ● Limited walking and intersections were also bicycling comfort frequently mentioned, ● Sidewalk gaps particularly concerns about ● Lighting deficiencies speeding during drop-off and pick-up times and limited While the Comprehensive crossing protection for children. Plan survey provided broader citywide context, the SS4A SS4A Short Survey “Adoption of a no- engagement offered more (In-Person Events) parking buffer near location-specific detail. bus stops to maintain Together, these inputs To reach residents who may reinforced the need for corridor- not participate in online accessibility and based safety improvements, engagement, short paper reduce operational school zone enhancements, surveys were collected at conflict�” lighting upgrades, and systemic multiple community events, speed management strategies. including National Night Out, Across events, respondents downtown pop-up outreach, emphasized that enforcement “Railroad crossing school orientation events, and driver behavior are safety and delay as critical as infrastructure Rotary Club presentations, and concerns, affecting the Regional West Medical improvements. Distracted Center employee benefit fair. driving, failure to yield, and both daily travel and disregard for signals were emergency response�” “Pedestrian safety commonly cited as contributing with button-activated Importantly, many of the to near misses and crashes. corridors and intersections crosswalks, like by the Overall, short survey responses identified through public input high school�” reinforced the priorities align closely with the High Injury Network (HIN) findings These in-person responses identified through crash analysis presented in Chapter 3. echoed the online survey and the online SS4A survey, This alignment underscores findings. Highway 26 and demonstrating consistency the consistency between its major intersections were across engagement methods. community experience and repeatedly identified as crash data. unsafe, with respondents citing Comprehensive Plan speeding, unclear signal timing, Update Survey Additional engagement details limited visibility, and heavy truck are provided in Appendix 1. traffic. Participants called for Public input from the slower speeds, longer yellow Comprehensive Plan Update and all-red intervals, improved Survey (October 2024–March lighting, and clearer pedestrian 2025) further validated these crossings. themes. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 22 Page 531 of 6572.4 Perception vs. crash dangerous largely align with corridors show concentrations Data where severe crashes are of angle crashes, turning occurring. conflicts, and speed-related incidents — concerns echoed What people feel and what Corridors such as Highway 26, the data shows in survey responses and map Avenue I (Highway 71), 27th comments. Comparing the public Street, and West Overland comment heat map with the were repeatedly identified by At the same time, public input crash heat map reveals a both crash data and public highlights areas that may not powerful pattern: the locations input as high-risk areas. yet appear as high-crash residents perceive as Intersections along these locations but are perceived Figure 2-5. Public Comment Heat Map Locations where residents identified safety concerns through surveys and the online comment map� 23 Page 532 of 657as unsafe due to near Together, the crash analysis and to documented crash misses, visibility issues, or community feedback create a patterns and to the locations school-related traffic. These more complete picture of safety where residents feel most perceptions provide critical in Scottsbluff — combining vulnerable. insight into emerging risk measurable outcomes with conditions that traditional lived experience. Several of the highest- crash data alone may not commented locations also capture. This integrated approach appear within the Tier 1 ensures that safety High Injury Network (HIN) investments respond both identified in Chapter 3. Figure 2-6. Crash Density Heat Map (2014–2023) Concentrations of reported crashes across the same geographic area� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 24 Page 533 of 657 Table 2-1. SS4A Engagement Activities Approximate Date Event / Activity Location Audience / Focus Participation Counts 2025-06-25 Task Force Meeting #1 Scottsbluff Core stakeholders 4 18th Street Plaza, 2025-07-10 Bands on Broadway Pop-Up General public 30 Scottsbluff Oregon Trail Days Food Festival 2025-07-11 Gering Regional public 75 & Car Show 2025-07-12 Oregon Trail Days Craft Fair Gering Regional public 200 Summer Reading Wrap-Up 2025-07-22 Scottsbluff Library Families & youth 80 Party 2025-08-01 Teen Advisory Council Scottsbluff Library Youth 7 2025-08-05 National Night Out Downtown Scottsbluff Families & residents 400 2025-08-11 SHS Outreach Scottsbluff High School Students 20 2025-08-13 Bluffs Middle School Outreach Bluffs Middle School Students 30 Westmoor Orientation Open 2025-08-13 Westmoor Elementary Students & parents 70 House SHS Enrichment Math 2025-08-20 Scottsbluff High School Students 12 Presentation Beef, Beans & Bluegrass 2025-08-23 Downtown Scottsbluff General public 275 Festival 2025-09-16 Roosevelt PTO Meeting Roosevelt Elementary Parents 8 2025-09-25 Westmoor School Discussion Westmoor Elementary Students 1 Lincoln Heights School 2025-09-25 Lincoln Heights Elementary Students 1 Discussion 2025-09-25 Bluffs Middle School Discussion Bluffs Middle School Students 1 2025-10-01 Task Force Meeting #2 Scottsbluff Core stakeholders 7 2025-10-02 SHS Physics Classes Scottsbluff High School Students 50 2025-10-06 Longfellow School Discussion Longfellow Elementary Students 1 2025-10-07 Scottsbluff/Gering Rotary Regional Business & civic leaders 20 2025-10-07 St. Agnes School Discussion St. Agnes School Students 1 Community Christian School 2025-10-16 Scottsbluff Students 1 Discussion Tri-City Roadrunner Transit 2025-10-30 Scottsbluff Transit services 1 Stakeholder Meeting Empowering Families 2025-10-31 18th Street Plaza Families 300 Halloween Event EMS, Police & Fire Stakeholder 2025-11-06 Scottsbluff Emergency services 8 Meeting Regional West Employee 2025-11-6&7 Scottsbluff Regional workforce 125 Benefit Fair 2025-11-12 Task Force Meeting #3 Scottsbluff Core stakeholders 6 2026-02-25 Task Force Meeting #4 Scottsbluff Core stakeholders 6 Los Guadalupanos Cinco de 2026-05-02 Guadalupe Center General public 10 Mayo Celebration 25 Page 534 of 6572.5 Engagement Timeline Safety priorities identified through the SS4A engagement process Community engagement for the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan occurred between closely align with findings from the June 2025 and May 2026—see Table 2-1. City’s Comprehensive Plan Update, Outreach activities included public pop-up demonstrating consistent and events, school-based discussions, stakeholder sustained public concern over time� meetings, youth engagement, regional festivals, and recurring Task Force meetings. 2.7 Ongoing Role of the Community The planning team intentionally engaged residents across age groups, neighborhoods, This plan is not the end of the conversation. and travel modes to ensure broad and Street safety requires continued partnership balanced participation. among residents, City leadership, schools, businesses, and regional stakeholders. Engagement activities were As projects move from planning to distributed across community implementation, the City will continue to: events and regional gatherings to reach residents who may not ● Seek public feedback during design development participate in traditional public meetings� ● Monitor safety performance metrics ● Adjust priorities as conditions change 2.6 How Input Shaped the Plan ● Coordinate with neighboring communities Public input was not only collected — it directly and regional partners influenced project selection, prioritization, and While the Task Force is expected to meet design strategies. less frequently following plan adoption, it Community concerns informed: will continue to serve as an important forum for implementation coordination, progress ● Identification of priority corridors and updates, and continued community input. intersections The project website will remain available ● Development of scoring criteria for capital as a resource for residents to review plan projects materials, follow implementation progress, ● Emphasis on speed management and and stay informed about future engagement visibility improvements opportunities. ● Focus on school zone safety and Ongoing engagement will remain essential to neighborhood access sustaining progress toward the City’s Vision ● Integration of sidewalk and ADA gap Zero commitment. closure into corridor strategies Safer streets are achieved through shared The engagement process reinforced the responsibility — and through consistent follow- importance of equitable investment — through. ensuring improvements are directed to areas of greatest need rather than areas of greatest convenience. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 26 Page 535 of 657 3Where and Why Crashes Happen 3.1 Understanding patterns to Prevent Serious Injury Behind every crash statistic is a person — a family disrupted, a child injured, a neighbor lost. Understanding where and why crashes occur is essential to preventing them. Fatal and serious This chapter translates community concern injury crashes (KSI) into crash data analysis, examining patterns in location, severity, and contributing factors. By represent only 1�3% of identifying recurring risk environments, the City total crashes, but they of Scottsbluff can focus resources on conditions most likely to result in serious injury or fatal change countless outcomes. lives� Crashes are not random events. They tend to occur in predictable locations, under familiar conditions, and often involve similar conflict types. Recognizing these patterns allows proactive interventions — addressing systemic risks before additional tragedies occur. 27 Page 536 of 657 A fatal crash results in at least one death, either at the scene or as a result of crash-related injuries. A serious injury (Injury A) crash involves life-altering harm requiring urgent medical attention, consistent with MMUCC definitions adopted by NDOT. An observed injury (Injury B) includes visible but less severe injuries such as cuts or bruises. A possible injury (Injury C) includes reported discomfort with- out visible injury at the scene. A property damage only (PDO) crash involves damage to vehicles or property without reported injuries. 3.2 Crash Overview Within corporate limits alone: Crash data for Scottsbluff was ● 4,907 total crashes analyzed for the years 2014– ● 9 fatal crashes 2023 using both the corporate ● 62 severe injury (Inj-A) limits and the expanded ETJ crashes project area to reflect real travel patterns influencing local safety. ● 423 visible injury (Inj-B) crashes Across the expanded project ● 592 possible injury (Inj-C) area (City + ETJ): crashes ● 5,361 total crashes ● 3821 PDO crashes ● 14 fatal crashes ● 79 severe injury (Inj-A) While the majority of Project crashes Area crashes (77.1%) were ● 476 visible injury (Inj-B) classified as property damage crashes only (PDO), even a single severe Figure 3-1. Crash Severity ● 658 possible injury (Inj-C) crash carries significant human Distribution for the Project crashes and community consequences. Area (City and ETJ, ● 4134 property-damage-only Fatal and serious injury crashes 2014–2023) (PDO) crashes represent a small share of total crashes but account for the most severe impacts. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 28 Page 537 of 657Figure 3-2. Tier 1 & Tier 2 HIN (2014–2023) 3.3 The High Injury Network (HIN) Tier 2 corridors represent an additional 2.1% of roadway mileage and capture nearly all To identify where fatal and serious injury crashes remaining KSIs. are most concentrated, the planning team developed a High Injury Network (HIN) Together, the Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN comprise (see Figure 3-2). A HIN is a data-driven map approximately 6.0% of the roadway network yet of roadway segments and intersections with account for 97% of fatal and serious injury crashes elevated crash severity patterns. during the 2014–2023 analysis period. The HIN analysis used ten years of crash data (2014–2023) and applied a crash severity ranking. Roadway segments were assigned a severity sum by adding the number of fatal, serious injury, observed injury, possible injury, and PDO crashes, weighted appropriately. Each location was then ranked by severity sum per mile, with Tier 1 representing locations above the 90th percentile and Tier 2 representing locations between the 85th and 90th percentile. Figure 3-3. HIN Network Statistics Tier 1 corridors represent approximately 3.9% of By using the Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN network as a tool the roadway network but account for 84% of all for analyzing crash concerns, the number of miles fatal and serious injury crashes (KSI). of roadway needing urgent action is vastly reduced, while still maintaining high priority on KSI crashes� 29 Page 538 of 657Key findings from the HIN including higher traffic pedestrian presence. Across volumes, greater speed the community, the majority of The HIN identifies several differentials, signalized KSI crashes are concentrated continuous crash corridors intersections, and multimodal along arterial roadways and where multiple high-risk activity near commercial higher-speed facilities rather intersections and roadway areas and schools. While than local residential streets. segments occur along the residential neighborhoods Both volume and speed likely same route. Primary east-west may experience localized have an impact on this, as corridors followed by north- crash occurrences, severe arterials are designed to carry south corridors include: crashes are more frequently more traffic at higher speeds Primary East–West KSI Corridors associated with arterial facilities than local streets or collector where exposure and operating roads. • US Highway 26 (US-26) speeds are higher. • West 27th Street HIN Intersections • 24th Street (Bluffs Middle Across the community, fatal School / Lincoln Heights area) and serious injury crashes To further examine the HIN, • 20th Street are disproportionately intersections were ranked by • East and West Overland concentrated along arterial summing the weighted severity • South Beltline Highway roadways and higher-speed scores of crashes occurring corridors. These facilities carry within each intersection area. Primary North–South KSI Corridors greater traffic volumes, include Using 10 years of crash data, • Avenue I (Highway 71) multiple travel lanes, and from 2014–2023, the highest- • Avenue B experience higher operating ranked intersections include: speeds than residential streets. • Broadway #1. US-26 & E 27th Street The combination of traffic • 5th Avenue #2. 20th Street & Broadway exposure, turning movements, • 10th Avenue #3. US-26 & Avenue I signalized intersections, and • 21st Avenue #4. US-26 & 5th Avenue access density contributes to Geographic Distribution of KSI elevated crash severity risk. When evaluated using only 5 Crashes (East vs. West patterns) years of crash data from 2019– In contrast, residential streets 2023, rankings shift slightly, Spatial analysis indicates generally experience lower reflecting recent crash trends. that the central and speeds and traffic volumes, Across both the 10-year and southeastern portions of resulting in fewer severe 5-year analyses, the following Scottsbluff experience a crashes despite occasional intersections consistently rank higher concentration of fatal higher crash frequencies among the highest severity and serious injury crashes related to access, parking, or locations: compared to other areas of local circulation. Residential the city. These areas include neighborhoods in the • South Beltline & Broadway segments of US Highway southwest, northwest, and • W 27th Street & Avenue B 26, Avenue I (Highway 71), northeast areas show relatively • South Beltline & 21st Avenue Broadway, and key school- few KSI crashes occurring on adjacent corridors. local streets. This is likely due A full list of the top 26 HIN to a combination of factors, intersections can be found in Several contributing factors Appendix A3 - Crash Maps. likely influence these patterns, including street width, speed limits, populations, higher SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 30 Page 539 of 657Figure 3-4. High Injury Network and Traffic Control HIN Intersection Control conflict between vehicles and pedestrians. Intersection control patterns Focus Area 2 – High-Severity reinforce the need for targeted In contrast, only 3 of the City’s Corridor Modernization, which corridor improvements along 10 all-way stop-controlled prioritizes improvements where Scottsbluff’s highest-risk intersections (30%) fall within traffic control complexity, roadways. Of the City’s 24 traffic the Tier 1 HIN, indicating that volume, and speed intersect. signals, 21 (88%) are located lower-speed, stop-controlled Strategies such as signal visibility along Tier 1 High Injury Network environments are less frequently upgrades, protected turning (HIN) corridors and intersections, associated with severe crashes. phases, access management, demonstrating a strong corridor lighting, and conflict relationship between signalized, As shown in Figure 3-4, reduction treatments are higher-volume intersections signalized intersections intended to address the and severe crash occurrence. and KSI crashes are heavily underlying conditions present at These locations typically involve concentrated along the same these high-risk locations. multiple turning movements, major corridors. These findings directly support the focus of By focusing on these corridors higher speeds, and increased as a priority, Scottsbluff is 31 Page 540 of 657Figure 3-5. KSI Crashes, Posted Speed Limits and Traffic Control targeting the locations where The largest share of HIN The overlap of higher posted safety improvements can have segments occurs on roadways speeds, signalized intersections, the greatest impact—moving with posted speeds of 30 mph and KSI crash locations— the community closer to its goal (35%), reflecting the number of particularly along corridors of eliminating fatal and serious crashes occurring on streets such as US-26, Avenue I, and injury crashes. that serve both neighborhood Broadway—illustrates how access and connections to speed, exposure, and roadway HIN and Posted Speed Limit major destinations. However, design combine to influence higher-speed corridors are crash severity. Posted speed is a critical factor disproportionately represented influencing crash severity in severe crashes, with 45 mph These findings reinforce across the High Injury Network. segments accounting for 26% the importance of speed As shown in Figure 3-5, KSI of the HIN. Roadways posted at management, corridor design crashes and HIN segments are 55 mph and above account for improvements, and intersection distributed across a range of an additional 17%, highlighting safety treatments as core speed environments, but clear the elevated risk associated with strategies for reducing fatal patterns emerge. higher-speed travel. and serious injury crashes in Scottsbluff. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 32 Page 541 of 657 Figure 3-6. Disadvantaged Census tracts and Killed and Seriously Injured Crash Locations. Disadvantaged census tracts and KSI crash locations (2014–2023) showing the relationship between high-injury corridors and areas experiencing historical underinvestment� 33 Page 542 of 657HIN and Disadvantaged This approach helps ensure While intersections represent that safety improvements a significant share of severe Areas address locations with both crash locations, not all Tier Crash analysis conducted elevated crash risk and higher 1 and Tier 2 HIN segments for this Safety Action Plan concentrations of everyday are intersection-based. Non- found that 27 of the 71 KSI travel activity, directing intersection Tier 1 segments crashes occurring within the resources where they can are located on US Hwy 26 in Scottsbluff corporate limits deliver the greatest safety between Ave I and Ave B, as between 2014 and 2023 (38 benefit for the community well as between Ave B and percent) happened within 5th Ave. Several high-severity or adjacent to census tracts HIN NON-Intersection roadway segments occur identified through the ETC locations midblock, including portions of: screening as historically ● South Beltline Highway disadvantaged (see Figure The High Injury Network ● East and West Overland 3-6), including 3 fatal crashes provides the geographic and 24 severe injury crashes. foundation for the ● South Frontage Road This pattern reflects the countermeasure selection ● 20th Street relationship between crash and project prioritization ● 21st Avenue risk and areas where roadway described in Chapter 4. By users—drivers, pedestrians, focusing on a small share of ● Sugar Factory Road roadway mileage where the and bicyclists—interact more These segments often reflect majority of severe crashes frequently. higher operating speeds, occur, the City can direct Overlaying USDOT historically access density, turning conflicts, resources where they will disadvantaged census or transitions between roadway have the greatest life-saving tracts with Scottsbluff’s High classifications. impact. Injury Network (HIN) further In contrast, many Tier 1 illustrates their relationship. Across both the 10-year and and Tier 2 intersections 5-year HIN, the following Portions of several Tier 1 HIN are concentrated along US non-US Hwy 26 intersections corridors and intersections Highway 26 and key north– possessed high severity fall within or along south arterials such as Avenue score sums, meaning they central neighborhoods in I (Highway 71), Broadway, and possessed a high number disadvantaged census tracts, Avenue B. These locations and/or a high severity of reinforcing the importance of experience a combination crashes: addressing safety conditions of traffic volume, turning in locations where exposure ● S Beltline and Broadway movements, signal control, and crash risk are highest. (5th and 9th) and multimodal activity that ● W 27th St and Avenue B increase crash exposure. For this reason, neighborhood (11th and 10th) context and ETC screening Crashes occur at results were considered ● S Beltline and 21st Avenue alongside HIN segments (12th and 13th) intersections and on and high-injury intersections corridor segments — A full list of Tier 1 and during the project this reinforces the need Tier 2 HIN segments and prioritization process. for both intersection- intersections is provided in level improvements Appendix A3 - Crash Maps. and systemic corridor improvements� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 34 Page 543 of 6573.4 Spacial Distribution method to group crashes by spots by type and location. New of Crashes Throughout location and time, followed by and consecutive hot spots show Emerging Hot Spot Analysis to where crashes have become Time detect statistically significant increasingly frequent in recent Understanding where and patterns. These trends were years, while persistent hot spots why crashes occur is essential classified as new, consecutive, highlight locations with a long to improving roadway safety persistent, or sporadic hot history of crash activity. These in Scottsbluff. In addition spots—revealing how crash areas are key indicators for to the HIN, crash data from risks evolve over time and where safety improvements— 2014-2023 was analyzed where targeted interventions such as reconfigured using advanced spatial and are most needed. intersections, traffic calming, or statistical tools in ArcGIS Pro pedestrian enhancements—can The map on the following page have a measurable impact. by applying a space-time cube (Figure 3-7) illustrates these hot 35 Page 544 of 657Unlike simple crash counts, like poor visibility, missing Figure 3-7. Hot Spots this approach focuses on signage, or design flaws. New, Consecutive, Persistent, statistically significant clusters, Understanding these trends and Sporadic Hot Spots were helping identify patterns that allows Scottsbluff to move from identified through a space- are unlikely to be due to reactive responses toward time analysis of the crashes chance alone. For example, proactive solutions that address from 2014-2023, weighted by repeated crashes at a particular underlying causes and reduce crash severity� intersection may point to issues future risk. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 36 Page 545 of 6573.5 5-Year KSI Crash Trend Analysis As part of the Safety Action Plan, fatal and severe injury (KSI) crashes were evaluated using rolling five-year periods to better understand how severe crash patterns shift over time. This approach provides a consistent basis for tracking trends while smoothing year-to-year variability. The series of maps illustrates five-year KSI crash patterns for the City of Scottsbluff from 2017–2021 through 2021–2025. While overall crash locations remain generally consistent with the High Injury Network, several notable trends emerge across the rolling periods. US-26 continues to show persistent Figure 3-8. 2017 - 2021 KSI Crashes crash levels, with increasing severity Five-year KSI crash locations within Scottsbluff in recent years, including multiple fatal corporate limits (2017–2021), illustrating crashes occurring since 2024. Arterial baseline severe crash patterns� corridors such as Avenue I and Broadway consistently exhibit clusters of severe crashes, reflecting higher speeds, traffic volumes, and turning conflicts. More recent periods also show an increased presence of KSI crashes on local streets and select collector roadways, indicating that severe crash risk is not limited to major corridors. These patterns reinforce the need for a balanced safety strategy that addresses both high-speed arterial corridors and localized neighborhood conditions. The rolling five-year analysis supports the plan’s focus on systemic improvements, corridor-level treatments, and targeted neighborhood safety interventions. Severe crashes remain Figure 3-11. 2020 - 2024 KSI Crashes concentrated, but their Five-year KSI crash locations (2020–2024), locations shift over time— showing distribution across arterial and local reinforcing the need for both roadways, including US-26� corridor and neighborhood safety improvements. 37 Page 546 of 657Figure 3-9. 2018 - 2022 KSI Crashes Figure 3-10. 2019 - 2023 KSI Crashes Five-year KSI crash locations (2018–2022), Five-year KSI crash locations (2019–2023), showing continued concentration along major with increased clustering along arterial corridors and emerging residential crash corridors� locations� 3.6 Enforcement Data Integration As part of ongoing safety monitoring, the City will work to incorporate traffic citation and enforcement data into its analysis framework. Mapping citation activity alongside crash data and the High Injury Network will help identify where enforcement is occurring, where gaps may exist, and how enforcement strategies align with locations of elevated crash risk. Over time, integrating citation data will support a more coordinated approach to safety by informing targeted enforcement, evaluating the effectiveness of education and enforcement programs, and strengthening data-driven decision-making. This effort will complement engineering improvements by Figure 3-12. 2021 - 2025 KSI Crashes helping the City better understand driver Five-year KSI crash locations (2021–2025), behavior patterns and focus resources reflecting continued activity along US-26 and where they can have the greatest impact on local streets, with emerging patterns along key reducing severe crashes. See Appendix A6 - Maps corridors such as Avenue I� for visualized citation data. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 38 Page 547 of 6573.7 Crash Type unknown/other categories. When evaluated geographically, Breakdowns (see Figure 3-15). the highest concentration of angle crashes aligns with major Angle crashes primarily While the HIN identifies corridors including: occur at intersections and priority corridors where high are often associated with ● US Highway 26 volumes and high severity turning conflicts, signal ● Avenue I (Highway 71) crashes occur, to further timing, or failure to yield. understand risk patterns, ● W 27th Street the planning team evaluated Single-vehicle crashes ● Broadway and 20th Street crash types across the full are more common along This pattern reinforces the study area. higher-speed segments emphasis for intersection and may reflect roadway Across all crashes, angle safety upgrades, signal departure, driver behavior, or crashes represent the largest timing improvements, access environmental conditions. share (35%), followed by management, and speed single-vehicle crashes (28%) Rear-end crashes frequently management strategies along and rear-end crashes (24%). occur along higher-volume arterial facilities. Other crash types include corridors with signalized Crash type analysis was sideswipe, front-to-front, and intersections. completed for each crash type, and can be seen on the following pages. Figure 3-13. Angle Crashes Heatmap of all angle crashes, weighted by severity, highlighting concentration along Tier 1 and Tier 2 HIN corridors� 39 Page 548 of 657Figure 3-14. Single Vehicle Crashes Heatmap of all single vehicle crashes, weighted by severity� Single vehicle crashes often occur due to rollover or overturn crashes, as well as including crashes involving pedestrians or bicyclists� This analysis supports Figure 3-15. Total Crash Type Distribution (2014–2023) the selection of countermeasures outlined in Chapter 4, including protected left-turn phasing, signal timing modifications, pedestrian crossing enhancements, corridor speed management, and improved lighting. A full breakdown of crash types by corridor and severity classification is provided in Appendix A2. Key Insight: Angle and rear-end crashes account for nearly 60% of all crashes citywide, reinforcing the need for intersection conflict reduction and speed management strategies� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 40 Page 549 of 6573.8 Angle Crashes Angle (Broadside, T-Bone, Right Left Turn Leaving Angle, etc) Figure 3-16. Angle Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics 98% of Angle 52.3% of all (2014-2023) KSI crashes KSI crashes occurred at were angle 1,841 Total Crashes intersections. crashes 49 KSI Crashes 4 Fatalities (28.6% of citywide fatalities) Nationwide, 36% of all crashes occur at intersections. 45 Severe Injuries Left-turn movements are frequently involved 242 Visible Injuries in fatal intersection crashes. 306 Possible Injuries Common Causes Countermeasures • Failure to yield • Intersection Control (signal upgrades / • Signal violations all-way stop evaluation) (ran red light / failed to stop) • Protected Left-Turn Phasing • Left-turn conflicts • Reduced Left-Turn Conflict Intersections • Speeding and aggressive driving (RCUT / J-turn where appropriate) • Distracted driving • Corridor Access Management • Poor visibility or sight distance • Reduce Parking Near Intersections • Raised Medians • Road Diet (where context appropriate) Left-turn movements are frequently associated with severe intersection crashes. 41 Page 550 of 6573.9 Single Vehicle Crashes Rollover / Overturn Single Vehicle (Object) Figure 3-17. Single Vehicle Crashes Single Vehicle (Parked MV) 1/3 of total 64% of total Scottsbluff Statistics KSI crashes fatal KSI (2014-2023) were Single crashes were Vehicle Single Vehicle 1,519 Total Crashes Crashes 31 KSI Crashes 9 Fatalities (64.3% of citywide fatalities) 31% of all Single Vehicle Injury crashes involved pedestrians or bicyclist - more than 22 Severe Injuries 1/4 crashes 128 Visible Injuries 92 Possible Injuries Common Causes Countermeasures • Speeding and loss of control • Speed Feedback Signs • Impaired driving • USLIMITS2 Speed Study Evaluation • Distracted driving • High Friction Surface Treatment • Weather conditions • Enhanced Delineation for Horizontal Curves • Medical events • Shoulder Rumble Strips • Loss of control is key for single vehicle. • Safety Edge • Median Barriers (where warranted) • Lane Reduction (where appropriate) • Targeted Enforcement While angle crashes represent the most common severe crash type at intersections, single vehicle crashes account for the majority of fatalities citywide, highlighting the need for both intersection conflict reduction and corridor speed management strategies� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 42 Page 551 of 6573.10 Front-Rear Crashes Figure 3-18. Front-Rear Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics Front-rear crashes represent one of the most (2014-2023) common crash types in Scottsbluff, accounting for a substantial share of total reported crashes. 1,301 Total Crashes These crashes are typically associated with signalized intersections, corridor congestion, 8 KSI Crashes speed variability, and sudden stopping conditions. 0 Fatalities 73% of Front- Although front-rear crashes contributed to 8 Rear crashes serious injuries during the 2014–2023 period, they 8 Severe Injuries occurred on did not result in fatalities. This pattern suggests dry roads with 76 Visible Injuries that while frequent, front-rear crashes generally clear weather produce lower severity outcomes compared to 222 Possible Injuries single-vehicle or angle crash types. Common Causes Countermeasures • Following too closely • Signal timing optimization to reduce • Driver inattention abrupt stopping • Speed variability • Advanced warning flashers on high- • Sudden braking at signalized speed approaches intersections • Improved signal visibility • Congestion and queue spillback • Access management to reduce turning conflicts • Speed management strategies along corridors Front-rear crashes are concentrated along higher-volume arterial corridors, reinforcing the importance of corridor-level signal coordination and speed management improvements identified in the High Injury Network analysis� 43 Page 552 of 6573.11 Front-Front Crashes Figure 3-19. Front-Front Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics Front-front crashes are rare in Scottsbluff, accounting for (2014-2023) only 16 reported crashes during the 10-year analysis period. One crash resulted in a serious injury, and no fatalities were 16 Total Crashes recorded. 1 KSI Crash While limited in frequency locally, front-front crashes are typically associated with higher-speed, head-on conflict 0 Fatalities conditions and carry elevated severity risk. Maintaining clear centerline delineation and reducing roadway departure 1 Severe Injury potential remain important systemic strategies to prevent 5 Visible Injuries this crash type. 3 Possible Injuries Common Causes Countermeasures • Lane departure • Centerline rumble strips • Impairment • Enhanced pavement markings • Distracted driving • Shoulder rumble strips • Speeding • Safety Edge treatments • Limited visibility • Speed management in higher-risk segments Front-rear crashes contribute significantly to overall crash frequency, while front-front crashes, though rare, carry higher severity risk� Together, these patterns reinforce the importance of corridor-level speed management, signal optimization, and roadway departure prevention strategies� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 44 Page 553 of 6573.12 Sideswipe (Same) Crashes Sideswipe Same Side Figure 3-20. Sideswipe Same Crashes 3/4 crashes occurred on dry roads with Scottsbluff Statistics clear weather. This suggests driver (2014-2023) behavior and lane discipline — rather than environmental conditions — are 370 Total Crashes primary contributing factors. 2 KSI Crashes National research from the Insurance 0 Fatalities Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) indicates that lane departure warning 2 Severe Injuries systems are associated with a 21% 15 Visible Injuries reduction in injury crashes involving sideswipe, head-on, and single-vehicle 15 Possible Injuries conflicts. (IIHS)1 Common Causes Countermeasures • Failure to maintain lane • Failure to maintain lane • Improper or unsafe lane changes • Improper or unsafe lane changes • Distracted driving • Distracted driving • Impairment • Impairment • Aggressive driving or speeding • Aggressive driving or speeding • Inattention to blind spots • Inattention to blind spots While sideswipe crashes account for a measurable share of total crash frequency, they represent a very small proportion of fatal and serious injury crashes� This distinction supports prioritizing intersection conflict reduction and speed management strategies over lane-departure-focused interventions for life-saving impact� 1 `According to a 2017 study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) 45 Page 554 of 6573.13 Sideswipe (Opposite) Crashes Sideswipe Opposite Side Figure 3-21. Sideswipe Opposite Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics The majority of crashes occurring on dry roads with clear weather indicates that driver behavior— (2014-2023) rather than environmental conditions—is the 57 Total Crashes primary contributing factor to Sideswipe crashes. 1 KSI Crash The most severe crash (Injury A) occurred on a 45 mph roadway, while Injury B and C crashes 0 Fatalities 65% of were primarily on 30 mph arterials, with some crashes on 25 mph local streets. This pattern suggests 1 Severe Injury occurred on that opposing-direction sideswipe crashes are dry roads with 5 Visible Injuries influenced by lane departure and roadway context, clear weather and may signal elevated risk for more severe 9 Possible Injuries head-on conflicts on higher-speed corridors. Common Causes Countermeasures • Driver inattention or distraction • Longitudinal Rumble Strips and Stripes, Center Line (drifting out of lane) Rumble Strips, Shoulder Rumble Strips • Fatigue or drowsy driving • Enhanced pavement markings • Impaired driving (alcohol/drugs) • Delineation improvements • Speeding, especially on • Edge line striping on all rural and higher-speed higher-speed corridors corridors • Narrow lanes or limited • Reflective/retro-reflective pavement markings shoulder width (wet-night visibility) • Poor visibility, including • Lane width standardization where feasible nighttime conditions or faded • Speed management (targeted enforcement or markings design-based) • Horizontal curves or subtle • Curve warning signage and advisory speed plaques alignment shifts (where applicable) • Weather conditions • Centerline widening or buffered centerlines (snow, ice, wind drift) (in constrained corridors) SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 46 Page 555 of 6573.14 Rear-Rear and Rear-Side Crashes Figure 3-22. Rear-Rear & Rear-Side Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics Rear-end and rear-side crashes represent (2014-2023) a small share of total crashes in Scottsbluff and did not result in fatal or serious injury 34 Total Crashes outcomes during the 2014–2023 analysis period. These crash types are typically 0 KSI Crashes associated with low-speed environments, queuing conditions, or minor turning 0 Fatalities 100% of conflicts. 0 Severe Injuries crashes were Although these crashes may contribute to Property 0 Visible Injuries congestion and property damage, they do Damage Only not represent a primary driver of fatal or 0 Possible Injuries serious injury risk within the city. 34 Property Damage Only Common Causes Countermeasures • Following too closely • Signal timing adjustments to reduce • Driver inattention sudden stopping • Sudden stopping or queue • Advance warning signage in high- formation volume corridors • Minor turning conflict • Improved intersection visibility • Access management in commercial areas 47 Page 556 of 6573.15 unknown/ Other Crashes Figure 3-23. Unknown/Other Crashes Scottsbluff Statistics Unknown or Other crash classifications account for a (2014-2023) moderate share of total reported crashes but represent a minimal share of fatal and serious injury outcomes. These 223 Total Crashes crashes often reflect reporting limitations, atypical collision patterns, or insufficient crash-type coding. 1 KSI Crash Because this category does not represent a distinct 1 Fatality or recurring crash pattern, it does not drive specific countermeasure selection. Instead, these crashes are 0 Severe Injuries addressed through systemic safety strategies applied 5 Visible Injuries across high-risk corridors. 11 Possible Injuries Common Causes Countermeasures • Incomplete crash reporting • Speed management • Unusual or mixed collision patterns • Improved lighting • Environmental factors • Corridor-level visibility • Driver behavior inconsistently coded enhancements • Enforcement of traffic control compliance Rear-end, rear-side, and unknown crash categories account for a measurable share of total crashes but contribute minimally to fatal and serious injury outcomes� As a result, they are addressed through broader systemic improvements rather than targeted corridor-specific interventions� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 48 Page 557 of 6573.16 Crash specifics and of KSI crashes; however, These violations increase Contributing Factors the number may be much conflict exposure, higher. It is unknown particularly during left- Crashes rarely result from a whether speeding was turn movements and single cause. They typically a factor in almost half pedestrian crossings. reflect a combination (48.4%) of KSI crashes. ● Distracted Driving– Driver of roadway design, This shows the importance distraction, including environmental conditions, of establishing more mobile device use, vehicle interaction, and thorough data collection reduces awareness and human behavior. To better methods, as well as reaction time. National understand patterns underscoring the data indicates that contributing to fatal and importance of systemic distracted driving remains serious injury crashes (KSI) speed reduction a persistent safety in Scottsbluff, contributing strategies. concern3. factors were reviewed for the ● Impairment – Alcohol and Locally, distracted driving 2014–2023 analysis period. drug impairment remain occurred during at least A few key factors stand out significant contributors to 9.7% of KSI crashes; in Scottsbluff’s most severe crash severity nationwide2 however, crash reports incidents: and are present in a 14.0% may under-represent of fatal and serious injury distraction due to ● Speeding – Vehicle crashes in Scottsbluff. reporting limitations. In speed is one of the most Impairment reduces 71% of local KSI crashes, it critical factors influencing reaction time, judgment, was unknown if distracted crash severity. Higher and vehicle control, driving played a role. speeds reduce reaction increasing the likelihood of time, increase stopping severe outcomes. distance, and dramatically Contributing Percent Percent ● Failure to Yield/Red Light increase impact force. Factor Involved Unknown Running – Failure to yield Failure to National research shows 57.0% 2.2% and red-light running are Yield that the risk of fatal common contributing injury for a pedestrian factors in angle crashes at Speeding 9.7% 48.4% increases sharply at signalized intersections, vehicle speeds above 30 with failure to yield being 1 Impairment 14.0% 5.4% mph . In Scottsbluff, many present in 100% of KSI Tier 1 High Injury Network angle crashes at signalized Red Light or corridors are higher- intersections. Stop Sign 20.4% 10.8% speed arterial facilities, Running These conflicts frequently reinforcing the need Distracted occur along major 9.7% 71.0% for speed management Driving corridors such as US strategies along these Highway 26, Avenue routes. Table 3-1. KSI Crashes I (Highway 71), and Contributing Factors Speeding and speed- Broadway — locations (2014–2023) related behaviors were identified in the High Injury present in at least 9.7% Network analysis. 49 Page 558 of 657IF HIT BY A PERSON Pedestrian SURVIVES RESULTS IN FATALITY DRIVING AT THE COLLISION 90% survive 10% 20 MPH 50% survive 50% 30 MPH 10% survive 90% 40 MPH Figure 3-24. Why Speed Matters Source: Vision Zero Network1 Slower Speeds Save Lives Many arterial corridors in Scottsbluff operate at Contributing factor analysis reinforces speeds of 30–40 mph or higher. Along these the importance of speed management, corridors, particularly within the High Injury intersection conflict reduction, enforcement Network, reducing operating speeds is one of coordination, and visibility improvements the most effective strategies for preventing fatal identified inChapter 4. and serious injuries. 1: https://visionzeronetwork.org/safety-over-speed/ 2: https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving 3: https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 50 Page 559 of 657 In Scottsbluff... Key characteristics of fatal and serious injury crashes (2014–2023) Heavy Restraint Single- Vehicle Impairment Use Vehicle Involvement Risk 6.5% Of KSI Fatal crashes A substantial Of all KSI crashes Involved alcohol share of KSI crashes Involved a crashes involved Involved only semi-truck unrestrained one motor or partially Vehicle, and Figure 3-25. Crash Severity Key Factors restrained Several key factors contribute to the severity occupants (43%), of crashes in Scottsbluff� Nearly one in five fatal crashes (21�4%) involved alcohol, while increasing injury 43% of fatal and serious injury crashes severity risk. involved unrestrained or partially restrained occupants, highlighting the importance of safe driving behavior and occupant protection� Crash patterns show that one-third of KSI crashes (33.3%) and nearly two-thirds of fatal crashes (64.3%) involved only a single vehicle, indicating that roadway conditions, speed, and driver Of fatal behavior all play a role even without multi-vehicle conflicts. Additionally, 6.5% of KSI crashes involved a semi-truck, reflecting Crashes the influence of freight traffic on key corridors. Together, these Involved factors reinforce the need for a Safe System approach that Only one motor addresses both human behavior and roadway design. Vehicle 51 Page 560 of 657 Figure 3-26. Clear Weather KSI Crashes Most severe crashes occur in clear, dry conditions. 79.6% of KSI crashes in Scottsbluff occurred during clear weather and on dry pavement. This indicates that environmental conditions alone do not drive severe crash risk. Human behavior and roadway design play a greater role in fatal and serious injury outcomes. Weather Lighting Conditions Although severe weather can contribute • 39% of KSI crashes occurred during to crash risk, the majority of KSI crashes dark conditions in Scottsbluff occurred with favorable • 23% occurred during dawn/dusk weather conditions. This reinforces • Nighttime KSI crashesNon-KSIs are more the importance of systemic design likelyNon-KSIs to involve alcohol or improvements rather than reliance onNon-KSIs impairment 3% weather-related mitigationNon-KSIs alone. • Reduced3% visibility increases risk for 18% Non-KSIs 3% pedestrians and turning18% conflicts CrashNon-KSIs characteristics in 3%Scottsbluff 18% reinforce that3% speed management, 18% Improved lighting and visibility roadway3% departure prevention,18% impaired enhancements remain important safety 5% driving enforcement,18% and visibility strategies along high-risk corridors.5% improvements are essential components 5% 4% of a comprehensive safety strategy. 5% 4% 5% 4% 5% 4% Figure 3-27. Lighting: Non-KSI Crashes4% Figure 3-28. Lighting:KSIs KSI Crashes Non-KSIs 4% 3% 70% 18% 70% 70% 27% 70% Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown 70% 5% 70% Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown Dark - Lit Dark - Not4% Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown 59% Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown 10% 70% 4% Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light N/S Unknown Dark - Lit Dark - Not Lit Dawn/Dusk Light SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 52 Page 561 of 657 3.17 Who Is Most Affected highlight the need for clearer lane delineation, improved crossing treatments, and enhanced Crash risk is not evenly distributed across all driver awareness. users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists, For motorcycles, the data only included children, and older adults face elevated injury information on motorcycle inclusion risk due to increased vulnerability and reduced for KSI crashes. Of the 93 KSI physical protection. Understanding who is most crashes, 15 involved a motorcycle. affected helps prioritize investments that reduce Of the 15 motorcycle KSI crashes, harm for those at greatest risk. 2 resulted in fatalities and 13 resulted in serious Pedestrians were involved in 52 injury. Motorcycle-involved crashes represent crashes from 2014-2023, with a disproportionately high share of severe 9 crashes resulting in death or outcomes relative to their presence in overall serious injury. This means almost traffic volumes. These crashes frequently involve 1 out of every 5 pedestrian crashes was a KSI higher operating speeds and reduced visibility. crash, versus 1 out of every 50 vehicular only Children and youth are particularly vulnerable crashes. near school zones, parks, and Pedestrian crashes represent a residential corridors. Crash disproportionately high share of fatal and clustering near school-adjacent serious injury outcomes relative to their intersections and during pick- total crash frequency. These crashes most up/drop-off periods reinforces the need for commonly occur during turning movements standardized school zone treatments, crossing at intersections or mid-block crossings along protection, and speed management strategies. higher-volume corridors. Older adults also face elevated Bicyclists were involved in 36 risk due to slower walking speeds, crashes between 2014 and 2023, longer crossing times, and including one serious injury. increased susceptibility to injury. Common contributing factors included failure to Intersections with wide crossing yield and improper overtaking by motor vehicles. distances and limited refuge space Many of these crashes occurred along corridors present particular challenges. Enhancements without dedicated bicycle infrastructure or where such as longer pedestrian clearance intervals, visibility and separation are limited. Although less refuge islands, and improved lighting are frequent than pedestrian crashes, bicycle crashes especially beneficial for aging populations. A Safe System must protect all users — especially those most vulnerable to serious injury. of all crashes of all KSI crashes involved vulnerable involved vulnerable road users 1.9% road users VS Although vulnerable road This disproportional users represent only 1.9% impact underscores of total crashes, they the need to prioritize account for 26.9% of fatal pedestrian and bicycle and serious injury crashes. safety improvements along high-risk corridors. Figure 3-29. Vulnerable Road User Crashes 53 Page 562 of 657 Figure 3-31. KSI Crash Distribution by Gender (above) Males account for a Figure 3-30. KSI Crash Distribution by Age Group higher share of KSI crashes (above) KSI crashes are most prevalent among adults aged 15-29, than females� with crashes decreasing in age excepting a spike in ages 65-69. 3.18 Age and Gender olds. Overall, KSI involvement generally decreases with Within the KSI crashes, the age; however, the 65–69 age planning team analyzed the ages group stands out as a notable and gender of all KSI crashes. exception, with involvement The data shows that there were rates nearly double those of significantly more male drivers surrounding age groups. These involved in KSI crashes than trends suggest that younger female drivers. (62% and 38% drivers are disproportionately respectively). represented in severe crashes and highlight the potential Figure 3-32. KSI Crash The age groups most frequently benefit of expanded driver Distribution by Gender involved in KSI crashes are education, awareness, and (above) Males account for a 20–24 year olds, followed by safe driving initiatives targeted higher share of KSI crashes 25–29 year olds and 15–19 year toward younger motorists. than females� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 54 Page 563 of 657Figure 3-33. Crashes: Days of the Week Figure 3-34. Crashes: Monthly Weekday crash volumes exceed weekend Total crashes increase in winter months, likely due totals, reflecting higher daily travel demand� KSI to weather conditions and roadway surface factors� crashes are distributed across all days, indicating However, KSI crashes show a relative increase that severe crash risk is not limited to a specific during summer months, potentially reflecting higher day but tied to overall exposure and system speeds, increased pedestrian activity, and greater conditions� recreational travel� 3.19 when crashes occur and reduced daylight. However, evening 5-6 p.m. period. This KSI crashes are more prevalent alignment with peak travel In addition to where and how during summer months (see periods suggests that traffic crashes occur, crash data also Figure 3-34). This may reflect volume, turning movements, reveals clear temporal patterns, increased travel activity, higher and exposure, rather than identifying when risk is highest. operating speeds in clear random occurrence, are key To better understand these weather conditions, recreational contributors to crash risk. patterns in Scottsbluff, the travel, and greater pedestrian planning team analyzed the and bicycle exposure. Location types time of day, day of the week, Time of day: Crash frequency Intersections account for a month, and year for all crashes increases throughout the day, substantial share of serious from 2014-2023. with clear peaks during typical crashes, particularly those Day of the Week: KSI crashes travel demand period: 7–8 involving turning movements are distributed across all days a.m., 12–1 p.m., and 3–6 p.m. and signalized operations. of the week, with increases These correspond to morning Key Corridors where high during weekdays when commute, midday travel, volumes of crashes occur commuting and school-related school dismissal, and evening include: travel are highest. Non- commute periods. KSI crashes ● U.S. Hwy 26 KSI crashes follow a similar follow a similar pattern, with the ● West 27th Street pattern, reflecting overall highest concentration occurring ● East and West Overland exposure and travel demand. in the late afternoon and early ● South Beltline Highway (See Figure 3-33). evening hours (4–6 p.m.). (See ● Avenue I (Highway 71) Figure 3-36). Months and Seasonality: ● Avenue B Total crash volume tends to KSI crashes follow a similar ● Broadway increase during winter months, time of day pattern, with ● 21st Avenue likely influenced by weather the highest number of KSI A full list of corridors can be conditions such as snow, ice, crashes occurring in the found in Appendix A3. 55 Page 564 of 657Figure 3-35. Crashes: Annually 2020 has the fewest number of overall crashes (possibly due to lower traffic volumes from COVID-19); however, 2020 is also tied for the second highest number of KSIs Figure 3-36. Crashes: Time of Day (below) Crash frequency rises sharply beginning at 7 a�m�, peaks in the late afternoon (4–6 p�m�), and declines after 8 p�m� KSI crashes mirror this pattern, highlighting the need for speed management and visibility improvements during high-exposure hours� School zones present risk data shows important trends: These numbers reflect the during concentrated drop- Total crashes remained human cost of outdated off and pick-up periods relatively stable over the 10-year infrastructure, unsafe when vehicle congestion, period. Fatal and severe injury speeds, and roadway distraction, and pedestrian crashes have also remained designs that don’t account activity overlap. relatively steady year-to-year, for all users. reinforcing that severe crash Temporal crash patterns in Understanding both risk persists even as total Scottsbluff reinforce that the “when” and the volumes fluctuate. See( Figure severe crashes are closely “where” of crashes 3-35). tied to peak travel demand, helps the City identify Specific corridors and signalized intersection activity, and countermeasures that intersections consistently higher-speed corridors — not demonstrate elevated crash random occurrence. These are time-sensitive, findings further support location-specific, and volumes and severity, aligning with the High Injury Network corridor-based safety responsive to real- findings presented earlier in this improvements and speed world travel patterns chapter. management strategies and exposure� outlined in Chapter 4. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 56 Page 565 of 6573.20 Vulnerable Road near school campuses and Scottsbluff Statistics Users — Pedestrians, activity centers. (2014-2023) Bicyclists, & Motorcyclists Although these crashes represent a smaller share of Pedestrian-Involved Pedestrians and bicyclists are total crash frequency, they carry • Crashes: 52 among the most vulnerable disproportionately high injury • Fatalities: 4 users of Scottsbluff’s severity risk. • Severe Injuries (Inj-A): 5 transportation system. Unlike • Visible Injuries (Inj-B): 28 vehicle occupants, they lack Spatial analysis indicates • Possible Injuries (Inj-C): 13 structural protection, making that pedestrian and bicycle crash outcomes highly crashes are concentrated in dependent on vehicle speed, the central urban grid and Bicycle-Involved visibility, and roadway design. along higher-volume corridors. • Crashes: 36 These areas combine higher • Fatalities: 0 Between 2014 and 2023, traffic volumes, signalized • Severe Injuries (Inj-A): 1 pedestrian-, bicycle-, and intersections, driveway density, • Visible Injuries (Inj-B): 17 motorcycle-involved crashes and multimodal activity. • Possible Injuries (Inj-C): 10 occurred primarily along arterial School-adjacent corridors and corridors and near major routes connecting residential Motorcycle-Involved intersections — particularly neighborhoods to commercial • KSI Crashes*: 15 along US Highway 26, Avenue areas also show recurring crash • Fatalities: 2 I (Highway 71), Broadway, and locations. • Severe Injuries: 13 *Additional injury-level crash numbers are not known for motorcycles due to data restraints 57 Page 566 of 657 Figure 3-37. All Crashes Involving Vulnerable Road Users (2014-2023) Every trip to school, to a park, or across town should feel safe — whether by foot, bicycle, or vehicle� The safety of children and families depends not only on individual behavior but on roadway design that anticipates mistakes and reduces harm� Protecting vulnerable users is not a special initiative — it is a core measure of a safe transportation system� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 58 Page 567 of 657Figure 3-38. Vulnerable Road User Crashes Pedestrian Disadvantaged Non-Disadvantaged Total Vulnerable Road Users: Bicyclist Census Blocks Census Blocks Pedestrians and Bicyclists Fatal Crash 2 1 3 Pedestrians and bicyclists Severe Injury Crash 3 3 6 represent some of the most KSI Crash 5 4 9 vulnerable users of Scottsbluff’s Visible Injury Crash 11 34 45 transportation system, with Possible Injury Crash 6 17 23 limited physical protection and Property Damage Only 0 10 10 greater exposure to traffic. Table 3-2. Vulnerable Road as downtown, schools, multi- As shown in Figure 3-38, Users pedestrian and bicycle involved family housing and commercial crashes are distributed across destinations. These locations Analysis of vulnerable road the community but tend to reflect environments where user crashes by location cluster along key corridors, vehicle speeds, turning shows that both pedestrians near intersections, and in movements, and crossing and bicyclists experience risk areas with higher activity such demand intersect. across the community, with 59 Page 568 of 657Figure 3-39. Current Trails, Schools, and Points of Interest important differences between outcomes, including fatal recreational opportunities areas. As summarized in Table crashes, are present in both and supports active 3-2, 9 pedestrian and bicycle areas, reinforcing that risk is not transportation, particularly related KSI crashes occurred isolated to a single part of the along the Monument Valley between 2014 and 2023, with a community. Pathway and park system. slightly higher share occurring As shown in Figure 3-39, within or adjacent to USDOT These findings highlight the trails connect several parks, historically disadvantaged need for citywide improvements schools, and community census block groups to pedestrian and bicycle destinations, contributing to compared to other areas. safety, while also ensuring that quality of life and offering investments prioritize locations alternatives to driving for While non-disadvantaged where vulnerable users face some trips. However, the areas account for a greater greater exposure and fewer network is not yet fully number of lower-severity transportation options. connected or consistently crashes—likely reflecting higher Scottsbluff’s pathway designed for daily overall traffic volumes and transportation use. activity levels—more severe system provides important SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 60 Page 569 of 657 Notably, gaps exist the need for expanded and future investments, improve in southeastern better-connected pathways. connectivity, and support both recreation and everyday travel. Scottsbluff and Desired improvements include: along key corridors, In addition to network limiting access to ● Connections to and from expansion, both stakeholders southeastern Scottsbluff and the public identified a schools, the college, neighborhoods downtown, and other need for enhanced signing, ● A safer crossing of US-26 pavement markings, and safety destinations� near 14th Avenue treatments along existing ● Expanded routes along pathways and crossings. These Several locations were improvements, combined with identified where trail and South Beltline east of Broadway continued coordination with street crossings could be NDOT on treatments such as ● Improved east-west and improved to provide safer and leading pedestrian intervals north-south connections to more intuitive connections along US-26, will help create downtown for users of all ages and a more predictable and safer abilities. While recent ● Stronger links between environment for vulnerable improvements—such as a trail neighborhoods, schools, users. railroad crossing upgrade and parks, and Western separated trail crossing over Nebraska Community Together, these findings US-26—have enhanced safety College highlight the importance of in specific locations, additional improving both connectivity Currently, Scottsbluff does not opportunities remain to and crossing safety. Expanding have a formal, adopted Trails improve crossing visibility, the pathway network, Master Plan beyond conceptual reduce conflict points, and strengthening connections to mapping and corridor ideas, strengthen connectivity key destinations, and enhancing including potential extensions between neighborhoods and visibility at crossings will be along the Scottsbluff Drain. The destinations. critical to reducing crash risk City has expressed interest in and supporting safe, accessible developing a comprehensive Public and stakeholder input travel for pedestrians and trails master plan to guide consistently emphasized bicyclists throughout Scottsbluff. 61 Page 570 of 6573.21 What the Data Tells ● Children and older adults Scottsbluff is advancing Us face elevated risk in areas a data-driven, equitable with high exposure and approach to reducing fatal The crash data reveals limited protection. and serious injury crashes. consistent and actionable ● School zones and arterial patterns: corridors represent priority The data confirms locations for intervention. what residents ● Crashes are concentrated on a relatively small These findings directly experience every day portion of the roadway shaped the Safety Action — and provides the network. Plan’s priorities — from project roadmap for change� identification and scoring ● Speed, impairment, criteria to the selection of distraction, and visibility The next chapter translates countermeasures. The focus are key contributors to these findings into targeted is not solely on isolated crash crash severity. strategies, policies, and locations, but on systemic projects designed to create ● Vulnerable road risk factors such as speed safer streets for everyone. users — including management, intersection pedestrians, bicyclists, design, corridor visibility, and and motorcyclists network connectivity. — experience disproportionately severe By aligning community input outcomes. with objective crash data, Trail crossing at Avenue I and BNSF Railroad. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 62 Page 571 of 6574What We Can Do to Make Streets Safer 4.1 From Findings to corridors, and near school-area Rather than focusing only Strategy crossings. on isolated crash locations, the plan prioritizes corridor- This chapter outlines the Crash analysis, High Injury level and network-level projects, programs, policies, Network (HIN) screening, improvements where severe and countermeasures stakeholder coordination, crashes are most likely to occur. recommended to reduce fatal and community engagement and serious injury crashes In Scottsbluff, this includes: consistently identified the through speed management, ● Managing speed along Tier same systemic safety concerns conflict reduction, improved 1 HIN corridors throughout Scottsbluff. Severe visibility, safer crossings, crashes are concentrated along ● Reducing intersection and stronger multimodal a limited number of corridors conflict density connectivity. and intersections where higher ● Improving pedestrian speeds, turning conflicts, limited 4.2 A Safe System visibility and crossing visibility, and vulnerable road Framework protection user exposure increase crash ● Standardizing school-zone risk. Scottsbluff’s Safety Action Plan treatments is grounded in the Safe System Community input closely ● Addressing rail interface and Approach, which recognizes aligned with these findings, multimodal exposure risks that while human error is particularly along US-26, ● Supporting long-term Avenue I (Highway 71), inevitable, roadway systems can be designed to reduce implementation through Broadway, East Overland, 20th policy and coordination Street, South Beltline Highway, conflict severity and improve southeast neighborhood survivability. 63 Page 572 of 657These strategies are Managing speed to survivable Highway where speed, turning reflected throughout the levels is one of the most movements, and multimodal plan’s recommended effective ways to reduce fatal exposure overlap, and school projects, including corridor and serious injury crashes. areas near Bluffs Middle School, modernization along US-26, Roosevelt Elementary, and school-access improvements, Strategies include: Longfellow Elementary. southeast neighborhood ● Corridor speed reductions connectivity enhancements, aligned with land use and 4.4 Safer Intersections and multimodal crossing pedestrian activity Intersections account for a improvements near rail and ● Lane reconfiguration and substantial share of severe highway barriers. road diets crashes in Scottsbluff, The following sections ● Traffic calming and speed particularly angle and left-turn summarize the primary safety management treatments conflict crashes at signalized strategies and countermeasures locations. ● Speed feedback devices incorporated in this plan. ● High-friction surface Signal timing, turning conflicts, 4.3 Speed Management treatments multi-lane crossing exposure, and visibility limitations Strategies ● Access management contribute to elevated crash risk Higher operating speeds and ● Targeted enforcement at high-volume intersections speed differentials contribute partnerships along HIN corridors. significantly to crash severity in These strategies are prioritized Strategies focus on: Scottsbluff, particularly along along corridors such as US- ● Protected left-turn phasing arterial corridors and Tier 1 HIN 26, Avenue I, Broadway, East ● Leading pedestrian intervals segments. Overland, and South Beltline (LPIs) SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 64 Page 573 of 657● Signal visibility and Highway, including several ● Transit stop safety and ADA operations improvements intersections consistently accessibility improvements ● High-visibility pedestrian identified among the City’s A corridor-based approach crossings and stop bars highest-severity crash locations: allows improvements to ● Rectangular Rapid Flashing ● US-26 & East 27th Street function together as a Beacons (RRFBs) coordinated safety system ● 20th Street & Broadway rather than isolated spot ● Pedestrian-scale lighting at ● US-26 & Avenue I treatments. intersections ● US-26 & 5th Avenue ● Curb extensions Within these corridor ● South Beltline & Broadway environments, certain locations ● Access management ● W 27th Street & Avenue B present especially high These treatments reduce exposure and vulnerability — conflict points, improve 4.5 Corridor Safety particularly school zones. visibility, and clarify right-of-way Improvements expectations for all roadway Recommended improvements users. Crash concentrations are include coordinated corridor clustered along arterial treatments along US-26, East See Table 4-1 for the Plan-Wide and collector corridors that Overland, Broadway, South Countermeasure Toolkit. combine higher speeds, turning Beltline Highway, and Avenue I movements, commercial access where crash exposure, access Because many severe crashes points, and pedestrian activity. density, and multimodal activity occur along continuous corridor overlap. segments rather than isolated Strategies include: intersections, intersection Projects that will include improvements are paired ● Systemic lighting upgrades corridor safety improvements: ● Median refuge islands with broader corridor-based ● US-26 Signal & Intersection strategies. ● Crossing consolidation Modernization ● Driveway management Priority locations include ● East Overland intersections along US-26, ● Roadway reconfiguration Improvements Broadway, Avenue I, 27th ● Rail crossing safety ● Active Transportation Street, and South Beltline improvements Network Completion 65 Page 574 of 657 Table 4-1. Plan-Wide Countermeasure Toolkit Individual projects may apply multiple countermeasures in combination to provide layered safety benefits consistent with the Safe System Approach—proven, FHWA-endorsed strategies selected to address Scottsbluff’s most common crash patterns� Each capital project and program described in this chapter applies one or more of these countermeasures based on local context and documented need� Countermeasure Summary Matrix Primary Safety Typical Primary CM ID Countermeasure (CM) Issues Addressed Applications Bundles Poor driver yielding, unclear Intersections, mid-block High-Visibility Pedestrian CM-1 crossing priority, stop-line crossings, downtown, school 1, 2, 3 Crossings & Stop Bars compliance areas Multilane roadways, school Rectangular Rapid Flashing Driver failure to yield at CM-2 crossings, high-speed 1, 3 Beacons (RRFBs) uncontrolled crossings corridors Signal Visibility & Operations Angle crashes, red-light running, Signalized intersections, CM-3 2 Improvements left-turn conflicts arterial corridors School Zone Safety Child pedestrian exposure, All school zones and adjacent CM-4 1 Treatments speeding, congestion streets Pedestrian-Scale & Nighttime crashes, poor Intersections, crossings, CM-5 Intersection Lighting 1, 2, 3 visibility corridors, rail approaches Improvements Quick-Build & Interim Safety Immediate risk reduction, pilot Citywide, near schools, CM-6 3 Measures testing corridors Traffic Calming & Speed Speed-related crashes, cut- Neighborhoods, corridors, CM-7 1, 2, 3 Management through traffic school areas Sidewalk & ADA Accessibility Accessibility barriers, pedestrian Routes to schools, downtown, CM-8 1, 2, 3 Improvements exposure transit stops Rail Crossing Safety Vehicle–train conflicts, visibility, CM-9 At-grade rail crossings 3 Improvements surface issues Transit Stop Safety & Pedestrian exposure, ADA High-use transit stops and CM-10 3 Accessibility Improvements deficiencies corridors SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 66 Page 575 of 6574.6 School Zone and Youth represent concentrated areas Strategies include: Safety Enhancements of youth exposure, vulnerable road users are present ● Sidewalk infill School areas were consistently throughout the transportation ● ADA ramp upgrades identified through crash network. ● Buffered bike lanes analysis, stakeholder Priority school-area ● Shared-use paths coordination, and public input improvements are concentrated ● Protected intersections as priority safety locations. near Roosevelt Elementary, ● Pedestrian lighting Children are especially Longfellow Elementary, Bluffs improvements vulnerable during peak arrival Middle School, Lincoln Heights, ● Transit stop accessibility and dismissal periods when and Scottsbluff High School upgrades traffic volumes and crossing where student exposure and Improving comfort, visibility, activity increase. traffic conflicts are highest. and predictability for vulnerable All schools are a priority and The following strategies are users is essential to reducing will benefit from school zone prioritized near schools: severe crash risk across the standardization as well as network. Key focus areas ● Standardized school-zone access and circulation projects. include improving crossings signage along high-speed corridors, ● Speed transition treatments 4.7 Vulnerable Road User Protection enhancing access near schools ● Raised crossings and transit routes, addressing ● RRFBs Although vulnerable road users sidewalk and ADA gaps, and ● Circulation improvements represent a smaller percentage reducing barriers created by rail ● Pedestrian-scale lighting of total crashes, they account corridors and highways. ● ADA gap closures for a disproportionate share of fatal and serious injury 4.8 Regional connectivity These improvements are outcomes. Pedestrians, and multimodal spine designed to reduce speed, bicyclists, transit users, improvements increase driver awareness, older adults, and individuals and provide clearer crossing with disabilities require Several priority corridors opportunities during peak consistent protection across identified through the school travel times. corridors, intersections, and Safety Action Plan provide Although school zones neighborhood streets.. opportunities to strengthen 67 Page 576 of 657regional multimodal connectivity support a more connected and developed a structured process between Scottsbluff, Gering, and safer regional transportation to prioritize investments. Terrytown while improving safety network. for all users. 4.10 Project Prioritization 4.9 Behavioral and Policy Framework One of the region’s most Strategies important multimodal Given limited funding and connections is the Broadway Behavioral factors such implementation capacity, corridor and bridge linking as speeding, distraction, Scottsbluff established a Scottsbluff and Gering/ impairment, and failure to yield structured prioritization Terrytown. Broadway in contribute to many severe framework incorporating: Scottsbluff transitions to crashes in Scottsbluff. ● High Injury Network location 10th Street in Gering at the data Broadway bridge, and the Reducing fatal and serious injury corridor already includes a crashes requires engineering ● Crash severity trends separated pedestrian facility improvements supported by ● Vulnerable road user on both sides of this bridge. enforcement, education, and involvement This existing infrastructure policy coordination. Behavioral ● Proximity to schools and high- provides a strong foundation and policy strategies include: exposure areas for enhanced pedestrian and ● Targeted enforcement along ● Community input bicycle connectivity between the HIN corridors ● Feasibility and funding two communities. ● Public education and readiness Additional regional connectivity outreach Projects were scored using a opportunities exist along the ● Impairment prevention weighted matrix that emphasized Avenue I corridor bridge in initiatives Tier 1 HIN corridors and southwest Scottsbluff, where ● Data monitoring and documented fatal and serious Avenue I transitions to Five performance reporting injury concentrations while incorporating equity, youth Rocks Road in Terrytown at the ● Crash review protocols Avenue I bridge. Connections to exposure, and implementation ● Transportation safety the Monument Valley Pathway feasibility considerations. ordinance updates system, the South Beltline This approach ensures Highway East, and the Southeast These actions reinforce physical investments are directed to Spine corridors in Scottsbluff improvements and support long- locations where they can achieve also create opportunities to term crash reduction. the greatest impact. improve multimodal access Enforcement and education between neighborhoods, efforts are prioritized along HIN Prioritization establishes where schools, parks, employment corridors, school zones, and and what to implement. The areas, transit routes, and other locations with recurring next step is determining when community destinations. speeding and failure-to-yield and how these actions will be delivered. The Safety Action Strengthening these regional concerns identified through Plan organizes capital projects, corridors through safer crash analysis and public input. programs, and policy updates crossings, pathway connections, With multiple documented risk into short-, mid-, and long- ADA accessibility improvements, patterns and a broad toolkit term phases to align urgency, and multimodal gap closures of countermeasures, the City feasibility, and funding readiness. in southeast Scottsbluff can SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 68 Page 577 of 6574.11 Short-, Mid-, and crash environments while Safety Focus Area 3 – Systemic Long-Term Action Plan strengthening overall system Citywide & Network Improvements performance. Strengthens the broader Reducing fatal and serious injury Safety Focus Area 1 – School & Youth transportation system through crashes will require sustained Safety protection lighting upgrades, sidewalk and investment, coordination, and Prioritizes predictable, high- pathway improvements, rail phased implementation. exposure school travel crossing enhancements, quick- Actions are organized into: environments through circulation build treatments, and supportive improvements, crossing policy actions. Southeast ● Capital Projects (J-Series) upgrades, ADA improvements, Scottsbluff if a focus for the ● Programs (P-Series) and speed management. connected network. ● Policy Actions (O-Series) Includes projects near Each focus area aligns with Implementation Safety Focus Areas Roosevelt, Longfellow, Bluffs documented crash patterns and To translate documented Middle, Lincoln Heights, and Safe System principles. risk into coordinated action Scottsbluff High School. Implementation does not end and provide layered safety Safety focus area 2 – High-Severity with project delivery� Sustained benefits, Scottsbluff's actions reductions in fatal and serious are organized its highest-priority Corridor Modernization injury crashes require ongoing strategies into three Safety Focuses on Tier 1 HIN highest performance monitoring, inter- Action Focus Areas: fatal and serious injury crash agency coordination, and plan ● Focus Area 1 – School & segments including US-26 updates� The following section Youth Safety Protection and other high-exposure outlines how Scottsbluff will corridors and intersections track progress and maintain ● Focus Area 2 – High- (Broadway, Ave I, E Overland, accountability over time� Severity Corridor S Beltline). Strategies include Modernization Table 4-2, provides an signal modernization, visibility Implementation Safety Focus ● Focus Area 3 – Systemic improvements, access Areas Overview, summarizing Citywide & Network management, and enhanced how each focus area addresses Improvements pedestrian crossings. documented safety risks and These focus areas allow the City why it aligns strongly with SS4A to address its highest-severity objectives. 69 Page 578 of 657 Table 4-2. Why These Safety Focus Areas? Together, these safety focus areas address Scottsbluff's highest risk locations, protect vulnerable users, balance immediate action with long-term change, and align directly with SS4A Implementation Grant eligibility. Safety Focus Area Why It Matters Safety Risks Addressed Why SS4A Is a Strong Fit Protects children and Speeding near schools, Aligns with Safe Routes to Safety Focus Area 1 – families in predictable, dismissal congestion, unsafe School principles; strong School & Youth Safety high-exposure travel crossings, ADA gaps, multilane equity and youth impact; Protection environments crossing risk clear community support Concentrates on corridors Targets documented KSI with the highest fatal and Angle crashes, red-light concentrations; supports Safety Focus Area 2 – High- serious injury crash running, turning conflicts, systemic corridor Severity Corridor exposure, including US-26 multilane pedestrian treatments; enables NDOT Modernization and other Tier 1 HIN exposure, freight interactions partnership and SS4A segments Implementation funding Strengthens the broader Nighttime severity, Scalable, data-driven, cost- Safety Focus Area 3 – transportation system to incomplete sidewalks, rail effective; supports quick- Systemic Citywide & reduce risk across crossing exposure, build pilots; reinforces Network Improvements neighborhoods and neighborhood speeding, long-term Safe System corridors inconsistent treatments implementation 4.12 Implementation Tiers: The tiered approach ensures Each tier reflects a From Priority to Delivery that: combination of: ● The highest-risk locations ● Crash severity and High Reducing fatal and serious are addressed first Injury Network (HIN) location injury crashes requires more than identifying what to ● Near-term opportunities are ● Exposure to vulnerable do—it requires a clear and advanced quickly users, particularly near practical understanding of ● More complex projects are schools and activity centers when and how actions will be developed strategically over ● Project feasibility implemented. time and readiness for implementation To support coordinated delivery, ● Funding and coordination the projects, programs, and efforts are aligned with ● Level of coordination policy actions are organized project readiness required (e.g., NDOT, rail, into three implementation tiers. transit, or regional partners) These tiers translate the prioritization framework into a Implementation Tiers phased, implementation-ready strategy aligned with crash Immediate Strategic Long-Term risk, project readiness, and Action Expansion Vision coordination requirements. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 70 Page 579 of 6574.13 project, program & Each action is evaluated based how documented safety risk policy action summaries on alignment with crash history translates into prioritized, and the High Injury Network (HIN), implementable actions. The following summaries and community and stakeholder input, Detailed project sheets, cost 4-3 Tables provide a concise policy consistency, equity and basis documentation, and overview of all capital projects youth impact, estimated planning- implementation notes are (J-series), programs (P-series), and level cost, implementation provided in Appendix A8. policy actions (O-series) included timeframe, and responsible in the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety lead agency. This matrix allows Action Plan. decision-makers to understand Priority & Alignment MatrixTable 4-3.1. Priority & Alignment Matrix — Capital Projects Crash & Equity / Lead Community Policy Overall Planning Cost Time ID PROJECTS HIN Youth Dept Support Alignment Tier Range Frame Alignment Impact /Org US-26 Signal & Tier $1.6M NDOT / J1 Intersection     Mid –$2.6M City Eng Modernization 1 Targeted Corridor & Tier $300K Short– J2     City Eng Intersection Corrections 1, 2 –$600K Mid Targeted East Overland Tier $150K J3     Short City Eng Improvements 1, 3 –$600K North Broadway & Bluffs Tier $450K City Eng / J4 Middle School Safety     Short –$700K SBPS Improvements 1, 2, 3 Active Transportation Tier $5.7M Mid– J5     City Eng Network Completion 1, 2, 3 –$14M Long School Circulation & Tier City Eng / J6 Access Safety     $1.5M Short SBPS Improvements 1, 2, 3 SHS Access & Parking Tier SBPS / J6a     $1.6M-$6M Mid Optimization 1, 2, 3 City Transit Stop Upgrade Tier $750K Short– City / J7     Program 1, 2, 3 –$1M Mid Transit Rail Crossing Accessibility Tier J8     $1.6M Mid City / Rail Upgrades 1, 2 In-Town Grade Tier City / J8a n    $400K Long Separation Feasibility 2 NDOT Ped/Bike Rail Separation Tier J8b     $300K Mid City Feasibility 2, 3 Tier J9 Pathway Master Plan n    $300K Short City 1 $85K Sidewalk & ADA Gap Tier Short– J10     –$500K City PW Elimination Mid 1 annually Southeast Neighborhood Tier J11     $582K Short City Eng Safety Improvements 1, 2 Very Strong Total Planning-LevelSystemic n CapitalModerate Investment (All Projects):Strong/High approx. $18M–$30M  71 / Very High Crash & Equity / Lead Community Policy Overall Planning Cost Time Page 580 of 657 ID PROGRAM HIN Youth Dept Support Alignment Tier Range Frame Alignment Impact /Org School Zone Tier City Eng / P1     $243K Short Standardization 1 SBPS Tier Short– P2 Targeted HIN Lighting     $1M City PW 1 Mid Quick-Build Tier P3     $380K Short City Eng Demonstration 1 Safety Monitoring & Tier P4 n    $50K annually Ongoing City Eng Evaluation 1 Tier PD / P5 Education & Outreach n    $40K annually Ongoing 1 Admin Programs are implemented annually or in phases and are not included in the capital project total.Capital Projects (J-Series) – Location-Based Infrastructure Improvements Capital Projects (J-Series) visibility, speed reduction, and Evaluates long-term solutions predictable driver behavior. for rail delay, emergency access, J1 – US-26 Signal & Intersection and system resilience through Modernization J5 – Active Transportation Network grade separation analysis. US-26 functions as both a Completion regional highway and a city Expands and connects J8b – Pedestrian/Bicycle Rail street, carrying high traffic pathways, perimeter bikeways, Separation Feasibility volumes and accounting for a and neighborhood spines — Assesses opportunities to disproportionate share of severe particularly in the southeast improve pathway continuity and crashes. This project modernizes portion of the City and along key safe non-motorized rail crossings signal operations, improves corridor connectors — reducing in southeast Scottsbluff. visibility and stop bar placement, pedestrian exposure and enhances pedestrian crossings, improving multimodal continuity. J9 – Pathway Master Plan and strengthens coordination Establishes a comprehensive with NDOT to reduce angle and J6 – School Circulation & Access strategy for long-term pathway rear-end crash risk. Safety Program expansion and network Improves traffic circulation, connectivity. J2 – Targeted Corridor & Intersection drop-off conditions, and Safety Corrections pedestrian conflict reduction at J10 – Sidewalk & ADA Gap Focused improvements at Tier 1 Roosevelt, Longfellow, Lincoln Elimination Program and Tier 2 High Injury Network Heights, Bluffs Middle, and other Closes sidewalk gaps and intersections along Avenue I, campuses. upgrades non-compliant ramps 27th Street, 20th Street, and along HIN corridors, school other corridors. Treatments J6a – SHS Access & Parking routes, downtown, and transit address signal timing, lane-use Optimization corridors. confusion, turning conflicts, and Addresses congestion and J11 – Southeast Neighborhood pedestrian exposure. student driver exposure near Scottsbluff High School, Safety Improvements J3 – East Overland Targeted improving access, parking Implements traffic calming and Improvements operations, and dismissal safety. pedestrian safety enhancements Addresses school access, in local Tier 1 and Tier 2 truck activity, and mid-block J7 – Transit Stop Upgrade Program neighborhood corridors. crossing exposure along East Improves ADA compliance, lighting, and pedestrian access Overland near 9th Avenue, Projects located on 14th Avenue, and 21st Avenue. at high-use transit stops along state-controlled facilities, Enhancements include crossing Avenue I, 20th Street, 27th visibility upgrades and speed Street, and East/West Overland. including US-26 and Nebraska Highway 71 management treatments. J8 – Rail Crossing Accessibility (Avenue I), will require J4 – North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Upgrades Enhances at-grade rail crossings coordination with the Safety Improvements Nebraska Department Improves multi-lane pedestrian throughout the City, addressing surface condition, visibility, of Transportation crossing conditions and (NDOT) and are school-zone speed compliance lighting, and ADA deficiencies. structured to support near Bluffs Middle School. J8a – In-Town Grade Separation joint implementation and Treatments emphasize crossing Feasibility funding alignment� SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 72 Page 581 of 657 Priority & Alignment Matrix Crash & Equity / Lead Community Policy Overall Planning Cost Time ID PROJECTS HIN Youth Dept Support Alignment Tier Range Frame Alignment Impact /Org US-26 Signal & Tier $1.6M NDOT / J1 Intersection     Mid –$2.6M City Eng Modernization 1 Targeted Corridor & Tier $300K Short– J2     City Eng Intersection Corrections 1, 2 –$600K Mid Targeted East Overland Tier $150K J3     Short City Eng Improvements 1, 3 –$600K North Broadway & Bluffs Tier $450K City Eng / J4 Middle School Safety     Short –$700K SBPS Improvements 1, 2, 3 Active Transportation Tier $5.7M Mid– J5     City Eng Network Completion 1, 2, 3 –$14M Long School Circulation & Tier City Eng / J6 Access Safety     $1.5M Short SBPS Improvements 1, 2, 3 SHS Access & Parking Tier SBPS / J6a     $1.6M-$6M Mid Optimization 1, 2, 3 City Transit Stop Upgrade Tier $750K Short– City / J7     Program 1, 2, 3 –$1M Mid Transit Rail Crossing Accessibility Tier J8     $1.6M Mid City / Rail Upgrades 1, 2 In-Town Grade Tier City / J8a n    $400K Long Separation Feasibility 2 NDOT Ped/Bike Rail Separation Tier J8b     $300K Mid City Feasibility 2, 3 Tier J9 Pathway Master Plan n    $300K Short City 1 $85K Sidewalk & ADA Gap Tier Short– J10     –$500K City PW Elimination Mid 1 annually Southeast Neighborhood Tier J11     $582K Short City Eng Safety Improvements 1, 2 Programs (P-Series) – Systemic Operational & Education Strategies Total Planning-Level Capital Investment (All Projects): approx. $18M–$30M Table 4-3.2. Priority & Alignment Matrix — Programs Crash & Equity / Lead Community Policy Overall Planning Cost Time ID PROGRAM HIN Youth Dept Support Alignment Tier Range Frame Alignment Impact /Org School Zone Tier City Eng / P1     $243K Short Standardization 1 SBPS Tier Short– P2 Targeted HIN Lighting     $1M City PW 1 Mid Quick-Build Tier P3     $380K Short City Eng Demonstration 1 Safety Monitoring & Tier P4 n    $50K annually Ongoing City Eng Evaluation 1 Tier PD / P5 Education & Outreach n    $40K annually Ongoing 1 Admin Programs are implemented annually or in phases and are not included in the capital project total. Programs (P-Series) corridors and crossings with Establishes ongoing crash P1 – School Zone Standardization elevated nighttime severity risk. tracking, High Injury Network Program updates, and public reporting to Creates consistent, enforceable P3 – Quick-Build Demonstration maintain accountability. school-zone treatments Program citywide, reducing driver Deploys low-cost, interim P5 – Transportation Safety confusion and improving treatments to test safety Education & Outreach compliance. concepts before permanent Supports behavior-focused construction. strategies aligned with P2 – Targeted HIN Lighting engineering improvements, Program P4 – Safety Performance particularly in school zones and Improves lighting along Monitoring & Evaluation high-exposure corridors. Policy (O-Series) – Governance & Administrative Framework Estimated Program Investment (5-Year / Phased):Table approx. 4-3.3. $1.3M Priority – $2.3M & Alignment Matrix — Policies Crash & Equity / Lead Community Policy Overall Planning Cost Time ID POLICY HIN Youth Dept Support Alignment Tier Range Frame Alignment Impact /Org City Transportation Safety Tier O1    $40K Short Admin / Ordinance Update n 1 Legal PolicyEstimated (O-Series) Policy Development Cost:Table <$50K 4-3.3 provides a translate documented O1 – Transportation Safety consolidated overview of all crash risk into coordinated, Ordinance Update Package capital projects, programs, and implementable actions. Modernizes regulatory tools to policy actions included in this Detailed cost assumptions support speed management, plan. and implementation notes are micro mobility rules, work zone provided in Appendix A8. compliance, and bus stop safety Together, these projects, standards. programs, and policies 73 Page 582 of 657SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 74 Page 583 of 657 critical gaps in the network their implementation timing Priority segments of the active will depend on coordination, transportation network focus funding, and programming Tier 1 on completing a continuous through NDOT. — Immediate Action: High shared-use pathway spine Impact, High Readiness through southeast Scottsbluff Implementation Approach and along South Beltline. These Tier 1 actions are advanced Tier 1 includes Scottsbluff’s segments connect residential through a combination of: highest-priority safety actions— neighborhoods, parks, schools, projects and programs that and Western Nebraska ● Quick-build and near-term address documented crash risk Community College to the improvements and can be advanced in the existing pathway system while ● Preliminary engineering near term. These improvements providing safer alternatives and design development (see Table 4-4) focus on to travel along higher-risk high-injury corridors, school ● Coordination with partner roadways and local streets with agencies and stakeholders environments, and locations documented crash activity. with concentrated pedestrian ● Immediate pursuit of grant activity. Several Tier 1 projects also funding opportunities improve continuity across Tier 1 emphasis major barriers and connect Expected Outcomes neighborhoods to existing ● School and youth safety Tier 1 represents the City’s facilities and destinations. improvements opportunity to achieve early, These improvements support visible safety improvements. ● Targeted corridor and safer daily travel and position These projects reduce crash intersection corrections the City to pursue near-term risk in the most critical locations ● Systemic upgrades implementation funding. while building momentum for such as lighting, ADA long-term investment. Projects along US-26 and improvements, and rail other state-controlled corridors crossing enhancements are led in coordination with ● Neighborhood-level safety the Nebraska Department of improvements in areas Transportation (NDOT). While with elevated crash risk these improvements align with ● Key active transportation Tier 1 priorities based on crash connections that close risk and corridor importance, 75 Page 584 of 657 Table 4-4. Tier 1 Actions Summary — Immediate Safety Improvements Category Representative Actions Project Codes What This Includes Signal upgrades, timing, Mast arms, LPIs, signal Signal & Intersection Safety J1, J2, J3 phasing, turn treatments timing, turn lanes, striping Targeted intersection and mid- Striping, crossings, RRFBs, Corridor Safety Corrections J3, J4 block improvements access adjustments Active Transportation SE pathway spine, Beltline Shared-use paths, J5 (Tier 1) (Priority Segments) path, bike routes crossings, bridge, signage Signing, crossings, ADA, School zone signage, HV School Safety Improvements J6, P1 circulation crosswalks, audits Transit Improvements Install Transit Shelters J7 Donated shelters Crossing upgrades and Lighting, markings, ADA Rail Crossing Safety J8 visibility improvements access Complete Pathway Master Pathway Planning J9 Planning Plan Sidewalk & ADA Gap closure and accessibility J10 Sidewalks, ramps, tie-ins Improvements upgrades Local street treatments in high- Markings, signage, curb Neighborhood Safety J11 risk areas extensions Corridor and intersection HIN lighting, pedestrian- Lighting Improvements P2 lighting scale lighting Low-cost rapid deployment Paint & post, striping, Quick-Build Projects P3 treatments refuge islands Ongoing evaluation and Data & Monitoring P4 HIN updates, reporting tracking SRTS, campaigns, walk Education & Programs Behavior change and outreach P5 audits Ordinance updates and Complete Streets, NRTOR, Policy Actions O1 standards ADA Focused on immediate, high-impact improvements that reduce risk where crashes are most concentrated. Detailed project descriptions, locations, and cost estimates are provided in Appendix A8. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 76 Page 585 of 657 Figure 4-1. Tier 1 PROJECT Actions — Immediate Safety Improvements Tier 1 project locations. Points and lines are labeled by project code (J#) and correspond to detailed project descriptions in Appendix A8. Tier 1 projects are directly informed by the High Injury Network (HIN) and crash analysis. These actions prioritize locations where fatal and serious injury crashes are most concentrated, as well as areas with high exposure for vulnerable users, including school zones and key pedestrian corridors. These projects target the underlying conditions identified in the crash analysis—such as speed, conflict points, and visibility—rather than isolated crash locations. In addition to addressing the highest-risk locations, Tier 1 projects were selected based on their ability to be implemented in the near term and to deliver measurable safety benefits quickly. 77 Page 586 of 657 Figure 4-2. Tier 1 PROGRAM Actions — Immediate Safety Improvements Tier 1 program locations labeled by program code (P#); see Appendix A8 for details. Codes correspond to the implementation tables and project sheets. Code Project ( J ) Tier(s) J1 US-26 Signal & Intersection Modernization (NDOT) 1 J2 City Corridor & Intersection Safety Corrections 1, 2 J3 East Overland Targeted Improvements 1, 3 J4 North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety Improvements 1, 2, 3 J5 Active Transportation Network Completion 1, 2, 3 J6 School Circulation & Access Safety 1, 2, 3 Tier 1 focuses J6a SHS Access & Parking Optimization 1, 2, 3 on the locations J7 Transit Stop Upgrade Program 1, 2, 3 J8 Rail Crossing Accessibility Upgrades 1, 2, 3 where crashes J9 Pathway Master Plan 1 J10 Sidewalk & ADA Gap Elimination 1 are most severe, J11 Southeast Neighborhood Safety Improvements 1, 2 most frequent, and Code Program ( P ) Tier(s) P1 School Zone Standardization Program 1 most preventable— P2 Targeted HIN Lighting Program 1 reflecting both data P3 Quick-Build Demonstration Program 1 P4 Safety Performance Monitoring & Implementation Program 1 analysis and public P5 Transportation Safety Education & Outreach Program 1 Code Policy ( O ) Tier(s) and stakeholder O1 Transportation Safety Ordinance Update Package 1 input. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 78 Page 587 of 657 Tier 2 emphasis Implementation Approach ● Corridor modernization and Tier 2 projects typically require: Tier 2 signal system upgrades ● Feasibility analysis and — Strategic Expansion: ● Expanded school circulation preliminary engineering Corridor and System and access improvements ● Inter-agency coordination Improvements ● Transit stop and rail crossing (NDOT, rail, transit providers) enhancements Tier 2 includes projects that ● Refined cost estimates and address significant safety ● Lighting and visibility project scoping risks but require additional program expansion ● Strategic bundling for coordination, design ● Additional network competitive funding development, or funding before connections and facility applications implementation. These projects upgrades Expected Outcomes (see Table 4-5) expand upon These projects often involve Tier 1 efforts by focusing on state-controlled facilities, higher Tier 2 investments deliver corridor-level improvements construction costs, or more broader corridor-level safety and system-wide upgrades. complex design considerations, improvements, addressing requiring additional preparation the conditions that contribute prior to implementation. to recurring severe crashes and strengthening the overall transportation network. Table 4-5. Tier 2 Actions Summary — Corridor & System Expansion Category Representative Actions Project Codes What This Includes Raised crossings, median Corridor Enhancements J2, J4 Geometric upgrades improvements Perimeter bikeways, Shoulders, shared-use Expanded Bike Network J5e, J5f connectors paths Parking, drop-off, access Internal circulation School Circulation J6, J6a changes improvements Transit Improvements Stop upgrades and relocations J7 ADA pads, relocations Rail Planning Feasibility and coordination J8, J8a, 8b Analysis and alternatives Lighting Expansion Additional corridor lighting J6, J11 Targeted enhancements Advances corridor-level improvements that require coordination, design, and strategic funding. Detailed project descriptions, locations, and cost estimates are provided in Appendix A8. 79 Page 588 of 657 Figure 4-3. Tier 2 PROJECT Actions — Corridor & System Expansion Tier 2 project locations. Points and lines are labeled by project code (J#) and correspond to detailed project descriptions in Appendix A8. Code Project ( J ) Tier(s) Tier 2 advances J2 City Corridor & Intersection Safety Corrections 1, 2 J4 North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety Improvements 1, 2, 3 coordinated J5 Active Transportation Network Completion 1, 2, 3 corridor J6 School Circulation & Access Safety 1, 2, 3 J6a SHS Access & Parking Optimization 1, 2, 3 improvements J7 Transit Stop Upgrade Program 1, 2, 3 that address J8 Rail Crossing Accessibility Upgrades 1, 2, 3 J8a In-Town Grade Separation Feasibility Study 2 the underlying J8b Ped/Bike Rail Separation Feasibility (SE Pathway) 2, 3 causes of severe J11 Southeast Neighborhood Safety Improvements 1, 2 crashes. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 80 Page 589 of 657 Tier 3 emphasis Implementation Approach Full active transportation Tier 3 projects are advanced Tier 3 network buildout through: — Long-Term Vision: ● Major corridor ● Long-range planning and System Completion and reconstruction or long- feasibility studies Transformation range improvements ● Right-of-way preservation and coordination Tier 3 includes long-term ● Rail separation or major projects that address systemic crossing improvements ● Regional partnerships and safety challenges and ● Long-term connectivity funding strategies require sustained planning, and system integration ● Phased implementation coordination, and funding. These projects are typically over time These projects (see Table more complex and may require Expected Outcomes 4-6) focus on completing the right-of-way acquisition, regional transportation network and coordination, or significant Tier 3 represents Scottsbluff’s addressing structural barriers to capital investment. long-term commitment to a safe travel. safe, connected, and resilient transportation system, ensuring that future growth supports safety for all users. Tier 3 completes the system with long-term investments that address complex barriers and support safer travel by design. Table 4-6. Tier 3 Actions Summary — Long-Term System Improvements Category Representative Actions Project Codes What This Includes Major Crossing High-cost crossing RRFBs, advanced lighting J3, J4, J6 Enhancements treatments US-26 corridor shared-use Parallel Pathways J5d Separated facility path School Infrastructure Parking expansion, pullouts J6a Capacity improvements Pedestrian-scale Transit Enhancements Lighting and stop upgrades J7 improvements Structural feasibility and Long-term grade Rail Separation J8b design separation Long-term investments that complete the network and address complex safety challenges. Detailed project descriptions, locations, and cost estimates are provided in Appendix A8. 81 Page 590 of 657 Figure 4-4. Tier 3 PROJECT Actions — Long-Term Safety Improvements Tier 3 project Code Project ( J ) Tier(s) locations labeled J4 North Broadway & Bluffs Middle Safety Improvements 1, 2, 3 by project code J6 School Circulation & Access Safety 1, 2, 3 SHS Access & Parking Optimization 2, 3 (J#). Programs and J6a J7 Transit Stop Upgrade Program 2, 3 policies support J8b Ped/Bike Rail Separation Feasibility (SE Pathway) 3 implementation Code Program ( P ) Tier(s) across all tiers and P2 Targeted HIN Lighting Program 1, 2, 3 are not location- P3 Quick-Build Demonstration Program 1, 2, 3 specific; seeAppendix P4 Safety Performance Monitoring & Implementation Program 1, 2, 3 P5 Transportation Safety Education & Outreach Program 1, 2, 3 A8 for details. Code Policy ( O ) Tier(s) O1 Transportation Safety Ordinance Update Package 1 SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 82 Page 591 of 657How the Tiers Work Together, these tiers align with Chapter 5 builds on this Together the Safety Focus Areas and framework by defining the provide a scalable, realistic path roles, responsibilities, funding The three implementation tiers toward achieving Scottsbluff’s strategies, and performance are designed to function as a Vision Zero goal. measures needed to move coordinated delivery system: these actions from concept to From Planning to construction. Tier 1 delivers Implementation immediate safety This coordinated improvements and The tiered structure ensures strategy enables early results that the Safety Action Plan is Scottsbluff to deliver Tier 2 expands and not a static document, but an safety investments as a strengthens corridor- active framework for decision- level performance making. By aligning priorities, system—targeting the funding, and implementation locations, conditions, Tier 3 completes readiness, Scottsbluff is and behaviors that the system and positioned to advance safety addresses long-term improvements in a deliberate contribute most to challenges and measurable way. severe crashes� 83 Page 592 of 6574.14 Governance, To ensure accountability and Project phasing Monitoring, and Plan sustained progress, the City reflects planning-level will: cost considerations, Updates implementation complexity, ● Monitor crash trends This Safety Action Plan is not and coordination and High Injury Network requirements. Programs and a one-time checklist — it is a conditions annually living roadmap. Policies are implemented ● Track implementation continuously across all tiers The prioritization framework progress using measurable and support the effectiveness identifies where safety safety outcomes of infrastructure investments. improvements are most ● Report publicly on needed; the implementation Through coordinated completed actions and implementation and Tiers 1 through 3 define when performance indicators and how those improvements performance monitoring, ● Update the plan every five are advanced. As projects Scottsbluff advances its years or sooner if crash are refined, funded, and Vision Zero commitment to trends shift coordinated, they may eliminating fatal and serious advance between tiers based ● Continue community injury crashes on readiness and opportunity. engagement to inform future updates SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 84 Page 593 of 6575 Implementing and sustaining safer streets in scottsbluff 5.1 FROM STRATEGY TO will receive priority focus as enforcement, and sustained SAVED LIVES implementation begins. partnerships. This chapter outlines: Chapter 4 translated those A plan does not save lives. findings into targeted ● Who leads and who Implementation does. strategies, countermeasures, supports implementation Chapter 3 documented a and bundled investments ● What projects advance clear pattern: fatal and serious aligned with the Safe System first and why injury crashes in Scottsbluff Approach. Chapter 5 now ● How funding will be are not random. They are defines how those strategies secured and bundled concentrated along US- move from concept to 26, Avenue I (Highway 71), construction — and from ● How performance will be Broadway, East Overland, policy to measurable safety monitored and reported and in areas where children, outcomes. ● How the plan will remain pedestrians, and drivers The Scottsbluff SS4A Safety active over time interact near schools and rail Action Plan is intentionally As a regional hub serving crossings. These locations structured to convert Western Nebraska represent the highest documented risk into built and eastern Wyoming, combination of crash severity improvements, adopted Scottsbluff’s transportation and exposure — and they ordinances, coordinated system carries both 85 Page 594 of 657neighborhood trips and phased, and achievable for a will also advance early where significant regional traffic. community of approximately feasible to reduce immediate Implementation must 14,000 residents. risk. therefore balance local safety Implementation sequencing improvements with corridor- reflects documented crash This implementation level investments that require severity, High Injury Network framework translates strategy coordination with NDOT, rail (HIN) prioritization, funding into action by defining: operators, transit providers, readiness, and inter-agency ● Clear leadership roles and and regional partners. coordination requirements. decision authority Strategy defines what to do. Tier 1 High Injury Network ● Phased project delivery Implementation defines how it corridors — including US-26, aligned with readiness and gets done. Avenue I (Highway 71), and risk other high-severity segments ● Funding alignment and 5.2 Implementation identified in Chapter 3 — will bundling strategy framework receive priority sequencing ● Performance monitoring when funding opportunities and accountability The actions outlined in align. School-area safety measures this Safety Action Plan are improvements and high- structured to be realistic, exposure pedestrian locations Implementation capacity SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 86 Page 595 of 657 Figure 5-1. Project reflects Scottsbluff’s size, Partners and Stakeholder staffing structure, and reliance Organizations on contracted engineering services for capital project development and delivery. As a mid-sized community with limited in-house design capacity, Scottsbluff’s approach emphasizes careful scoping, phased advancement, and grant alignment to maximize impact per dollar invested. Together, Chapters 4 and 5 form a complete safety delivery system: Policy direction + Implementation structure = Real safety change. City Administration coordination with NDOT and 5.3 who does what: other agencies for capital City Administration improvements. Governance & Roles coordinates implementation Successful implementation across departments, advances Engineering will funding opportunities, in Scottsbluff requires also support grant coordinated leadership oversees reporting, and ensures that safety priorities narrative preparation, across City leadership and benefit-cost departments, state partners, are integrated into capital schools, rail operators, transit improvement planning. documentation, and safety performance providers, and community Implementation stakeholders. Because several forecasting when sequencing will of the highest-risk corridors required for be integrated into fall under state jurisdiction competitive funding the City’s annual or intersect active rail programs� infrastructure, responsibilities budget cycle and are distributed based on legal Capital Improvement Public Works authority, operational control, Planning process� and technical expertise. Public Works will support Engineering (Consulting Services) implementation of lighting City Council upgrades, signage Engineering services, improvements, striping, and The City Council provides provided by the City’s maintenance-related safety policy direction, adopts contracted consulting firm, enhancements. ordinances, approves funding will lead design development, allocations, and formally cost refinement, project Public Works will also be endorses grant applications scoping, grant support responsible for maintaining and inter-agency agreements. documentation, and installed safety treatments, 87 Page 596 of 657including pavement markings, Highway 71 (Avenue I). Projects Panhandle Public Health District signage, lighting systems, affecting these facilities will (PPHD) and pedestrian visibility require NDOT coordination PPHD can support walk enhancements to ensure long- and approval. The Safety audits, Safe Routes–style term effectiveness. Action Plan is structured to programming, community support joint implementation engagement, and grant Police Department and HSIP alignment where application assistance. As The Police Department will applicable. a regional partner working support targeted enforcement across Scottsbluff, Terrytown, aligned with documented BNSF Railway and Gering, PPHD can also crash patterns, school zone BNSF coordination will be help align safety messaging standardization efforts, and required for rail crossing and funding strategies across public safety education accessibility improvements, jurisdictional boundaries. initiatives. lighting enhancements, and feasibility studies related to Western Nebraska Community Scottsbluff Public Schools (SBPS) grade separation. College (WNCC) SBPS will coordinate on school zone treatments, circulation Tri-City Roadrunner (Transit WNCC may support driver improvements, Safe Routes Provider) education, youth safety outreach, and community strategies, and youth-focused Tri-City Roadrunner will engagement efforts aligned safety programming. coordinate on transit stop with enforcement and upgrades, ADA compliance, Nebraska Department of education programs included in and safety improvements at this plan. Transportation (NDOT) high-use stops located along NDOT maintains jurisdiction HIN corridors. over US-26 and Nebraska SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 88 Page 597 of 657 Figure 5-2. Phased Implementation Strategy Advancing projects from concept to construction, aligned with 5.4 what happens first: project readiness, coordination, and funding Phased delivery plan Short-term projects focus on environments with immediate vulnerability and high risk exposure, including school zones, neighborhood corridors, and documented pedestrian conflict locations. ● Transportation Safety Mid-term investments Implementation sequencing is Ordinance updates (O1) prioritize Tier 1 and Tier based on risk severity, funding ● Safety Performance 2 High Injury Network readiness, and inter-agency Monitoring framework corridors requiring signal coordination requirements. launch modernization, lighting Implementation is structured expansion, and access in three timeframes aligned These projects are scalable, management. with project tiers and readiness cost-effective, and suitable for levels. rapid deployment. Long-Term (5+ Years) Mid-Term (3–5 Years) Focus: System-scale Short-Term (0–2 Years) investments and feasibility- Focus: Quick-build Focus: Corridor-level driven projects. improvements, school zone improvements and bundled standardization, policy adoption, grant implementation. Priority actions include: and high-readiness projects. Priority actions include: ● Active Transportation Network Completion (J5) Priority actions include: ● US-26 Signal & Intersection Modernization ● In-Town Grade Separation ● School Zone Feasibility (J8a) Standardization Program (J1) (P1) ● Targeted Corridor Safety ● Pedestrian/Bicycle Rail Separation Feasibility (J8b) ● Quick-Build Demonstration Corrections (J2) Projects (P3) ● Lighting & Visibility These projects require Program expansion (P2) sustained funding strategy, ● High-Visibility Crosswalk & right-of-way review, and ADA Upgrades (J10 – initial ● School Circulation & potential inter-agency cost phases) Access Improvements (J6) sharing. ● East Overland ● Rail Crossing Accessibility Improvements (J3) Upgrades (J8) Long-term projects reflect structural risk factors ● North Broadway & ● Transit Stop Upgrade identified in the crash analysis, Bluffs Middle Safety Program (J7) including rail interface Improvements (J4) These projects may require conflicts and network ● Southeast Neighborhood NDOT coordination, connectivity gaps. Safety Improvements (J11) engineering development, ● Pathway Master Plan (J9) and external funding support. 89 Page 598 of 657 5.5 Action Plan Actions & Implementation Guide From Plan to Practice Successful implementation of the Scottsbluff SS4A Safety Action Plan requires more than project delivery. It requires ongoing coordination, defined responsibilities, and Immediate Implementation repeatable actions that integrate safety into Milestones (First 12 Months) everyday City operations. Within the first year following While Chapters 3 and 4 identify where and what plan adoption, the City will: to improve, this section defines how those ● Initiate School Zone improvements will be advanced, funded, Standardization (P1) delivered, and sustained over time. ● Launch Safety Performance These actions are intentionally structured to: Monitoring framework ● Be realistic for a community of Scottsbluff’s ● Identify and scope at size least one Quick-Build ● Align with existing City roles and processes Demonstration Project ● Support grant competitiveness and funding ● Begin preliminary readiness engineering coordination with NDOT for Tier 1 ● Provide clear, step-by-step direction for corridor projects implementation ● Refine cost estimates for 5.5.1 Action Categories top-priority capital projects ● Identify local match Action Plan Actions are organized into three strategy for grant categories: submittals 1. Implementation Actions Implementation actions advance physical improvements (projects, quick-builds, corridor upgrades) 2. Programmatic Actions Programmatic actions support education, enforcement, and community partnerships 3. Institutional Actions Institutional actions embed safety into City policy, budgeting, and decision-making SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 90 Page 599 of 6575.5.2 Implementation Action Matrix A. IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS Projects → Built Improvements Advance Tier 1 Priority Deliver Quick-Build Projects into Design Demonstration Action 1 and Construction Action 2 Projects Lead: City Administration / Engineering Lead: Public Works Support: NDOT, Consultant, Public Works Support: Engineering, Police, Schools Timeframe: Short–Mid (0–5 years) Timeframe: Short (annual) Tracking: # of projects advanced to design, funded, constructed Tracking: # of quick-builds installed, before/ after evaluation Steps (What this actually means): Steps: 1. Confirm final scope of Tier 1 projects (J1–J11 priority elements) 1. Identify 1–2 locations annually (school 2. Identify which can move forward zones, intersections) immediately (ready vs not ready) 2. Select low-cost treatments: 3. Initiate preliminary engineering (10–30%) ● Striping 4. Coordinate early with NDOT ● Posts / delineators (for US-26, Hwy 71) 3. Temporary curb extensions 5. Develop cost estimates suitable for grant 4. Install using in-house crews where possible applications Monitor: 6. Package projects into grant-ready bundles ● Speeds 7. Submit for SS4A / HSIP / TAP funding ● Conflicts 8. Upon award → finalize design → bid → ● Public feedback construct 5. Adjust or convert to permanent improvements 91 Page 600 of 657 Integrate Safety into Capital Improvement Action 3 Planning (CIP) Lead: City Administration Support: Engineering, Finance Timeframe: Annual Tracking: % of CIP projects incorporating safety elements Steps: 1. Review upcoming CIP projects annually 2. Cross-reference with: ● HIN ● School areas ● Public concerns 3. Add safety elements: ● Crosswalks ● Lighting ● Turn lanes ● ADA upgrades 4. Prioritize projects that address Tier 1 risks 5. Document safety justification for funding SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 92 Page 601 of 657 B. Programmatic ACTIONS Behavior → Partnerships Implement School Safety and Safe Action Routes Programming Lead4: Scottsbluff Public Schools Support: PPHD, Police, City Timeframe: Ongoing Tracking: # of schools participating, improvements implemented Steps: 1. Conduct walk audits at priority schools 2. Identify: ● Crossing gaps ● Drop-off conflicts ● Visibility issues 3. Coordinate improvements (quick-build + capital) 4. Implement education: ● Students ● Parents 5. Align enforcement during peak times 93 Page 602 of 657 Coordinate Targeted Conduct Ongoing Enforcement and Community Action 5 Education Action 6 Engagement Lead: Police Department Lead: City Administration Support: PPHD, City Admin Support: PPHD, Schools, WNCC Timeframe: Ongoing Timeframe: Annual Tracking: Enforcement activity + behavior Tracking: # of engagements, participation trends levels Steps: Steps: 1. Identify high-risk behaviors: 1. Maintain project website updates ● Speeding 2. Conduct periodic surveys ● Red-light running 3. Host: ● Impairment ● Open houses 2. Focus on: ● School outreach ● HIN corridors 4. Use: ● School zones ● Map-based feedback tools 3. Use: 5. Incorporate feedback into project ● STEP grants prioritization ● Coordinated campaigns 4. Pair enforcement with: ● Education messaging ● Community outreach SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 94 Page 603 of 657C. Institutional ACTIONS Establish Ongoing SS4A Coordination POLICY, DATA & COORDINATION Action (Task Force) Maintain and Update Lead8: City Administration the High Injury Support: All partners Action Network (HIN) (PPHD, NDOT, Schools, etc.) Lead7: Engineering / GIS Timeframe: 2–4 meetings/year Support: NDOT Tracking: Meeting frequency + action follow-up Timeframe: Annual Steps: Tracking: Updated HIN map 1. Maintain Task Force structure Steps: 2. Set standing agenda: 1. Update crash data annually ● Crash trends 2. Recalculate: ● Project updates ● Severity ● Funding opportunities ● Crash rates 3. Assign action items 3. Adjust Tier 1 / Tier 2 priorities 4. Track progress between meetings 4. Share with: ● City leadership ● Task Force 5. Use to guide funding + projects 95 Page 604 of 657 Track Performance Prepare and and Report Progress Submit Grant Action Action Applications 9: City Administration 10: Engineering / Administration Lead Lead Support: Engineering, Police Support: Consultant, PPHD Timeframe: Annual Timeframe: Annual cycles (or quarterly if grant-funded) Tracking: # of applications Tracking: Published report submitted / awarded Steps: Steps: 1. Compile: 1. Monitor funding cycles: ● Crash trends ● SS4A ● Project status ● HSIP 2. Update: ● TAP ● HIN 2. Select ready projects ● Implementation metrics 3. Bundle projects strategically 3. Publish summary: 4. Develop: ● Website ● Cost estimates ● Council updates ● Benefit justification 4. Use findings to adjust priorities 5. Submit applications 6. Track outcomes and refine approach How Progress Will Be Results will be reviewed By pairing capital investments Tracked annually and used to adjust with ongoing coordination, priorities, funding strategies, performance tracking, and Progress will be measured and implementation community partnerships, using: sequencing. Scottsbluff is positioned to deliver measurable, sustained ● Project delivery milestones Why This Matters reductions in fatal and serious injury crashes. ● Annual crash trend These actions ensure that analysis the Safety Action Plan is not ● High Injury Network a static document, but an updates active, evolving program that ● Program participation continuously translates data metrics into decisions and decisions into safer streets. ● Grant funding secured SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 96 Page 605 of 657 5.6 how we pay for Federal Funding Opportunities ● Rail Safety Funds (where applicable) – Rail crossing it: funding & Grant ● SS4A Implementation improvements and Readiness Grants – Tier 1 corridor modernization, school feasibility studies The Safety Action Plan is safety bundles, lighting Grant Cycle Awareness structured to support diverse programs Federal grant programs funding pathways and ● Highway Safety such as SS4A, HSIP, and competitive grant positioning. Improvement Program TAP operate on competitive The total planning- (HSIP) – NDOT-aligned annual or biennial cycles. corridor and intersection Scottsbluff will monitor level capital treatments USDOT and NDOT funding investment identified ● Transportation announcements and align in this plan is Alternatives Program preliminary engineering approximately (TAP) – Sidewalk, pathway, schedules to ensure projects $18–$30 million, and ADA gap closure are ready for submission structured across projects when opportunities arise. phased tiers� ● Safe Routes to School Early engineering funding – School-area development improves Planning-level cost ranges improvements and youth competitiveness by reflect 2026 dollars and mobility protection demonstrating readiness, will be refined through cost clarity, and inter-agency preliminary engineering and ● Highway Safety Office coordination. grant development. (HSO) – Education and enforcement programming Figure 5-3. Funding Strategy & Sources Scottsbluff will leverage local, state, and federal funding sources to advance projects across all implementation tiers� 97 Page 606 of 657Local & State Funding to strengthen grant including quarterly progress Local match may include: competitiveness. Corridor- reporting, performance metric based applications (e.g., tracking, and adherence to ● General Fund allocations US-26 modernization + federal procurement and for policy and quick-build lighting + intersection visibility documentation standards. projects improvements) increase Engineering documentation and ● In-kind design services safety impact and funding justification. planning-level cost estimates ● Phased Capital provided in Appendix A8 support Improvement Advancing SS4A Implementation grant application readiness. Programming (CIP) Funding Implementation Risks and ● Potential public-private To pursue SS4A Implementation Constraints regional partnerships Grants, the City will: where appropriate Implementation timelines may Bundling Strategy ● Confirm Tier 1 project be influenced by: scope and cost refinement Scottsbluff’s funding strategy through preliminary ● Federal and state funding is built on bundling, readiness, engineering availability and alignment with federal ● Coordinate early with ● Inflation and construction safety priorities. Projects NDOT for state-controlled cost fluctuations are structured to maximize corridor elements ● Right-of-way acquisition competitiveness by pairing needs corridor-level risk reduction ● Bundle related projects to with systemic improvements strengthen safety impact ● Utility coordination and equity considerations. justification requirements ● Document crash reduction ● Rail scheduling constraints If fully implemented, expectations using HIN ● Contractor availability these actions and crash data are expected to The phased structure of ● Finalize proposed grant substantially reduce this plan allows Scottsbluff budget fatal and serious injury to adjust sequencing crashes along Tier ● Identify local match while maintaining focus on documented high-risk 1 HIN corridors and sources where required corridors. high-exposure school Upon award, the City will environments� comply with all USDOT reporting requirements, Crash reduction outcomes will depend on full deployment, Table 5-1. Implementation Priorities sustained enforcement Focus Investment Focus Risk Addressed Priority Focus alignment, and ongoing Area School & Neighborhood Critical Community maintenance of implemented 1 Pedestrian exposure treatments. Corridors Focus 2 US-26 & Ave I Corridors Highest KSI concentration High Impact Priority Projects are intentionally Foundational System 3 Network Improvements Systemic, Citywide Focus grouped into bundles Strategy 4 Policy & Monitoring Long-term system resilience Safe Sysem Approach SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 98 Page 607 of 6575.7 how we measure ● Tracking of completed funding prioritization. success Performance & capital projects and program milestones For federally funded projects, Accountability the City will comply with ● Monitoring pedestrian and USDOT performance reporting Baseline crash data (2014– school-area crash trends requirements, including 2023) provides the reference ● Public reporting of documentation of safety point for performance tracking. implementation status outcomes, expenditure tracking, Performance monitoring is Performance indicators may and milestone reporting not a compliance exercise include: consistent with SS4A guidance. — it is a decision-making tool. Results will directly ● Reduction in fatal and The City will evaluate whether inform future funding serious injury crashes implemented projects remain prioritization, engineering consistent with Safe System ● Reduction in pedestrian- design refinements, and policy principles and adjust future involved crashes along updates. phases accordingly. HIN corridors The City will monitor ● School zone compliance The City will consider publishing implementation progress and improvements an annual safety summary safety outcomes through: report summarizing project ● Number of upgraded progress, crash trends, and ● Annual crash trend crossings and lighting High Injury Network updates analysis installations to maintain transparency and ● High Injury Network (HIN) Monitoring results will inform public accountability. updates phased adjustments and Figure 5-4. Performance Monitoring and Accountability Scottsbluff will evaluate progress, track safety performance, and adjust strategies over time to support continuous improvement� 99 Page 608 of 6575.8 working across High Injury Network mapping and development review boundaries: Inter-agency will be refreshed annually processes to ensure new to identify shifting crash growth supports safety Coordination concentrations or emerging objectives. corridors of concern. Implementation on state- Progress will depend on steady controlled corridors and rail 5.9 sustaining momentum: funding alignment, coordinated interfaces requires sustained From Plan to Action design development, and coordination. consistent application of Safe Because US-26 and Highway 71 With corridors identified, System principles. countermeasures selected, function as both regional freight Early visible improvements, and priorities established, corridors and local main streets, particularly in school zones Scottsbluff is prepared to begin corridor improvements must and high-exposure corridors, advancing safety improvements balance mobility and safety will help build community trust immediately. Early efforts will objectives through coordinated and support for longer-term focus on high-readiness, high- design review. investments. impact projects, while mid- and Rail-related improvements long-term investments will move Ongoing Community Involvement will require coordination with forward through coordinated federal rail safety standards and engineering development, Residents will continue to play BNSF scheduling constraints. funding alignment, and inter- a role in implementation by: agency partnership. The City will: ● Participating in corridor By combining corridor design input sessions ● Engage NDOT early in modernization, school safety ● Reporting safety concerns corridor design discussions protection, systemic citywide through City platforms ● Coordinate with BNSF on improvements, and policy ● Engaging in school safety crossing enhancements and reinforcement, Scottsbluff and Safe Routes initiatives feasibility studies is positioned to achieve ● Supporting behavior measurable reductions in fatal ● Partner with SBPS on change through and serious injury crashes. school-area improvements community education ● Coordinate with Tri-City Implementation will efforts Roadrunner on transit stop require sustained Safety improvement is a upgrades leadership beyond shared responsibility between ● Maintain alignment between election cycles, infrastructure design and user safety investments and behavior. Comprehensive Plan cross-agency updates collaboration, and This Safety Action Plan will continued community be reviewed annually and engagement� formally updated at least every Implementation will occur five years, or sooner if crash in coordination with future trends, funding conditions, or Comprehensive Plan development patterns change updates, zoning decisions, significantly. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 100 Page 609 of 6575.10 federal compliance & What This Plan Means for SS4A alignment Residents This Safety Action Plan satisfies SS4A planning requirements by: ● Phased improvements, ● Identifying a High Injury not overnight change Network (HIN) ● Safer and more visible ● Applying a Safe System– crossings based methodology ● Integrating disadvantaged ● Clearer and more consistent community considerations school zones ● Incorporating meaningful ● Improved lighting along key public engagement corridors ● Establishing a prioritized implementation strategy ● Better walking, biking, and ● Providing planning-level accessibility connections cost estimates ● A long-term roadmap for ● Defining performance monitoring procedures reducing fatal and serious ● Outlining a five-year update injury crashes cycle The City of Scottsbluff is prepared to advance these actions into implementation What This Plan Does NOT Do phases consistent with FHWA guidance and SS4A program ● Does not immediately raise objectives. taxes This plan positions Scottsbluff ● Does not eliminate all traffic to compete effectively for implementation funding while congestion maintaining compliance with ● Does not commit to projects FHWA guidance and federal safety performance standards. without funding ● Does not require every project Scottsbluff’s size and to be built at once governance structure allow for nimble ● Does not shift responsibility implementation once away from safe driving funding is secured� behavior 101 Page 610 of 657SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 102 Page 611 of 657 SCOTTSBLUFF SS4A SAFETY ACTION PLAN 5.11 Council Adoption Summary Purpose The Scottsbluff Safe Streets ● Structures improvements Performance & Accountability and Roads for All (SS4A) Safety into short-, mid-, and long- The City will: Action Plan establishes a data- term phases ● Conduct annual crash trend driven, phased strategy to ● Establishes a performance analysis reduce fatal and serious injury monitoring framework ● Update the High Injury crashes within the community. Implementation Approach The plan aligns with the Federal Network annually Safe System Approach and Implementation will: ● Track project implementation supports the City’s Vision Zero ● Advance school-zone safety progress goal of eliminating traffic-related improvements early ● Monitor pedestrian and deaths and severe injuries. ● Prioritize Tier 1 High Injury school-zone safety outcomes Network corridors Why This Plan Is Needed ● Bundle projects to maximize ● Publicly report safety Crash analysis (2014–2023) grant competitiveness performance identified that fatal and serious ● Coordinate with NDOT on Baseline Scottsbluff crash data injury crashes in Scottsbluff are state-controlled highways (2014–2023) will serve as the concentrated along: ● Coordinate with BNSF on rail reference point for measuring ● US-26 crossing improvements progress. ● Avenue I (Highway 71) ● Align with annual Capital Council Action ● Broadway Improvement Planning Adoption of the Scottsbluff SS4A ● East Overland focus on Short-term actions Safety Action Plan: ● School zones and rail quick-build improvements and ● Authorizes staff to pursue crossings school safety standardization. These corridors and intersections implementation funding represent the highest combination Mid-term actions advance ● Integrates safety priorities into of crash severity and user corridor modernization and capital planning exposure. The Safety Action Plan lighting expansion. ● Positions the City for prioritizes improvements where federal and state grant risk is greatest. Long-term actions address competitiveness system-scale improvements and This plan does not commit the What the Plan Does rail interface feasibility. City to immediate construction expenditures but establishes a The plan: Funding Strategy ● Identifies a High Injury structured framework for phased, Network (HIN) The plan positions Scottsbluff to fundable safety improvements. ● Applies Safe System compete for: Statement of Commitment principles ● SS4A Implementation Grants ● Establishes prioritized ● Highway Safety Improvement By adopting this Safety Action capital projects: J-Series Program (HSIP) funds Plan, the City of Scottsbluff affirms ● Defines programmatic ● Transportation Alternatives its commitment to reducing actions: P-Series Program (TAP) funds fatal and serious injury crashes ● Updates policy tools: ● Highway Safety Office (HSO) through coordinated engineering, O-Series funding enforcement, education, and ● Provides planning-level cost ● Rail safety programs partnership. estimates ($18–$30 million Local match may include Strategy defines what to do. total) General Fund allocations, CIP Adoption authorizes how it funding, and in-kind services. begins. 103 Page 612 of 657 Figure 5-5. Scottsbluff Safety Action Plan adopted by City Council, May 18, 2026 SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 104 Page 613 of 657 Figure 5-6. Vision Zero Resolution adopted May 4, 2026� 105 Page 614 of 657 Safer Streets. Stronger Connections. A Better Future for All. SCOTTSBLUFF SAFETY ACTION PLAN 106 Page 615 of 657Page 616 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 13.b Council to discuss and consider action on the Agreement with M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering Services for Sanitary Sewer District No. 169, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement. Staff Contact: Kevin E Spencer Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 b) Page 617 of 657AGREEMENT BETWEEN M.C. SCHAFF & ASSOCIATES, INC. AND THE CITY OF SCOTTSBLUFF FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR, SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT NO. 169 LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 54 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. The City of Scottsbluff (“CITY”) having its office at 2525 Circle Drive, Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69361 and M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc., a Nebraska Corporation with its address at 818 South Beltline Highway East, Scottsbluff, NE 69361 (“ENGINEER”), agree as follows: The ENGINEER agrees to provide professional services to the CITY under the following terms and conditions: I. PROJECT The ENGINEER agrees to provide professional services to the CITY in connection with the following project (“PROJECT”): Sanitary Sewer District No. 169 located in the East half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M. II. SERVICES A. The ENGINEER agrees to provide Engineering Services for the project as described in Exhibit A. B. SERVICES under this Agreement shall be performed by ENGINEER to the same standard achieved by other engineers performing similar work in similar locations. Determinations of acceptable quality shall be made by the Project Manager for the City of Scottsbluff. III. COMPENSATION OF CONSULTANT A. The ENGINEER’S maximum ceiling fee paid on the basis of time spent at the rates specified in Exhibit B shall be $12,582.00. Payment shall be made monthly following receipt of the bills submitted by the ENGINEER. No work will be done by ENGINEER outside the scope of services unless prior Council authorization, in the form of a change order, is received. Work outside the scope of Page 618 of 657 services will be provided at the Hourly rates specified in Exhibit C. B. The ENGINEER shall keep complete records of time spent and materials used on the PROJECT so that the CITY may verify bills submitted by the ENGINEER. Such records shall be made available to the CITY upon request and submitted in summary form with each bill. IV. INSURANCE A. During the term of this agreement, the ENGINEER agrees to maintain in effect a policy of professional liability insurance protecting the ENGINEER and its employees in an amount of not less than $1,000,000. The ENGINEER shall maintain in effect a policy of worker’s compensation insurance. B. The ENGINEER shall also maintain in effect an insurance policy or policies in an amount of not less than $1,000,000 which protects it and the CITY from damages resulting from the ENGINEER’S conduct. C. Certificates showing the ENGINEER has the required insurance shall be filed with the CITY before any SERVICES are performed. Certificates shall provide not less than 10 days prior written notice to the CITY of cancellation or material changes of the terms of the policy. The Certificate for the insurance outlined in Article IV.B. shall name the CITY as an additional insured party. D. The ENGINEER shall indemnify, defend and hold the CITY, its officers, employees and agents harmless from all suits, claims, judgments and expenses (including attorney’s fees) resulting or alleged to result from any SERVICES, acts or omissions by the ENGINEER or its employees and agents in performing this agreement. V. WARRANTIES BY ENGINEER A. The ENGINEER warrants that its SERVICES shall conform to the same standards achieved by other engineers performing similar work in similar locations. Page 619 of 657 B. The ENGINEER warrants that it has all the skills and experience and all professional licenses necessary to perform the SERVICES it is to provide pursuant to this agreement. The ENGINEER may rely upon the accuracy of reports and surveys provided to it by the CITY except when defects should have been apparent to a reasonably competent professional or when it has actual notice of any defects in the reports and survey. C. The ENGINEER shall perform its SERVICES for the PROJECT compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. VI. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. The agreement can be cancelled by either party with written notice 30 days prior to cancellation. B. This agreement may be terminated by either party in the case of a breach of this agreement by the other party, if the breaching party has not corrected the breach within 15 days after notice to termination is mailed to it at the above address. C. The CITY may terminate this agreement if it decides not to continue with the PROJECT. The CITY shall provide notice of such termination by first class mail to the ENGINEER at its above address. If the PROJECT is terminated for reasons other than the breach of the agreement by the ENGINEER, the ENGINEER shall be compensated for reasonable time spent and reasonable quantities of materials used prior to notification of termination. VII. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY A. The CITY agrees to give the ENGINEER access to the PROJECT area and other CITY owned properties as required to perform the necessary SERVICES under this agreement. B. The CITY shall notify the ENGINEER of any defects in the SERVICES of which the CITY has actual notice. Page 620 of 657 VIII. ASSIGNMENT The ENGINEER shall not subcontract or assign any portion of the SERVICES without prior written consent of such action by the CITY. IX. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT This agreement represents the entire understanding between the CITY and the ENGINEER and it supersedes all prior representations or agreements whether written or oral. This agreement may be altered only by written amendment signed by the ENGINEER and the CITY. X. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Upon completion or termination of this agreement, all documents prepared by the ENGINEER, including plans, tracings, drawings, estimates, specifications, field notes, investigations, studies and reports shall become the property of, and be delivered to, the CITY. The CITY acknowledges that the documents are prepared only for the PROJECT. Effective Date of this Agreement _____________, 2026. M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska ______________________________ ______________________________ Page 621 of 657 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services Perform all engineering services as required for the making of surveys, designs, layouts, analysis, plans, quantity computations, summaries and other items necessary to determine precise alignment, provide preliminary and final plans of the proposed project, and assist the City in taking of bids on the Project. The project shall include design of Sanitary Sewer District No. 169 located in the East half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 22 North, Range 54 West of the 6th P.M. including all sanitary sewer main, manholes, and related work. Care shall be exercised in drawing all preliminary and construction details. All notes shall be properly spaced and all lettering shall be of an engineering style. Clarity must be maintained to allow reduction to half size plans. Specifically, a more detailed description of the services to be performed is as follows: WORK DESCRIPTION A. Project Alignment and Field Survey Perform topographic survey to locate existing facilities and identify potential conflicts with other utilities in the area. B. Prepare Plans & Specifications) Perform engineering services and prepare construction drawings, specifications, and a construction estimate detailing the work to be performed by the contractor. The design package will incorporate all appropriate City of Scottsbluff Standard Specifications. Design services provided by our firm will meet all needs of the City and will be done in compliance with the State Board of Engineers and Architects. All work will be done by qualified engineers, designers, and technicians. Page 622 of 657C. Prepare Contract Documents and Assist in Bidding Process Prepare contract documents for review and approval by the City staff and City Council. The contract documents will include the technical specifications, construction plans, and contractual requirements. The documents will include necessary bid documents for use as a proposal to be submitted by potential bidders. Once the contract documents are approved by the City Council, we will assist the City in the advertisement for, receipt of, and review of bids received. We will prepare a tabulation of the bids received and any documentation needed to evaluate and eventually recommend acceptance of the lowest and best bid. Following contract award, we will prepare the contracts, bonds, and other documents needed for the execution of the construction contract for this project. Page 623 of 657 EXHIBIT B WORK ITEM AND STAFF HOURS RATE EXTENSION SUBTOTAL A. PROJECT ALIGNMENT AND FIELD SURVEY $3,692.00 Professional Engineer 6 $229.00 $1,374.00 Survey Crew 10 $155.00 $1,550.00 Engineering Tech 8 $96.00 $768.00 Clerical 0 $87.00 $0.00 B. PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS (SANITARY SEWER) $7,800.00 Professional Engineer 28 $229.00 $6,412.00 Survey Crew 4 $155.00 $620.00 Engineering Tech 8 $96.00 $768.00 Clerical 0 $87.00 $0.00 C. PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND ASSIST IN BIDDING PROCESS $1,090.00 Professional Engineer 4 $229.00 $916.00 Survey Crew 0 $155.00 $0.00 Engineering Tech 0 $96.00 $0.00 Clerical 2 $87.00 $174.00 Total $12,582.00 Page 624 of 657 EXHIBIT C The hourly rate schedule for work to be provided by M.C. Schaff & Associates, Inc. under this agreement shall be as listed below. Professional Engineer $229.00 Survey Crew $155.00 Project Inspector $103.00 Engineering Tech $96.00 Clerical $87.00 Page 625 of 657 City of Scottsbluff, Nebraska Monday, May 18, 2026 Regular Meeting Item 13.c Council to receive the 2025 Annual Report from the Police Department. Staff Contact: Krisa Brass Scottsbluff Regular Meeting – 5/18/2026 c) Page 626 of 657 Annual Report 2025 Scottsbluff Police Department Visit Our Website www.scottsbluff.org Page 627 of 657 Our Mission Our Vision The mission of the Scottsbluff Police Department is to enhance safety, service, and trust with our community. To serve our Keep our community safe by preventing citizens from community with becoming victims of crime or from being injured in traffic honesty, collisions. This is our highest priority. compassion and Provide excellent service to the numerous requests we respect. receive from the community. Our principal duty is to serve. Maintain the trust of our community. This trust provides every department member with the foundation required to carry out our duties. Without trust we simply do not have the authority to serve our public. Page 628 of 657 CORE VALUES To help in achieving our mission, the Scottsbluff Police Department has outlined the department’s CORE VALUES, or characteristics important to being a successful officer: Integrity: The Scottsbluff Police Department is built upon a foundation of ethical and professional conduct. We are committed to the highest level of moral principles and ethics. All members of the department will adhere to the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. Honesty: We will be truthful and trustworthy at all times. Candor: The freedom from prejudice or malice; fairness. We are committed to equal application of the law to offenders and members of the public as well as the equal application of rules and regulations to all members of the department. Commitment: The trait of sincere and steadfast fixity on a purpose; the act of binding yourself (intellectually or emotionally) to a course of action. We are dedicated to meeting demands of our profession and performing all duties to the best of our ability. Courage: The ability to confront real or perceived fear in the face of pain, danger, uncertainty or intimidation. We are dedicated to meeting all challenges with the courage needed to accomplish our mission. Competence: Properly or sufficiently qualified, capable, or efficient of performing the task; adequate for the purpose. We are committed to being qualified to handle the tasks which society expects from the police department. Compassion: We understand our role as community caretakers, and temper our application of the law with compassion and empathy. Page 629 of 657 Department Goals Continue to evaluate and implement policy and procedural changes that enhance the guidance and accountability of the department. Recruit and retain the best possible police officers. Provide quality training for all employees. Promote police conduct that is responsive and sensitive to the needs of the community. Require aggressive crime fighting to improve the utilization of patrol and investigative resouces in the identification, arrest, and conviction of individuals committing criminal activity within our jurisdiction. Require a professional work ethic and professional work product by officers engaged in routine police duties, and preliminary and follow-up investigations. Enhance the role of department personnel in the planning and development process. Recognize exceptional work by police employees. Stress the responsibility of all employees to be accountable to the department and the community for all of his/her actions. Page 630 of 657 38.8 Age and Experience Average Age of Sworn Personnel Average Years of Police Experienece 12.2 23 19.4 5.5 19.4 5.5 All Sworn Command Sergeants Corporals Detectives Patrol Personnel Officers Page 631 of 657 Chief Brass Organizational Admin Asst Walker Chart Captain Kite Captain Enlow PATROL SGT.’s DETECTIVES SCHOOL Eckerberg Lopez Massie Genoways Sgt. Soucie RESOURCE Kiesel OFFICERS PATROL CPL.’s Rohrer Kuhlman Rada Wilson Roalkvan Griess Weber Yocum Johnson Compliance Service Officer McGowan PATROL OFFICER’s Record Tech Record Tech Record Tech RecorVde Trneocnh Howton Littau Muniz Curry Knox Garza Vernon Modec Vorse Thomas Weatherman Peterson Mason Luckinbill Bissonnette Page 632 of 657 2025 Revenues Police Service/Terrytown $137,540 Why It's Important? STEP Grant $96,941 Scottsbluff Police Department provides several services by administrative staff and officers. These Car & Property Auctions $24,609 services are provided for fees charged by the Vehicle Impound/Tow $12,152 department to assist in recovering the cost of providing them. The monies earned in this area are Alcohol Tests $6,100 then returned to the City’s General Fund. Photo Copies $2,819 Also shown is the service contract amount with Terrytown for providing all police functions. Not Handgun Permits $1,503 shown is the amount that the department shares with Scottsbluff School District and Western Security $1,336 nebraska Community College for providing crossing Alarms $800 guards and school resource officers. ATV/UTV Permits $725 Fingerprinting $489 WING Task Force $350 Witness Fees $326 Page 633 of 657 Captain Lance Kite Operations Division Patrol Vehicle Fleet Grants-Highway Safety, etc. Maintenance Order new vehicles Internship Program Equipment and install Patrol Division consists of 4 Patrol K9 Sergeants, 4 Patrol Corporals and 16 Program Patrol Officers Traffic Resolutions/Ordinances Schedules Field Training Coordinator Uniform/Equipment Cooridnate work schedule Citizen Complaints Court appearance liaison Use of Force Review Cooridnate training State Reporting Media Liaison Page 634 of 657 STEP Grant The purpose of the Special Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP) grant is to provide funding assistance to Law Enforcement Agencies for selective overtime enforcement, community engagement/outreach, and education overtime in the emphasis areas of Occupant Protection, Impaired Driving, Distracted Driving, or General Traffic. Funding assistance will provide reimbursement for overtime salaries. Each month we submit an activity report for: Presentations Community Programs School Programs Media Contacts Booth Displays Enforcements Distributed Materials Number of People Reached $120,000 Oct 24-Sep 25 Page 635 of 657 K9 Team Cpl. Weber & Duke STATISTICS 20 Narcotic Deployments with 61.5g Methamphetamine located, along with multiple residue cases with Methamphetamine and Marijuana 10 Patrol Deployments 1 Evidence Recovery Deployment 1 Tracking Deployment Officer Weber and Duke have maintained a consistant 16 hours of training per month Page 636 of 657 INTERNSHIPS Christian Peters Ana Alarcon Palacios We had 4 interns in 2025. Interns experience a full immersion into the workings of the Scottsbluff Police Department. Records Administration Yasmine Arias Investigations Katalia Adams Patrol Page 637 of 657 Support Services Captain Cody Enlow Investigative Bureau Crime Prevention Programs EOD and SWAT Records Animal Control Supervision of Personnel Computer programs Liason for schools Productivity statistics Monthly crime/activity reports (NIBRS) Criminal history requests Firearms permits Evidence room oversight/audits Media releases/liason Page 638 of 657SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER PROGRAM The School Resource Officer Program began in 2002 with funding from the United States Department of Justice COPS in Schools grant program. Through the years and with diminishing grant funds, partnerships were expanded with the Scottsbluff Public School District to maintain and enhance the program. In 2014 this partnership grew with the addition of a second School Resource Officer within the district. The program was enhanced again in 2019 with the addition of a third School Resource Officer position within the department. This third officer serves on the campus of the Western Nebraska Community College, Scottsbluff Campus. Page 639 of 657 $ 2 22025 Scottsbluff Police Department Animal Control 1414 Animal Complaint CFS’s 31 Written Reports 44 Animal Bites 23 Citations for Leash Law 4 Warnings 1 Citations for Kennel License 1 Warnings 3 Citations for Animal Cruelty 1 Warnings 3 Citations for No Rabies Page 640 of 657 2025 Activity Summary 3-year Calls for Service Comparison 2025 Local Agency Total Call Comparison Page 641 of 657 Of the total arrests for Scottsbluff Police Department in 2025, the below arrests were made for serious crimes. 5 Homicide Arrests 0 Robbery Arrests 1 Arson Arrests 80 Aggravated Assault Arrests 69 Assault on Officer Arrests (0 with bodily fluids) 146 Warrant Arresting Agency Jurisdiction This graph compares the three larger agencies 23 Warrant Outside Agency arrest statistics in Scotts Bluff County Page 642 of 6572025 Written Report Agency Comparison The total number of reports written by Scottsbluff Police Officers in 2025 reflects an average of 132 written reports per officer. Some reports take minimal time while others take several hours and even shifts to complete. Written reports are completed to document investigative efforts as well as document evidence collected during investigations. Not all calls for service (CFS) require a written report. Of the total calls for services received, this reflects 19% (3967/20733) of those calls required written reports. Page 643 of 657 2025 Scottsbluff Police Department Drug Related Activity In 2025 the WING Task Force and Scottsbluff Police Department continued to see significant increase in the number of opiates seized and possessed by offenders within their areas of operation. This included the seizure of numerous counterfeit prescription pills containing fentanyl. These drugs are very dangerous to users as they are most often created in clandestine labs without any control or oversight. The department also investigated several deaths caused by fentanyl poisoning in 2025. 2025 Drug Seizure Amounts METHAMPHETAMINE: 183.527 grams, 66.7 dosages, 51.270 milliliters, .5 gallons COCAINE: 2.2 grams MARIJUANA: 372.204 grams, 47 dosages, 4.7 pounds, 7.625 ounces, 1 milliliter OPIUM: 136.5 dosages NARCOTICS: 75 dosages, 11.6 grams STIMULANTS: 65 dosages BARBITUATES: 3 dosages, 8 grams DEPRESSANTS: 85 dosages OTHER DRUGS: 6,966 dosages UNKNOWN DRUG TYPES: 1 dosage, .8 grams Page 644 of 657 2025 Scottsbluff Police Department Drug Related Activity 152 subjects were arrested for Possession of Controlled Substances (includes Marijuana) 194 subjects arrested for Possession of Drug Paraphernalia The Scottsbluff Police Department provides an investigator to the WING/HIDTA Drug Task Force. This task force focuses on the investigation of mid to upper level drug distributors throughout the 13 counties of the Nebraska Panhandle. Other agencies throughout the panhandle also provide investigators for this effort. Some arrests were released on citations and the subjects were not jailed Page 645 of 657 2025 Scottsbluff Police Department Alcohol Related Activity 95 subjects were arrested or cited for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) 14 of these were also charged with Refusal of a Chemical Test or PBT 42 subjects were arrested/cited for Minor In Possession (MIP) 46 Open Container violations Of the 149 Liquor License Checks conducted within the City of Scottsbluff in 2025, there were 2 compliance failures including the sale of alcohol to a minor, and 147 that were in compliance. Page 646 of 657 2025 Motor Vehicle Summary/Traffic Enforcement Traffic enforcement is important in reducing the number of motor vehicle accidents and increasing public safety. Below is the number of traffic accidents investigated within the city in 2025. The totals of violations listed below are some of the most common violations contributing to motor vehicle accidents. Scottsbluff Police Officers conducted 3,913 traffic stops in 2025, of these, 1,033 citations and 1,864 warning citations were issued. TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CITATIONS WARNINGS ACCIDENTS Driving Under Suspension 104 Stop Sign Violations 61 71 Non-Injury Accidents 594 Speeding Violations 221 712 Injury Accidents 119 Failure to Yield 65 3 Following too Closely 14 2 Fatal Accidents 1 Negligent/Reckless Driving 11 2 Page 647 of 6572025 Motor Vehicle Accident Summary Page 648 of 6572025 Crimes Summary Many crimes that occur fall within designations of Crimes Against Property and Crimes Against Persons. Below is a snapshot of some of these crime types that were investigated by the department in 2025. The department continues to see significant increase in fraud related crimes targeting vulnerable groups within the community. These crimes can result in significant monetary losses and post significant challenges to investigate. Property Persons Bad Check 3 Animal Bites 31 Burglary 50 Assaults (includes domestic) 127 Counterfeiting/Forgery 18 Agg. Assaults (includes domestic) 33 Criminal Mischief 36 Child Abuse 99 Embezzlement 1 Fraud 75 Disorderly Conduct 60 Theft 494 Lewd & Lascivious 2 Theft-Motor Vehicle 47 Protection Order Violations 50 Trespassing 395 Robbery 2 Vandalism 131 Sex Offenses 26 Totals: 1,250 Total: 430 Page 649 of 657 294 victims 271 Female 23 Male 175 of those calls were from SPD 132 unsolicited phone calls (phone calls made after a referral from the Police Officers) Caring, trained advocates * Immediate, ongoing, & long-term support * One on one support * Group support * Holistic healing * Coping skills * Connections to other community agencies * Connections & referrals for professional counseling * Legal advocacy * Assistance with Protection Order Applications * Immigration assistance * Attorney referrals * Court system information & support * Medical Advocacy * Medical system information & support * Accompaniment to hospital, doctor, or clinic * Emergency & short-term financial assistance * Transportation assistance * Food pantry * Emergency cell phones * Emergency safe shelter Page 650 of 657Community Engagement Coffee With A Cop Cops N’ Cones National Night Out Pink Patch Project Shop with a Cop Dating Violence Awareness Month JROTC teen CERT training-EOD WNCC Career Fair Week of the Child-car seat safety Bicycle Safety w/youth organizations and schools SRO’s - SPS after school programs Storytime with a Police Officer-Leid Public Library Empowering Families summer Youth Empowermtne tCamp Army National Guard Career Fair/Boss Lift-Chinook Central Square Community Portal Broadway Trick or Treat Halloween with Empowering Families in the Plaza Career Cabs - SWAT, EOD, K9 and drones Terrytown Cocoa and Cookies Terrytown Trunk or Treat Pharmaceutical Take Back Event Page 651 of 657 Chief Captain Admin. Sergeant Sergeant Krisa Brass Cody Enlow Andrew Soucie Nathan Genoways 2025 Promotions Corporal Corporal Corporal Detective Spencer Griess Tyler Weber Stefan Yocum Zac RadaPage 652 of 657 es e Anniversari 2025 Mileston Thank You for your dedication and service to our department! Detective Officer Sergeant Officer Corporal Rob Kiesel Billy Howton Andrew Soucie Ron Wilson Spencer Griess 35 years 20 years 10 years 10 years 5 years Page 653 of 657 2024 Chief of Police Award OFFICER REINA MUNIZ Officer Muniz has served our department for 2 years. Implemented new signage on the building to assist children looking for help Holds herself accountable Dedication to our community Takes pride in her work Shows empathy for others Never backs down from a challenge Awarded to any member of our department for outstanding job accomplishments that has contributed to a more effective and efficient police department. This may involve improved administration, improved operations, substantial cost savings, or other benefits to the department that have materially facilitated the effective performance of the department’s mission. This award is presented in the form of a medal, a ribbon bar, and a framed citation. Page 654 of 657 2024 Officer of the Year Award OFFICER RYLIE MASON Officer Mason has served our department for 2 years. Tenacious work ethic Highly organized Actively compete to do better than those on her shift Eager to learn and actively seeks feedback daily Positive attitude Level-headed and shows great compassion towards victims This officer is selected by the Segeants. The department member must show exceptional achievement in any police endeavor, either on-duty or off-duty, crime prevention, investigative work, community policing, traffic safety, drug control and prevention, juvenlie programs and training programs. This award will be presented in form of medal, a ribbon bar, and a framed citation. Page 655 of 657219th Basic Session 221st Basic Session NLETC Officer Levi Thomas Officer Jacob Officer John Curry Weatherman Page 656 of 657 2025 Law Enforcement Memorial Ceremony National Police Week became a designated observance under President John F. Kennedy’s Albert W. Peterson administration in 1962, with the End of Watch: April 25, 1923 designation of May 15 as Peace Officers Memorial Day. Page 657 of 657