COEUR d'ALENE - A last minute review of design codes prompted McEuen Park engineers to reconstruct Front Avenue as though it were a bridge instead of a parking garage.

Yes, Front Avenue is a street, but it's also a multi-use component that's key to the McEuen Park reconstruction project.

The change equates to about 170,000 pounds of extra steel to reinforce the parkside street that will cover the parking structure tied into the park's redesign.

In short, Front Avenue is more of a bridge than a garage, engineers decided.

How much that additional steel costs hasn't been determined, but it's expected to be less than the $600,000 reserved in contingency funds to pay for it, said City Engineer Gordon Dobler.

That means the change shouldn't make the entire park project exceed its $14.8 million budget. Contingency funds are funds set aside to cover unexpected costs with a project.

"We can't exceed the budget without council approval," Dobler said of the project to redevelop the 15-acre park being worked on by Contractors Northwest, Inc. "We're locked into the budget amount."

Dobler said the rebar cost should be calculated in two weeks and all change orders on the contract will go the City Council for approval as the project wraps up.

"That would be the plan to come in at the end and approve change orders," Dobler said. "We're still within our budget."

But the fact that the parking structure - the most expensive single component of the McEuen Field park plan - would be graded as a bridge caught engineers off guard: A change Dobler called "frustrating."

Estimated at $6.6 million, the parking structure tucks 452 parking spots under Front Avenue, allowing the park to capture around three additional acres of green space.

SDCI-Engineers, out of Spokane, originally designed the structure to International Building Code guidelines after they were contracted by Team McEuen, the park's designers, to work on construction documents. They thought it was a structure, because it was supported by three walls, not pillars, like a true bridge.

But in March, before the contract was awarded to CNI, the city's building department sought a third, independent opinion of the structure's blueprint from JUB Engineers Inc.

JUB declined to perform a full review, which could take weeks, because there wasn't enough time before the building permits needed to be issued as the contract was signed.

But JUB did look at the blueprint, free of charge, and told the city the structure should have been constructed to adhere to design code for bridges that follow the American Association of State Highway Transformation Officials specifications.

In short, bridge standards mean more rebar support because big rigs could be rumbling atop the road.

"We realized upon our initial look that this structure supports a public roadway over a parking lot and therefore is a bridge overpass and not a parking garage," JUB structure engineer David Barnett wrote DCI in March. "The fact that cars can be parked underneath the bridge or on the bridge does not change this fact."

With JUB's opinion in hand, building permits were issued to IBC parking structure standards, but with the understanding that city engineers would consult more with the Idaho Transportation Department.

ITD said, according to the city, it would hold the structure to its bridge standards when it reviews it each year - meaning it was a bridge in the engineering world, and the permits would have to be tweaked, as does the budget for rebar.

"The short of it is, there wasn't enough time left," Dobler said of exploring other compliance options on the street structure that has a completion goal of November, around the same time concrete plants close for the season. "There weren't any dimensional changes (to the plan), just some additional rebar."

ITD declined to comment.

The change shouldn't affect the construction progress timeline, engineers said. The bulk of it should be done in November, with the rest wrapping up in spring 2014.

As it stands, 11 percent of the park project budget has been spent with 10 percent of the construction days used, according to Dennis Grant, project spokesperson, who updated the City Council last week on the park's progress.

But some opponents of the park plan pointed to the perceived quickness on several decisions before the project blueprints were sent out to bid and the contract awarded as a sign that it didn't leave time for project leaders to do all the due diligence.

Frank Orzell, a retired management consultant who organized an unsuccessful recall effort against the city's pro-project incumbents, said in March that the project scope and price were sure to change regardless of what bid came back.

On Friday, Orzell said the changes didn't surprise him, expected more in the future, but that the design code issue should have stopped the park project until it had been settled.

"As a design standard, it should have been checked," he said.

Doug Eastwood, parks director, said construction is going "really well," and changes on a project of its size are to be expected.

But a third party should have been consulted earlier, Ed Wagner, building department director, said.

He said the department engages a third party on large projects, like the high-rise towers, but debated on the parking garage because of the uniqueness of the structure.

"It was kind of a last minute decision to get another pair of eyes on it since it's a unique project," Wagner said. "Unfortunately, we should have jumped on it sooner."

But, officials said, the problem was solved in time and construction is progressing.

DCI referred questions to the city. Dick Stauffer, Team McEuen designer who contracted DCI, declined to comment on the change, but said, "Everything is moving ahead. We're all on schedule; the adjustments have been made."