Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/21/2022 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 076, 2022, APPROPRI
Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2022 City Council STAFF Dana Hornkohl, Capital Projects Manager Brad Buckman, Manager, Civil Engineering Aaron Guin, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 076, 2022, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersections Improvement Project and Related Art in Public Places. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate additional funding for the Vine/Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project (the “Project”). The Project is experiencing inflationary pressures and the cost to complete the work now exceeds the appropriated budget requiring either: (1) delay of final delivery of the Project; and/or (2) securing additional funds to complete the Project. To reduce the scope of the Project means delivering a project that fails to meet established City standards for urban design and landscaping. To delay final delivery until funding becomes available will negatively impact other transportation capital projects currently in the delivery pipeline. Staff recommends a total supplemental appropriation of $2,142,260 to allow for completion of the Project as intended when construction commenced. The total supplemental appropriation includes $1,380,000 in new funding plus $762,620 for traffic signals that has yet to be appropriated. This request is being made to Council now to avoid additional negative cost impacts due to potentially pausing and restarting an active construction project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Project is the City’s top transportation capital improvement project. The work includes construction of a new road and intersection slightly east of the original Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue intersection and a new bridge over the BNSF railway and existing Vine Drive. Primary construction began in April of 2021, with an accelerated schedule. Construction of most infrastructure elements was completed in December 2021, and the roadway opened several weeks ahead of schedule. Staff provided a memorandum updating Council of the project budget in November 2021. (Attachment 1) As of January 2022, the primary remaining work for this project included urban design elements, Art in Public Places, irrigation, landscaping, and work needed to complete the pedestrian underpass (future northeast trail system) at the north end of the Project. Beginning in the Summer of 2021, the nation, the State of Colorado, and the northern Colorado region began experiencing significant inflation in construction costs. (Attachments 2, 3, and 4) The two most recent Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Colorado Construction Cost Index (CCI) reports indicate annual percentage changes of 17.45% (Q4 2021) and 31.79% (Q1 2022). These inflationary pressures impacted the Project as pricing was being finalized for irrigation and landscape elements during this time. The delivery team conducted a significant review of the irrigation and landscaping work to lower cost and increase value. Even after this effort, the estimated cost for this work exceeded the identified budget by $570,000. The Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 2 underpass completion also experienced significant cost overruns, due to its late inclusion in the design effort, coupled with the accelerated schedule. Inflation also affected the underpass cost as the design and pricing were finalized during the same period. Underpass costs exceeded the budget by roughly $790,000. The total amount needed to complete the project is approximately $1,380,000, plus $762,620 for traffic signals to correct an administrative error from an earlier appropriation. Staff has identified two alternatives to reach project completion: • Option 1: Delay the landscaping and irrigation scope of work items until additional funding can be secured. This option would result in the project not meeting the identified project goals within the promised time frame, would expose the remaining work to the likelihood of continued inflation of costs, and would impact the schedule and budgets for other transportation capital projects in the design, acquisition, and construction pipeline. • Option 2: Secure supplemental appropriation to complete the identified scope of work on schedule. Costs for three intersection signals for the Project (totaling $995,550) were to be funded by TCEF program administration funds appropriated for arterial intersections in fiscal year 2021. Due to an administrative error, $232,930 of this total was charged towards the administrative TCEF fund, leaving $762,620 to be appropriated as part of fiscal year 2022. The appropriation for these remaining TCEF funds is included in the proposed supplemental appropriation. Project Funding Trans. Fund TCEF Gen. Fund CCIP - Project Specific Conserv. Trust KFCG Utilities Special Revenue and Debt Services CCIP - Ped/Bike Gr. Sep. Cr. TOTAL Increase Existing 20,020$ 10,934,819$ 1,050,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 12,000,000$ -$ 24,004,839$ Other -$ 232,930$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ -$ 500,000$ 3,956,170$ Proposed -$ 427,500$ 427,500$ 283,000$ 242,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,380,000$ Other -$ 762,620$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 762,620$ Total 20,020$ 11,595,249$ 1,477,500$ 283,000$ 1,242,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 12,000,000$ 500,000$ 30,103,629$ Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection Improvements 5% Figure 1 - Project Budget (Option 2) CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The following is a summary of the current and proposed funding appropriations for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project. Prior Appropriated Funds General Fund $1,050,000 TCEF Fund $10,934,819 Transportation Fund $20,020 Special Revenue and Debt Services Funds $12,000,000 Total Prior Appropriation $24,004,839 Prior Transfer to Art in Public Places $240,048 Other Appropriated Funds TCEF Fund (signals) $232,930 Conservation Trust Fund (underpass) $1,000,000 Keep Fort Collins Great Fund (bridge program) $1,373,240 Utilities (water) $850,000 CCIP Bicycle Pedestrian Grade Separated Crossing Fund $500,000 Total Other Appropriation $3,956,170 Prior Transfer to Art in Public Places $39,562 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 3 Funds to be Appropriated with this Action TCEF Fund Reserves $427,500 TCEF Fund Reserves (signals) $762,620 General Fund Reserves $427,500 CCIP Fund Reserves $283,000 Conservation Trust Fund Reserves $242,000 Total Funds to be Appropriated per this Action $2,142,260 Transfer to Art in Public Place per this Action $21,423 Total Current Project Budget $30,103,269 Total Transfer to Art in Public Places $301,033 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Staff presented this request for supplemental appropriation for the Project to the Council Finance Committee on June 2, 2022, receiving a recommendation from the Committee. (Attachment 5) Prior to construction, the Project was presented to several boards and commissions including Council, Council Finance Committee, Downtown Development Authority Board, and Transportation Board. PUBLIC OUTREACH Prior to and during construction the Project has been presented at numerous public outreach events beginning in 2016, including open house events held in 2016, 2017, and 2019. ATTACHMENTS 1. Memorandum to Council, November 3, 2021 (PDF) 2. Engineering News Record, Construction Cost Index History – As of June 2022 (PDF) 3. Engineering News Record, City Cost Index – Denver – As of May 2022 (PDF) 4. Colorado Construction Cost Index Report (PDF) 5. Council Finance Committee Minutes (draft) (PDF) ATTACHMENT 1 Construction Cost Index History - As of June 2022 HOW ENR BUILDS THE INDEX: 200 hours of common labor at the 20-city average of common labor rates, plus 25 cwt of standard structural steel shapes at the mill price prior to 1996 and the fabricated 20-city price from 1996, plus 1.128 tons of portland cement at the 20-city price, plus 1,088 board ft of 2 x 4 lumber at the 20-city price. View the ANNUAL AVERAGE FOR ENR'S CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX. ENR'S CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX HISTORY (1908-2022) YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV 2022 12555.55 12683.97 12791.43 12898.96 13004.47 13110.50 2021 11627 11698 11749 11849 11989 12112 12237 12463 12464 12464 1246 2020 11392 11396 11397 11412 11418 11436 11439 11455 11499 11539 1157 2019 11206 11213 11228 11228 11230 11268 11293 11311 11311 11326 1138 2018 10878 10889 10959 10971 11013 11069 11116 11124 11170 11183 1118 2017 10542 10559 10667 10678 10692 10703 10789 10826 10823 10817 1087 2016 10132 10181 10242 10279 10315 10337 10379 10385 10403 10434 1044 2015 9972 9962 9972 9992 9975 10039 10037 10039 10065 10128 1009 2014 9664 9681 9702 9750 9796 9800 9835 9846 9870 9886 9912 2013 9437 9453 9456 9484 9516 9542 9552 9545 9552 9689 9666 2012 9176 9198 9268 9273 9290 9291 9324 9351 9341 9376 9398 2011 8938 8998 9011 9027 9035 9053 9080 9088 9116 9147 9173 Tweet ShareShare Share 539Like0 Privacy - Terms ATTACHMENT 2 The latest news and information #1 Source for Construction News, Data, Rankings, Analysis, and Commentary JOIN ENR UNLIMITED Copyright ©2022. All Rights Reserved BNP Media. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing Privacy - Terms City Cost Index - Denver - As of May 2022 The building and construction cost indexes for ENR's individual cities use the same components and weighting as those for the 20-city national indexes. The city indexes use local prices for portland cement and 2 X 4 lumber and the national average price for structural steel. The city's BCI uses local union wages, plus fringes, for carpenters, bricklayers and iron workers. The city's CCI uses the same union wages for laborers. To find more recent cost index data, go to this webpage (link below) and click on the link for the year you need, and then navigate to the week you need. Keep in mind that the city cost index figures are always published in the second weekly issue of the month. http://www.enr.com/economics/current_costs Go back to view all City Indexes. ENR COST INDEXES IN DENVER (1978-2022) YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2022 May 6269.45 +16.5 8589.63 +10.4 2022 April 6233.95 +17.2 8554.13 +10.8 2022 March 6191.70 +17.2 8511.88 +10.8 2022 February 6110.37 +16.2 8430.55 +10.1 2022 January 6021.13 +14.9 8418.76 +10.2 Tweet ShareShare Share 28Like0 Privacy - Terms This website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more. ATTACHMENT 3 YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2021 December 5948.13 +14.3 8345.76 +9.8 2021 November 5871.97 +12.8 8269.59 +8.7 2021 October 5830.22 +12.4% 8227.84 +8.5% 2021 September 5781.97 +11.6 8179.59 +7.9 2021 August 5714.19 +1.09 8138.79 +7.4 2021 July 5546.00 +7.0 7943.60 +4.8 2021 June 5536.25 +7.0 7933.85 +4.8 2021 May 5379.40 +3.9 7777.00 +2.7 2021 April 5320.92 +2.8 7718.50 +1.9 2021 March 5284.83 +2.3 7682.40 +1.6 2021 Feb 5257.83 +2.0 7655.40 +1.4 2021 Jan 5239.12 +1.7 7636.68 +1.1 2020 Dec 5205.78 +1.3 7603.33 +0.9 2020 Nov 5207.06 1.2% 7604.60 0.8% 2020 Oct 5186.02 +1.3 7583.57 +0.5 2020 Sept 5182.52 +1.4 7580.07 +0.6 2020 Aug 5178.18 +1.3 7575.73 +0.6 2020 July 5182.68 +1.7 7580.23 +0.8 2020 June 5175.47 +1.1 7573.02 +0.4 2020 May 5177.50 +5.3 7575.05 +0.6 2020 April 5175.00 +5.7 7572.55 +0.8 2020 March 5166.00 +6.0 7563.54 +1.1 2020 Feb 5155.43 +5.1 7552.96 +0.4 2020 Jan 5153.93 +5.3 7551.46 +0.6 2019 Dec 5138.85 +5.1 7536.38 +0.3 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2019 Nov 5144.91 +5.6 7542.44 +0.6 2019 Oct 5120.21 +5.0 7543.94 +0.6 2019 Sept 5111.46 +5.1 7535.19 +0.6 2019 Aug 5109.47 +6.3 7533.20 +0.6 2019 July 5093.91 +7.8 7517.63 +0.9 2019 June 5118.44 +7.7 7542.17 +0.9 2019 May 4916.70 +3.5 7529.30 +0.7 2019 April 4896.16 +4.4 7508.77 +1.3 2019 Mar 4871.91 +3.9 7484.52 +1.0 2019 Feb 4907.16 +4.7 7519.77 +1.5 2019 Jan 4893.25 +4.3 7505.86 +1.3 2018 Dec 4889.70 +4.3 7513.69 +1.4 2018 Nov 4872.10 +3.9 7499.09 +1.2 2018 Oct 4875.10 +5.2 7499.09 +1.6 2018 Sept 4863.09 +4.6 7487.08 +1.2 2018 Aug 4807.30 +3.4 7484.83 +1.2 2018 July 4723.98 +1.8 7447.08 +0.8 2018 June 4751.84 +1.9 7474.95 +0.9 2018 May 4751.84 +1.9 7474.95 +0.9 2018 Apr 4689.58 +0.7 7412.68 +0.1 2018 Mar 4688.98 +2.9 7412.08 +4.6 2018 Feb 4688.98 +1.6 7412.08 +0.7 2018 Jan 4689.81 +1.6 7412.92 +0.7 2017 Dec 4689.22 1.5 7412.32 +0.6 2017 Nov 4689.22 +2.5 7412.32 +3.5 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2017 Oct 4632.99 +1.8 7378.65 +3.4 2017 Sept 4650.98 +2.2 7396.64 +3.7 2017 Aug 4648.92 +2.7 7394.58 +4.0 2017 Jul 4642.44 –2.6 7388.09 –3.9 2017 Jun 4665.09 +3.5 7410.74 +4.5 2017 May 4665.09 +4.3 7410.74 +4.6 2017 Apr 4657.54 +4.0 7403.19 +4.3 2017 Mar 4558.89 +1.8 7083.25 –0.2 2017 Feb 4569.27 +2.1 7093.63 0.0 2017 Jan 4615.98 +3.9 7361.63 +4.1 2016 Dec 4620.41 +4.0 7,366.07 +4.1 2016 Nov 4575.45 +3.1 7161.82 +1.3 2016 Oct 4551.16 +2.3 7137.53 +0.9 2016 Sep 4549.16 +2.3 7135.53 +0.9 2016 Aug 4525.24 +1.80 7111.59 +0.60 2016 Jul 4525.74 +1.80 7112.09 +0.60 2016 Jun 4506.93 +1.40 7093.28 +0.30 2016 May 4473.30 +0.40 7088.11 +0.10 2016 Apr 4480.46 +0.70 7096.86 +0.30 2016 Mar 4477.58 +0.70 7093.98 +0.30 2016 Feb 4476.08 +0.60 7092.48 +0.20 2016 Jan 4443.86 –0.20 7071.66 –0.10 2015 Dec 4445.86 0.00 7073.66 0.00 2015 Nov 4440.74 –0.20 7067.07 –0.20 2015 Oct 4441.99 +0.20 7068.32 +0.10 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2015 Sep 4448.49 +0.80 7074.82 +0.50 2015 Aug 4444.74 +0.70 7071.07 +0.40 2015 Jul 4446.38 0.00 7072.71 0.00 2015 Jun 4446.38 –0.23 7072.71 –0.15 2015 May 4456.77 +0.20 7083.10 +0.13 2015 Apr 4441.10 +2.2 7067.43 +0.8 2015 Mar 4447.85 +2.7 7074.18 +1.1 2015 Feb 4449.85 2.7 7076.18 1 2015 Jan 4451.35 2.5 7077.68 1 2014 Dec 4447.6 2.4 7073.93 0.9 2014 Nov 4447.5 1.8 7077.93 0.6 2014 Oct 4435.5 1.8 7065.93 0.6 2014 Sep 4412.18 1.1 7042.61 0.1 2014 Aug 4412.11 1.1 7041.86 0.1 2014 Jul 4412.11 1.1 7041.86 0.1 2014 Jun 4414.11 1.3 7043.86 0.3 2014 May 4384.09 0.7 7013.84 –0.1 2014 Apr 4344.34 0.0 7012.84 0.0 2014 Mar 4332.38 0.2 7000.88 0.1 2014 Feb 4335.13 0.2 7003.63 0.2 2014 Jan 4341.69 0.6 7010.19 0.4 2013 Dec 4344.19 0.8 7012.69 0.5 2013 Nov 4346.44 0.6 7014.94 0.4 2013 Oct 4357.05 0.8 7025.55 0.5 2013 Sep 4364.82 1.1 7033.32 0.7 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2013 Aug 4363.57 0.8 7032.07 0.5 2013 Jul 4366.32 2.7 7034.82 0.3 2013 Jun 4358.14 2.5 7026.64 0.1 2013 May 4352.39 2.3 7020.89 0.0 2013 Apr 4342.64 2.4 7011.14 0.1 2013 Mar 4323.75 2.0 6992.25 –0.1 2013 Feb 4324.75 3.5 6993.25 1.5 2013 Jan 4316.50 3.3 6985.00 1.4 2012 Dec 4310.75 3.3 6979.25 1.4 2012 Nov 4322.00 3.6 6990.50 1.6 2012 Oct 4323.00 3.7 6991.50 1.6 2012 Sep 4319.28 3.8 6987.78 1.7 2012 Aug 4329.78 3.9 6998.28 1.7 2012 Jul 4249.73 2.2 7013.28 2.1 2012 Jun 4253.73 2.7 7017.28 2.4 2012 May 4254.23 2.8 7017.78 2.5 2012 May 4254.23 2.8 7017.78 2.5 2012 Apr 4239.48 2.6 7003.03 2.3 2012 Mar 4237.73 2.7 7001.28 2.4 2012 Feb 4177.84 1.3 6889.53 0.8 2012 Feb 4177.84 1.3 6889.53 0.8 2012 Jan 4177.84 2.1 6889.53 7.9 2011 Dec 4174.84 1.7 6886.53 7.7 2011 Nov 4172.10 1.5 6883.80 7.6 2011 Oct 4167.10 1.6 6878.80 7.6 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2011 Sep 4160.60 1.6 6872.30 7.8 2011 Aug 4169.45 1.9 6881.14 7.8 2011 Jul 4156.70 1.6 6868.39 7.6 2011 Jun 4142.47 2.9 6854.16 7.7 2011 May 4136.72 3.2 6848.41 7.9 2011 Apr 4133.34 3.4 6845.03 8 2011 Mar 4126.64 3.3 6838.33 7.9 2011 Feb 4123.64 3.5 6835.33 8 2011 Jan 4091.89 2.9 6383.58 0.7 2010 Dec 4105.46 3.2 6397.15 0.9 2010 Nov 4108.71 4.1 6400.4 9 2010 Oct 4100.21 3.9 6391.9 8.9 2010 Sep 4093.66 3.7 6375.35 8.6 2010 Aug 4093.66 3.5 6805.35 15.8 2010 Jul 4093.16 3.5 6384.85 8.6 2010 Jun 4024.32 1.5 6366.39 8.2 2010 May 4007.57 0.7 6349.64 7.6 2010 Apr 3995.82 1.1 6337.89 7.3 2010 Mar 3993.82 1 6335.89 7.2 2010 Feb 3984.75 0.9 6326.81 7.1 2010 Jan 3975.44 0.3 6341.44 7.1 2009 Dec 3977.19 -0.1 6343.19 6.9 2009 Nov 3948.07 -2.1 5870.56 -2 2009 Oct 3947.82 -2.9 5870.31 -2.5 2009 Sep 3947.13 -3.1 5869.62 -2.6 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2009 Aug 3955.6 1.7 5878.09 -0.2 2009 Jul 3954.83 1.8 5877.32 -0.2 2009 Jun 3963.77 3.9 5886.26 1.2 2009 May 3978.21 5.3 5900.7 2.1 2009 Apr 3951.52 5.1 5908.2 2.5 2009 Mar 3953.27 5.2 5909.95 2.6 2009 Feb 3950.77 5.6 5907.45 2.9 2009 Jan 3965.02 5.8 5921.7 3 2008 Dec 3979.06 6.3 5935.74 3.3 2008 Nov 4033.8 7.8 5990.48 4.3 2008 Oct 4065.99 7.9 6022.67 4.4 2008 Sep 4071.24 8.1 6027.92 4.5 2008 Aug 3890.02 3.2 5892.17 2.1 2008 Jul 3886.59 3 5888.74 1.9 2008 Jun 3816.84 1.4 5818.99 0.9 2008 May 3779.42 0.4 5781.57 0.3 2008 Apr 3760.17 0.8 5762.32 0.9 2008 Mar 3757.12 0.8 5759.27 0.9 2008 Feb 3741.12 0.4 5743.27 0.6 2008 Jan 3748.74 0.6 5750.88 0.8 2007 Dec 3744.81 0.3 5746.96 0.6 2007 Nov 3767.3 1.1 5769.45 1.1 2007 Oct 3767.3 1.1 5769.45 1.1 2007 Sep 3766.3 1.6 5768.45 1.4 2007 Aug 3768.56 2.1 5770.7 3.4 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2007 Jul 3775.26 2.3 5777.41 3.5 2007 Jun 3765.5 2.5 5767.64 3.7 2007 May 3764.5 2.8 5766.64 3.9 2007 Apr 3730.18 1.7 5711.79 2.7 2007 Mar 3727.43 1.7 5709.04 2.8 2007 Feb 3724.93 1.5 5706.54 2.6 2007 Jan 3725.43 1.5 5707.04 2.6 2006 Dec 3732.7 2 5714.3 2.9 2006 Nov 3724.9 3.4 5706.51 3.9 2006 Oct 3724.9 3.4 5706.51 3.9 2006 Sep 3707.91 2.7 5689.52 3.4 2006 Aug 3697.42 3.6 5588.24 2.5 2006 Jul 3690.42 2.6 5581.24 1.9 2006 Jun 3672.12 1.9 5562.93 1.4 2006 May 3661.32 1.8 5552.14 1.4 2006 Apr 3669.62 2.2 5560.44 1.6 2006 Mar 3665.29 3 5556.1 2.1 2006 Feb 3670.02 3.1 5560.83 2.2 2006 Jan 3672.02 3 5562.83 2.1 2005 Dec 3660.74 2.6 5551.55 1.9 2005 Nov 3633.49 1.8 5524.3 1.4 2005 Oct 3600.99 1.7 5491.8 1.3 2005 Sep 3611.04 2 5501.86 1.5 2005 Aug 3569.69 2.4 5451.61 0.9 2005 Jul 3595.92 3.4 5477.84 1.5 Privacy - Terms YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 2005 Jun 3605.25 3.8 5487.16 1.7 2005 May 3595 3.9 5476.91 1.8 2005 Apr 3589.56 9 5471.47 5 2005 Mar 3558.31 9.4 5440.22 5.2 2005 Feb 3560.31 14.4 5442.22 8.3 2005 Jan 3566.25 15.4 5448.16 9 2004 Dec 3568.42 14.9 5450.34 8.7 2003 Dec 3104.91 6.2 5015.43 5.7 2002 Dec 2925.15 -2 4744.3 1.7 2001 Dec 2985.37 -2.5 4663.08 -2.2 2000 Dec 3060.54 5.5 4766.74 6 1999 Dec 2901.28 1.3 4498.45 0.6 1998 Dec 2863.92 -0.1 4470.35 3.3 1997 Dec 2865.25 -0.8 4329.24 -0.1 1996 Dec 2887.49 8.5 4334.09 6 1995 Dec 2661.49 2 4087.82 2 1994 Dec 2608.72 1.4 4008.74 -0.1 1993 Dec 2573.9 5.6 4012.02 4.7 1992 Dec 2438.39 2.7 3833.64 3.2 1991 Dec 2375.26 2.3 3715.34 1.3 1990 Dec 2321.28 2.8 3668.2 1.3 1989 Dec 2277.59 1.1 3641.78 2.9 1988 Dec 2252.48 -5.1 3538.26 0.8 1987 Dec 2374.39 0.8 3506.95 0.1 1986 Dec 2355.81 5.7 3503.37 5.6 Privacy - Terms The latest news and information #1 Source for Construction News, Data, Rankings, Analysis, and Commentary JOIN ENR UNLIMITED Copyright ©2022. All Rights Reserved BNP Media. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing YEAR MONTH BCI %CHG CCI %CHG 1985 Dec 2229.4 2 3316.24 6.8 1984 Dec 2185.17 -10.5 3106.45 -15.8 1983 Dec 2440.68 10.3 3690.22 7.1 1982 Dec 2213.7 7.1 3445.7 7.7 1981 Dec 2066.42 9.9 3200.57 8.6 1980 Dec 1880.46 2.7 2947.14 7.6 1979 Dec 1831.81 8.3 2739.14 6.8 1978 Dec 1692.06 7.5 2564.77 9 Privacy - Terms STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Division of Project Support Construction Engineering Services Branch COLORADO CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX REPORT Calendar Year 2022 First Quarter Prepared for Stephen Harelson, Chief Engineer Prepared by Stephen Bokros, Manager Cost Estimating Services Unit Construction Engineering Services Branch Division of Project Support ATTACHMENT 4 CCI REPORT SUMMARY 1st QUARTER ENDING March 31, 2022 Relative change from last quarter, quarterly data*………………………………….7.08% Cumulative change from same quarter last year, quarterly data*………………….16.24% Relative change from last year, annual data**……………………………………..31.79% * Calculations based on quarterly data may vary significantly due to strong seasonality in Colorado. ** Calculations derived from the most recent four consecutive quarters of data compared to the previous four consecutive quarters of data. For example, relative change for 2nd QUARTER ENDING June 30, 2017 is derived from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 data compared to July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016 data. Summary for all Design-Bid-Build projects awarded between 01/01/2022 and 03/31/2022 Project Amount Number of Projects Number of Bidders Biddable Items Total Amount Average Number of Bidders $0.00 to $999,999.99 3 2 $646,748.00 0.67 $1,000,000.00 to $4,999,999.99 19 55 $41,758,478.67 2.89 $5,000,000.00 to $19,999,999.99 12 28 $118,927,812.76 2.33 $20,000,000.00 or Greater 3 15 $74,233,983.61 5.00 Total 37 100 $235,567,023.04 2.70 Average number of bidders per project decreased to 2.70 this quarter, from 2.82 the previous quarter. Average cost per Design-Bid-Build project was $6,366,676.30. Year Quarter Price ($/CY)Qty (CY)Price ($/TON)Qty (TON)Price ($/SY)Qty (SY)Price ($/CY)Qty (CY)Price ($/LB)Qty (LB) Relative Cumulative 2012 Q1 9.32 295,331.00 83.52 611,829.00 29.47 459,695.83 433.44 7,636.00 0.88 1,956,874.00 1.0000 2012 Q2 10.61 367,636.10 82.65 328,357.21 31.18 264,194.31 472.96 5,910.00 0.97 833,101.00 1.0190 1.0190 2012 Q3 11.92 212,117.00 90.76 59,799.23 34.76 107,643.81 487.93 2,388.20 1.04 485,586.00 1.0995 1.1204 2012 Q4 9.49 246,805.00 102.24 146,197.04 n/a**n/a**527.68 1,772.00 0.94 310,307.00 1.0344 1.1589 2013 Q1 8.08 659,125.00 76.07 393,759.56 31.81 549,580.81 487.00 9,019.00 0.87 1,929,721.00 0.8044 0.9322 2013 Q2 12.75 316,498.00 84.37 501,946.32 52.18 60,482.78 427.09 6,857.00 0.91 1,048,761.00 1.2121 1.1300 2013 Q3 8.72 419,967.00 85.00 147,064.84 35.57 170,833.67 372.83 9,917.00 0.77 2,350,291.00 0.8947 1.0110 2013 Q4 10.00 75,520.00 80.78 198,528.45 42.64 92,749.00 309.40 1,752.00 0.85 486,791.00 1.0086 1.0197 2014 Q1 20.16 99,605.00 92.28 433,692.17 76.84 57,552.78 476.21 3,265.00 0.98 629,246.00 1.2581 1.2829 2014 Q2 12.88 610,731.00 88.13 548,253.70 34.34 302,520.17 517.01 8,249.90 0.90 1,468,195.00 0.8421 1.0803 2014 Q3 13.30 708,794.00 100.07 102,680.99 52.39 147,911.17 592.26 16,294.30 1.01 2,949,114.00 1.1740 1.2683 2014 Q4 10.73 695,288.00 113.42 141,154.23 46.12 156,635.11 549.86 6,657.10 1.03 948,029.00 0.9591 1.2164 2015 Q1 16.60 301,494.80 83.80 736,968.84 34.36 311,378.67 744.81 1,994.30 1.66 368,665.00 0.8798 1.0702 2015 Q2 15.12 167,066.00 94.22 311,989.59 46.36 219,498.00 577.73 1,119.00 1.64 205,245.00 1.1391 1.2190 2015 Q3 20.32 40,649.00 98.61 89,024.05 75.70 12,880.78 739.20 706.90 1.33 86,854.00 1.1536 1.4063 2015 Q4 12.16 309,414.10 81.21 66,957.40 47.46 128,174.06 598.73 3,702.00 1.42 366,651.00 0.7434 1.0454 2016 Q1 12.27 939,477.00 84.03 1,078,315.35 39.18 243,518.78 617.10 6,507.71 1.02 1,627,487.00 0.9767 1.0211 2016 Q2 31.34 14,104.00 110.17 118,434.28 104.99 1,936.89 1,028.57 126.00 2.79 12,189.00 1.4571 1.4878 2016 Q3 10.66 503,305.00 83.55 286,987.61 52.59 275,462.06 606.80 1,952.80 0.94 331,788.70 0.6500 0.9671 2016 Q4 18.00 81,788.00 106.93 108,909.09 47.97 51,601.89 978.88 300.80 2.28 18,840.00 1.2318 1.1913 2017 Q1 24.99 110,497.40 82.20 480,758.14 36.08 60,069.44 1,138.99 67.00 2.17 26,054.00 0.8105 0.9655 2017 Q2 11.28 153,010.00 88.48 302,427.67 36.44 147,787.36 592.94 2,168.00 1.06 416,630.00 0.9916 0.9574 2017 Q3 27.34 51,552.00 115.01 19,675.64 97.88 2,088.89 629.83 2,292.00 1.15 346,069.00 1.4673 1.4048 2017 Q4 16.17 23,686.00 95.90 152,110.33 72.95 2,823.00 1,068.73 263.00 2.32 24,850.00 0.9449 1.3274 2018 Q1 13.97 163,772.00 90.91 302,427.23 92.58 7,834.00 862.30 1,167.00 1.39 206,568.00 0.9415 1.2497 2018 Q2 15.58 47,167.00 110.11 42,157.74 n/a**n/a**809.61 887.00 1.54 139,494.00 1.1643 1.4551 2018 Q3 15.69 77,482.00 107.51 38,587.91 60.91 11,825.11 711.51 5,097.00 1.07 1,480,110.00 0.8995 1.3088 2018 Q4 16.51 174,175.00 89.89 594,326.44 35.97 974,214.00 674.59 2,017.00 1.29 213,561.00 0.8238 1.0785 2019 Q1 12.73 545,088.00 101.34 491,723.60 53.33 197,389.61 840.94 4,426.90 1.40 871,380.00 1.1848 1.2778 2019 Q2 26.64 55,197.00 119.73 116,528.65 79.43 13,611.17 479.34 8,463.00 1.05 1,230,972.00 1.1236 1.4357 2019 Q3 n/a**n/a**n/a**n/a**104.00 4,074.22 n/a**n/a**n/a**n/a**1.0100 1.4501 2019 Q4 16.30 207,333.00 95.42 275,273.38 43.76 41,068.89 798.39 468.00 1.39 149,577.00 0.8508 1.2337 2020 Q1 20.76 456,146.00 93.02 867,587.63 62.82 53,818.89 805.97 4,026.00 1.22 820,456.00 1.0204 1.2589 2020 Q2 9.86 764,455.00 104.16 156,927.56 51.27 177,038.39 809.92 1,804.90 1.43 363,737.00 0.9156 1.1527 2020 Q3 18.41 38,940.00 119.00 26,251.98 46.08 108,008.22 874.51 829.50 1.35 142,067.00 1.1208 1.2920 2020 Q4 7.97 236,919.00 103.21 204,957.94 118.13 129.78 663.99 1,372.40 1.50 170,603.00 1.1677 1.5087 2021 Q1 29.41 70,042.00 86.42 717,198.89 75.43 38,520.44 776.10 1,205.40 1.44 193,123.00 0.9550 1.4408 2021 Q2 15.43 336,448.00 90.69 153,802.91 61.18 44,898.56 988.80 2,639.00 1.61 431,045.00 0.9405 1.3550 2021 Q3 15.10 614,822.00 104.66 60,911.11 83.54 7,714.89 879.03 2,306.00 1.51 302,787.00 1.0677 1.4467 2021 Q4 18.77 279,454.00 114.06 772,464.56 49.21 107,696.78 733.07 1,857.40 1.52 409,460.00 1.0811 1.5641 2022 Q1 21.51 158,601.00 118.27 377,371.40 66.87 79,738.72 1,027.78 1,812.50 1.60 537,299.00 1.0708 1.6748 Weighted average prices and quantities are calculated after outliers (< 5% and > 95%) are removed in the preceding 7 years for a given quarter. * Concrete Pavement is normalized to 9 inches thick. ** Assuming same price and quantity as previous quarter for index calculations, due to insufficient data of this sub group. Colorado Construction Cost Index Tabulations: Quarterly Data Fisher Ideal IndexEarthworkHot Mix Asphalt Concrete Pavement*Structural Concrete Reinforcing Steel 0.7000 0.8000 0.9000 1.0000 1.1000 1.2000 1.3000 1.4000 1.5000 1.6000 1.7000 2012 Q22012 Q32012 Q42013 Q12013 Q22013 Q32013 Q42014 Q12014 Q22014 Q32014 Q42015 Q12015 Q22015 Q32015 Q42016 Q12016 Q22016 Q32016 Q42017 Q12017 Q22017 Q32017 Q42018 Q12018 Q22018 Q32018 Q42019 Q12019 Q22019 Q32019 Q42020 Q12020 Q22020 Q32020 Q42021 Q12021 Q22021 Q32021 Q42022 Q1Construction Cost IndexCalendar Year - Quarter Colorado CCI - Quarterly Data, Cumulative Assuming 2012 Q1 = 1.0000 Quarterly Trendline: Annual Percentage = 4.20% Year Quarter Price ($/CY)Qty (CY)Price ($/TON)Qty (TON)Price ($/SY)Qty (SY)Price ($/CY)Qty (CY)Price ($/LB)Qty (LB)Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2012 Q1 7.48 3,751,697.00 74.46 2,382,261.64 34.23 900,143.46 422.36 73,783.53 0.85 13,569,678.00 15.75%--- 2012 Q2 8.23 1,880,505.10 80.96 1,363,144.44 30.16 816,743.88 443.62 23,011.23 0.90 4,772,701.00 -10.64%-- 2012 Q3 8.48 1,846,077.10 81.66 1,287,260.97 31.05 843,073.00 452.94 22,476.20 0.91 4,787,809.00 --10.96%- 2012 Q4 10.27 1,121,889.10 86.04 1,146,182.48 31.16 939,177.75 463.41 17,706.20 0.93 3,585,868.00 ---15.53% 2013 Q1 9.49 1,485,683.10 83.47 928,113.04 32.27 1,029,062.73 486.55 19,089.20 0.92 3,558,715.00 10.18%--- 2013 Q2 9.92 1,434,545.00 84.12 1,101,702.15 34.07 825,351.20 470.21 20,036.20 0.91 3,774,375.00 -6.96%-- 2013 Q3 9.36 1,642,395.00 83.90 1,188,967.76 34.28 888,541.07 433.64 27,565.00 0.84 5,639,080.00 --3.92%- 2013 Q4 9.37 1,471,110.00 81.24 1,241,299.17 35.11 873,646.26 419.69 27,545.00 0.84 5,815,564.00 ----2.97% 2014 Q1 11.48 911,590.00 86.56 1,281,231.78 46.14 381,618.23 400.29 21,791.00 0.84 4,515,089.00 9.65%--- 2014 Q2 11.85 1,205,823.00 88.04 1,327,539.16 39.83 623,655.62 433.90 23,183.90 0.84 4,934,523.00 -6.78%-- 2014 Q3 13.42 1,494,650.00 89.35 1,283,155.31 44.14 600,733.12 541.68 29,561.20 0.96 5,533,346.00 --15.05%- 2014 Q4 12.66 2,114,418.00 93.51 1,225,781.09 44.81 664,619.23 555.07 34,466.30 0.98 5,994,584.00 ---20.73% 2015 Q1 12.85 2,316,307.80 89.18 1,529,057.76 39.26 918,445.12 574.22 33,195.60 1.03 5,734,003.00 3.93%--- 2015 Q2 13.04 1,872,642.80 90.84 1,292,793.65 42.91 835,422.95 592.48 26,064.70 1.10 4,471,053.00 -7.23%-- 2015 Q3 13.13 1,204,497.80 90.64 1,279,136.71 41.51 700,392.56 602.72 10,477.30 1.27 1,608,793.00 --1.03%- 2015 Q4 14.80 818,623.90 87.45 1,204,939.88 41.57 671,931.51 647.54 7,522.20 1.54 1,027,415.00 ----1.69% 2016 Q1 12.80 1,456,606.10 86.80 1,546,286.39 44.32 604,071.62 614.96 12,035.61 1.15 2,286,237.00 0.67%--- 2016 Q2 12.70 1,303,644.10 87.14 1,352,731.08 43.47 386,510.51 623.45 11,042.61 1.11 2,093,181.00 --2.50%-- 2016 Q3 11.94 1,766,300.10 85.82 1,550,694.64 46.70 649,091.79 614.15 12,288.51 1.08 2,338,115.70 ---2.85%- 2016 Q4 12.22 1,538,674.00 87.45 1,592,646.33 46.65 572,519.62 632.92 8,887.31 1.03 1,990,304.70 ----0.35% 2017 Q1 14.15 709,694.40 88.62 995,089.12 49.69 389,070.28 688.84 2,446.60 1.15 388,871.70 4.54%--- 2017 Q2 13.35 848,600.40 86.42 1,179,082.51 45.83 534,920.75 632.98 4,488.60 1.08 793,312.70 -0.60%-- 2017 Q3 18.57 396,847.40 87.95 911,770.54 39.12 261,547.58 642.08 4,827.80 1.16 807,593.00 --4.13%- 2017 Q4 18.54 338,745.40 87.05 954,971.78 37.43 212,768.69 644.35 4,790.00 1.17 813,603.00 ---1.06% 2018 Q1 14.81 392,020.00 91.55 776,640.87 40.62 160,533.25 681.91 5,890.00 1.19 994,117.00 0.56%--- 2018 Q2 16.83 286,177.00 94.87 516,370.94 90.43 20,579.89 748.33 4,609.00 1.34 716,981.00 -19.65%-- 2018 Q3 14.81 312,107.00 95.04 535,283.21 78.40 30,316.11 759.65 7,414.00 1.16 1,851,022.00 --11.53%- 2018 Q4 15.38 462,596.00 91.78 977,499.32 37.15 1,001,707.11 732.07 9,168.00 1.16 2,039,733.00 ---3.18% 2019 Q1 13.94 843,912.00 96.03 1,166,795.69 39.47 1,191,262.72 758.62 12,427.90 1.22 2,704,545.00 3.08%--- 2019 Q2 14.67 851,942.00 97.78 1,241,166.61 39.57 1,197,039.89 638.21 20,003.90 1.15 3,796,023.00 --13.30%-- 2019 Q3 15.37 829,657.00 99.43 1,319,107.35 39.58 1,189,289.00 564.69 23,369.90 1.15 3,546,885.00 ---9.30%- 2019 Q4 15.37 862,815.00 104.00 1,000,054.28 53.99 256,143.89 559.54 21,820.90 1.15 3,482,901.00 ---14.14% 2020 Q1 20.40 773,873.00 98.03 1,375,918.32 59.37 112,573.17 547.70 21,420.00 1.11 3,431,977.00 9.12%--- 2020 Q2 14.74 1,483,131.00 96.92 1,416,317.22 53.19 276,000.39 618.95 14,761.90 1.18 2,564,742.00 -4.39%-- 2020 Q3 14.38 1,466,874.00 95.35 1,326,040.54 50.62 379,934.39 814.45 7,128.40 1.30 1,475,837.00 --2.95%- 2020 Q4 13.10 1,496,460.00 96.62 1,255,725.11 51.48 338,995.28 789.68 8,032.80 1.31 1,496,863.00 ----4.71% 2021 Q1 10.99 1,110,356.00 92.83 1,105,336.37 52.44 323,696.83 773.95 5,212.20 1.43 869,530.00 -8.23%--- 2021 Q2 14.45 682,349.00 90.91 1,102,211.72 55.57 191,557.00 856.99 6,046.30 1.52 936,838.00 --2.80%-- 2021 Q3 14.64 1,258,231.00 91.00 1,136,870.85 69.17 91,263.67 861.81 37,614.00 1.54 1,097,558.00 ---0.18%- 2021 Q4 18.77 279,454.00 114.06 772,464.56 49.21 107,696.78 733.07 1,857.40 1.52 409,460.00 ---17.45% 2022 Q1 21.51 158,601.00 118.27 377,371.40 66.87 79,738.72 1,027.78 1,812.50 1.60 537,299.00 31.79%--- Weighted average prices and quantities are calculated after outliers (< 5% and > 95%) are removed in the preceding 7 years for a given quarter. * Concrete Pavement is normalized to 9 inches thick. Fisher Ideal Index (Annual Change) Colorado Construction Cost Index Tabulations: Annual Percentage Change Earthwork Hot Mix Asphalt Concrete Pavement*Structural Concrete Reinforcing Steel 10.64%10.96% 15.53% 10.18% 6.96% 3.92% -2.97% 9.65% 6.78% 15.05% 20.73% 3.93% 7.23% 1.03% -1.69% 0.67% -2.50%-2.85% -0.35% 4.54% 0.60% 4.13% 1.06%0.56% 19.65% 11.53% 3.18%3.08% -13.30% -9.30% 14.14% 9.12% 4.39% 2.95% -4.71% -8.23% -2.80% -0.18% 17.45% -20.00% -15.00% -10.00% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00%2012 Q22012 Q32012 Q42013 Q12013 Q22013 Q32013 Q42014 Q12014 Q22014 Q32014 Q42015 Q12015 Q22015 Q32015 Q42016 Q12016 Q22016 Q32016 Q42017 Q12017 Q22017 Q32017 Q42018 Q12018 Q22018 Q32018 Q42019 Q12019 Q22019 Q32019 Q42020 Q12020 Q22020 Q32020 Q42021 Q12021 Q22021 Q32021 Q42022 Q1Construction Cost IndexCalendar Year - Quarter Colorado CCI - Annual Percentage Change Calculations derived from the most recent four consecutive quarters of data compared to the previous four consecutive quarters of data. 31.79% Comments: The methodology for preparing the CCI is documented in a brief report attached to the ‘2012 CCI Q2’ report at the following link http://www.coloradodot.info/business/eema, under the ‘Construction Cost Index’ heading and ‘2012 CCI Q2’ report. Starting with 2016 Q3, this quarterly CCI report includes calculations based on annual data. The annual data calculations are less volatile than the quarterly data calculations, partially due to the strong seasonal nature of transportation construction in Colorado. For the current quarter, price changes for the five sub groups, as shown in the ‘Colorado Construction Cost Index Tabulations: Quarterly Data’, are listed as follows: Earthwork (Excavation and Embankment): The average price was $21.51/CY, which is up $2.74/CY, with 57% of the quantity, from the previous quarter. Hot Mix Asphalt: The average price was $118.27/TON, which is up $4.21/TON, with 49% of the quantity, from the previous quarter. Concrete Pavement: The average price was $66.87/SY, which is up $17.66/SY, with 74% of the quantity, from the previous quarter. Structural Concrete: The average price was $1,027.78/CY, which is up $294.71/CY, with 98% the quantity, from the previous quarter. Reinforcing Steel: The average price was $1.60/LB, which is up $0.08/LB, with 131% the quantity, from the previous quarter. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: This quarter, based on preceding quarterly data, all five subgroups, Earthwork, Hot Mix Asphalt, Concrete Pavement, Structural Concrete, and Reinforcing Steel showed an increase in price. 37 Design-Bid-Build projects for a total of $235,567,023.04 were bid and awarded this quarter. The five categories for CCI items totaled $56,097,200.67, which is 23.81% of the total Design-Bid- Build awarded amount. Last quarter, by comparison, had 39 Design-Bid-Build projects bid and awarded. Projects Awarded this Quarter and Not Used in the CCI Calculations Project Type Number of Projects Biddable Items Total Amount Design-Build 0 $0.00 Hybrid / Modified / Streamlined Design-Build 0 $0.00 Construction Manager / General Contractor 3 $16,679,624.08 Emergency 0 $0.00 Sub Total 3 $16,679,624.08 Finance Administration 215 N. Mason 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6788 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com Finance Committee Meeting Minutes June 2, 2022, 4-6 pm Zoom Council Attendees: Julie Pignataro, Kelly Ohlson, Emily Francis Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Travis Storin, Tyler Marr, Carrie Daggett, John Duval, Teresa Roche, Kelley Vodden, Caryn Champine, Dean Klingner, Monica Martinez, Brad Buckman, Dana Hornkohl, Dillon Willett, Jeff Usher, Mark Laken, Ginny Sawyer, Jennifer Poznanovic, Nina Bodenhamer, Seve Ghose, Mike Calhoon, Kurt Friesen, Aaron Harris, Victoria Shaw, Gerry Paul, Blaine Dunn, Randy Bailey, Trevor Nash, Amanda Newton, Jo Cech, Dave Lenz, Sheena Freve, Zack Mozer, Molly Reeves, Erik Martin, Jackie Thiel, Javier Echeverria, Lindsay Ex, Honore Depew, Beth Yonce, Carolyn Koontz Others: Emily Gallichotte, Resident Jacy Marmaduke, Coloradoan Kevin Jones, Chamber ______________________________________________________________________________ Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm Approval of minutes from the May 5, 2022, Council Finance Committee Meeting. Kelly Olson moved for approval of the minutes as presented. Emily Frances seconded the motion. Minutes were approved unanimously via roll call by; Julie Pignataro, Kelly Ohlson and Emily Francis. A.Capital Projects – Inflationary Impacts (3 Projects) Brad Buckman, City Engineer Monica Martinez, Manager, FP&A Dana Hornkohl, Director, Civil Engineering EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Three active transportation capital improvement projects are experiencing budget impacts due to inflationary pressures: Linden Street Renovation (Linden), South Timberline Corridor (Timberline), and Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection Improvements (Vine and Lemay). The cost to complete these projects now exceeds the appropriated budget. It is necessary to 1) reduce scope, 2) delay final delivery, and/or 3) secure additional funds to complete these projects. Reduction of scope will result in projects that do not meet established City standards for urban design and landscaping. Delaying final delivery until funding becomes available will negatively impact other transportation capital projects in the delivery pipeline. Staff is recommending supplemental appropriations totaling $4,028,000 which would allow for completion of the three projects as intended when construction commenced. This request is coming before Council Finance Committee now to avoid additional cost impacts due to potentially pausing and restarting active construction projects. ATTACHMENT 5 GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • Does Council Finance Committee support an off-cycle appropriation of Community Capital Improvement Project (CCIP) fund reserves to complete the Linden Street Renovation project? • Does Council Finance Committee support off-cycle appropriations of the Transportation, Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF), and General fund reserves as well as CCIP – Arterial Intersection fund to complete the South Timberline Corridor project? • Does Council Finance Committee support off-cycle appropriations of the TCEF, General, and CCIP fund reserves as well as Conservation Trust fund to complete the Vine/Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Beginning in the Summer of 2021, the nation, Colorado, and the Denver region began to experience significant inflation in construction costs (Attachments 1, 2, and 3). The two most recent Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Colorado Construction Cost Index (CCI) reports indicated annual percentage changes of 17.45% (Q4 2021) and 31.79% (Q1 2022). These inflationary pressures are impacting three transportation capital improvement projects that are in active construction. Linden Street Renovation The Linden project will transform Linden Street between Jefferson and Walnut Streets into a “convertible street,” a roadway that can be closed to vehicular and bicycle traffic and transformed into a pedestrian gathering space during specialty events. Construction was originally planned for 2020, with the entire project built at once. Due to the onset of the pandemic, construction was postponed and broken into two phases to minimize impacts to the businesses within the footprint of the project. Phase 1 construction was completed in 2021. Phase 2 began in February of this year and completion is anticipated in July. Staff anticipated that splitting the project into two phases would result in increased mobilization and oversight costs. An additional $400,000 was appropriated to address this cost increase. Inflation began to rise as pricing was being finalized for Phase 2 construction in the Fall of 2021. Price increases for many unit price work items led to an increase of approximately $500,000 to deliver the identified scope of work. Staff has identified two alternatives to reach project completion: • Option 1: Delay non-essential scope of work items until additional funding can be secured. Specifically, the temporary scope reduction could include seat wall caps and outdoor furniture. This option would result in the project not meeting the identified project goals within the promised timeframe, expose the remaining work to further inflation, and would impact the schedule and budget for other transportation capital projects in the design, acquisition, and construction pipeline. • Option 2: Secure a supplemental appropriation to complete the identified scope of work on schedule. Figure 1 - Linden Project Budget Project Funding TCEF CCIP - Project Specific TOTAL Increase Existing 400,000$ 3,461,000$ 3,861,000$ Proposed -$ 500,000$ 500,000$ Total 400,000$ 3,961,000$ 4,361,000$ Linden Street Renovation 13% South Timberline Corridor The Timberline project is identified in the City’s Master Street Plan. It will reduce congestion, improve safety, as well as enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities along the corridor between Stetson Creek Road and Zephyr Road. Construction was set for two phases. Phase 1 included the structural road elements, box culverts for the Mail Creek Ditch and the Mail Creek Trail underpass. Ditch company requirements for water conveyance limited Phase 1 work to be substantially completed prior to April 15, 2022. Phase 1 work began in December 2021 and is anticipated to reach final completion in June 2022. Phase 2 included all remaining corridor improvements. This phase was partially funded by a Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) requiring concurrence from CDOT to advertise for construction that was not granted until February of 2022. This delay led to significant increases for most unit price work items totaling approximately $2,148,000. Staff has identified three alternatives to reach project completion: • Option 1: Delay some scope of work items until additional funding can be secured. Specifically, the temporary scope reduction could include traffic signals, irrigation, landscaping, and/or reducing the length of corridor improvements. This option would result in the project not meeting the identified project goals within the promised timeframe, expose the remaining work to further inflation, and would impact the schedule and budget for other transportation capital projects in the design, acquisition, and construction pipeline. This option has several iterations where one or more elements could be funded by a supplement appropriation. It should be noted that some supplemental appropriation is required to move forward with construction, and the traffic signals are required for the corridor to function. • Option 2: Delay all Phase 2 work until additional funding can be secured. This option would have similar impacts to Option 1 with increasing affects to pipeline projects’ schedules and budgets. • Option 3: Secure a supplemental appropriation to complete the identified scope of work on schedule. Please note that $400,000 in CCIP – Arterial Intersection Improvements funds are proposed as part of Option 3. These funds have already been appropriated but were originally intended for the College and Trilby Intersection Improvements project. Figure 2 - Timberline Project Budget Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection Improvements The Vine and Lemay project is the City's top transportation capital improvement project. The work includes construction of a new road and intersection slightly east of the original Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue intersection with a new bridge over the BNSF railway and existing Vine Drive. Primary construction began in April of 2021 with an accelerated schedule. Construction of most infrastructure elements was completed in December 2021 with the roadway opening several weeks ahead of schedule. Staff provided a memorandum updating City Council of the project budget in November 2021 (Attachment 4). As of January 2022, the primary remaining work for this project included urban design elements, Art in Public Places, irrigation, landscaping, and work needed to complete the pedestrian underpass (future northeast trail system) at the north end of the project. Pricing for irrigation and landscape elements had not been set at this Project Funding STBG (Grant)Trans. Fund TCEF Gen. Fund Bridge Program CCIP - Art. Int. Imp. CCIP - Ped/Bike Gr. Sep. Cr. CCIP - Ped. Sid.Dev.TOTAL Increase Existing 2,694,602$ 10,325$ 4,701,111$ -$ 265,000$ -$ 700,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 8,723,228$ Proposed -$ 200,000$ 774,000$ 774,000$ -$ 400,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2,148,000$ Total 2,694,602$ 210,325$ 5,475,111$ 774,000$ 265,000$ 400,000$ 700,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 10,871,228$ South Timberline Corridor 25% time. Surging inflation greatly affected the unit prices for this work. The delivery team conducted a significant review of the irrigation and landscaping work to lower cost and increase value. Even after this effort, the estimated cost for this work exceeded the identified budget by $570,000. The underpass completion also experienced significant cost overruns. These increases were due to its late inclusion in the design effort coupled with the accelerated schedule. All the underpass design criteria and elements had not been accounted for in the original estimate leading to costs that exceeded the budget by roughly $790,000. The total amount needed to complete the project is approximately $1,380,000. Staff has identified two alternatives to reach project completion: • Option 1: Delay non-essential scope of work items until additional funding can be secured. Specifically, the temporary scope reduction could include irrigation and landscaping. This option would result in the project not meeting the identified project goals within the promised timeframe, expose the remaining work to further inflation, and would impact the schedule and budget for other transportation capital projects in the design, acquisition, and construction pipeline. • Option 2: Secure a supplemental appropriation to complete the identified scope of work on schedule. The Conservation Trust Fund is shown as contributing towards the supplemental appropriation proposed in Option 2. These funds would be used to cover a portion of the cost overrun associated with the pedestrian underpass. Park Planning and Development has identified $242,000 that could be allocated for this effort. These funds were originally identified for the Power Trail at Harmony Grade Separated Crossing project. This reallocation impacts the overall funding for the Power Trail project, but the current budget shortfall exceeds this amount. Please note that the memorandum to City Council dated November 3, 2021 (Attachment 4) covers estimated construction costs. The table below includes all projects costs including design and acquisition. Figure 3 - Vine and Lemay Project Budget Summary If inflationary impacts continue, delaying the identified work will result in additional cost increases to these projects and future transportation capital projects. Supplemental appropriations granted to complete all work now will ensure that fully realized projects are completed as promised for the community. If it is decided that portions of the work on these projects should be delayed until additional funding can be identified, the result would likely impact the delivery schedule for the following projects that are currently working towards final design and construction. It should be noted the projects below are already suffering from inflationary pressures outside the potential impacts from the proposed supplemental appropriations. • College and Trilby Intersection Improvements • Power Trail at Harmony Grade Separated Crossing • Siphon and Union Pacific Overpass • Laporte Corridor Improvements – Fishback to Sunset • College and Drake Intersection Improvements Project Funding Trans. Fund TCEF Gen. Fund CCIP - Project Specific PPD (Cons. Trust)KFCG Utilities BOB CCIP - Ped/Bike Gr. Sep. Cr. TOTAL Increase Existing 1,220,020$ 11,930,369$ 7,247,965$ -$ 1,000,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ 500,000$ 28,723,630$ Proposed -$ 427,500$ 427,500$ 283,000$ 242,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,380,000$ Total 1,220,020$ 12,357,869$ 7,675,465$ 283,000$ 1,242,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ 500,000$ 30,103,630$ Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection Improvements 5% Transportation capital improvement projects managed by the Engineering Department are just one area within the City facing inflationary pressure. Materials and services are experiencing significant price escalations across the entire organization. By way of examples: • The Streets Department is managing asphalt cost increases between 12% to 40%. • Transfort anticipates fuel costs to increase approximately 30% this fiscal year. • Traffic Operations has noted an increase of approximately 31% for traffic poles and associated materials. • Light & Power transformer costs as discussed at the May Finance Committee meeting The Finance Department will come before the committee next month with additional information on inflationary impacts to capital projects from across the City’s portfolio. There is time sensitivity to the three projects requesting additional appropriations above as they are currently under construction, whereas there is more flexibility to discuss systemwide pressures at the July Finance Committee meeting. Summary of requested supplemental appropriations for all three projects. • Transportation Fund Reserves: $200,000 • TCEF Reserves: $1,201,500 • General Fund Reserves: $1,201,500 • CCIP Reserves: $783,000 • Conservation Trust Fund: $242,000 • CCIP – Arterial Intersection Improvements: $400,000 • Total: $4,028,000 Summary of Existing Funding and Proposed Supplemental Appropriations DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS: GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • Does Council Finance Committee support an off-cycle appropriation of Community Capital Improvement Project (CCIP) fund reserves to complete the Linden Street Renovation project? • Does Council Finance Committee support off-cycle appropriations of the Transportation, Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF), and General fund reserves as well as CCIP – Arterial Intersection fund to complete the South Timberline Corridor project? • Does Council Finance Committee support off-cycle appropriations of the TCEF, General, and CCIP fund reserves as well as Conservation Trust fund to complete the Vine/Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project? Project Funding STBG (Grant)Trans. Fund TCEF Gen. Fund CCIP - Project Specific PPD (Cons. Trust) Bridge Program KFCG Utilities BOB CCIP - Art. Int. Imp. CCIP - Ped/Bike Gr. Sep. Cr. CCIP - Ped. Sid.Dev.TOTAL Increase Existing -$ -$ 400,000$ -$ 3,461,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,861,000$ Proposed -$ -$ -$ -$ 500,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 500,000$ Total -$ -$ 400,000$ -$ 3,961,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,361,000$ Existing 2,694,602$ 10,325$ 4,701,111$ -$ -$ -$ 265,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 700,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 8,723,228$ Proposed -$ 200,000$ 774,000$ 774,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 400,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2,148,000$ Total 2,694,602$ 210,325$ 5,475,111$ 774,000$ -$ -$ 265,000$ -$ -$ -$ 400,000$ 700,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 10,871,228$ Existing -$ 1,220,020$ 11,930,369$ 7,247,965$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ -$ 500,000$ -$ -$ 28,723,630$ Proposed -$ -$ 427,500$ 427,500$ 283,000$ 242,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,380,000$ Total -$ 1,220,020$ 12,357,869$ 7,675,465$ 283,000$ 1,242,000$ -$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ -$ 500,000$ -$ -$ 30,103,630$ Existing 2,694,602$ 1,230,345$ 17,031,480$ 7,247,965$ 3,461,000$ 1,000,000$ 265,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ -$ 1,200,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 41,307,858$ Proposed -$ 200,000$ 1,201,500$ 1,201,500$ 783,000$ 242,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 400,000$ -$ -$ -$ 4,028,000$ Total 2,694,602$ 1,430,345$ 18,232,980$ 8,449,465$ 4,244,000$ 1,242,000$ 265,000$ 1,373,240$ 850,000$ 4,602,036$ 400,000$ 1,200,000$ 35,000$ 317,190$ 45,335,858$ Linden Street Renovation South Timberline Corridor TOTAL Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection Improvements 13% 25% 5% 10% Julie Pignataro; how many construction projects do we have going on right now? Dana Hornkohl; we currently have three capital transportation capital projects underway that are suffering inflationary impacts and are budget stressed. Julie Pignataro; how many projects in total are underway across the city? Brad Buckman; the projects we are discussing today are specifically from the Capital Group in Engineering. Different departments are executing other projects across the city. Julie Pignataro; you mentioned additional BFO offers for other projects for cost increases due to inflation Brad Buckman; the projects being brought forward today are under construction and projects in the pipeline will be addressed with BFO offers for inflationary impacts. For example, the Utilities Service Area has a portfolio of projects that are experiencing inflationary impacts. Julie Pignataro; do we expect that other projects will be coming forward with similar appropriation requests in the next few months? Travis Storin; there is a risk of seeing similar requests from other parts of the city. We plan to come back to Council Finance in July to expand this topic beyond project specific conversations. In the case of these three projects, we are discussing today, we have shovels in the ground, so we need to talk now. Julie Pignataro; on these construction projects, how much of a swing in budget do we anticipate on the low and high end? Dana Hornkohl; we are typically budgeting between 10-15% for contingency once we reach construction to cover unforeseen needs or potential small scope changes that are encountered because of field changes. Julie Pignataro; in the case of these three projects, we are going beyond those percentages. The 25% on the Timberline project is alarming. Can we go into more depth as to why the Timberline Project impact is so much higher? Dana Hornkohl; it is later in the inflationary surge than the other two projects - the costs were set at the latest and had the most inflationary impact – we also compared that to other roadway construction projects that were let in the same period in our area through Region 4 of CDOT and increases of between 20-30% have been experienced for most projects during that time and very few have been awarded due to this. While it was extraordinary it was not uncommon for that period of time. Julie Pignataro; where would additional future funding come from? Dana Hornkohl; primarily we have resources from CCIP (Community Capital Improvement Program) through 2025 that could augment these funds to help get these projects to the finish line but those have mostly been earmarked to other projects that are in the pipeline so we would be delaying those other projects. Those CCIP funds would need to be unearmarked and then applied to these projects. Travis Storin; CCIP (Community Capital Improvement Program) consists of the ¼ cent tax that goes toward capital specifically - historically about 50% of that over all 10-year tax has gone to transportation type projects whether sidewalks or multimodal or arterial intersections. Julie Pignataro; how are we applying lessons learned to future projects? The annual percentage change on slide 3 (see below) – the highs are higher, and the lows are lower – are we going to have a bigger swing in the future or what kind of plans does your department have as a result of what has happened? Dana Hornkohl; I think paying closer attention to inflation and the trends that are related to construction. We are paying attention to three primary indices and the level of inflation across all three Indices doesn’t always agree although they are trending in the same direction – I think paying closer attention to those indices and factoring that into all of our estimates as we reach 30% Kelly Ohlson; I believe some of these projects were bid before inflation pressures really hit. Weren’t parts of South Timberline and parts of Vine & Lemay bid before inflation took off? Dana Hornkohl; that is correct, in the case of South Timberline, Phase 1 work was bid, awarded and underway well in advance and Phase 2 work was bid directly during the inflationary surge period. For Vine & Lemay, the majority of the construction infrastructure work related to the roadway was well before the surge. The inflationary impacts did apply to landscaping and irrigation and those prices had not been set until this same period (January and February 2022) and that leads directly to why there are insufficient funds to complete that particular portion of work for Vine & Lemay. Kelly Ohlson; let’s say a project was fairly bid and then inflation hit, why is that our responsibility as a city to bear the additional costs due to inflation? It doesn’t work the other way – your data showed there was deflation of 10% some time and we didn’t get a 10% discount. Does the city always bear the brunt of increased inflation, or do we have legal documents that protect us? Travis Storin; I will speak to the city-wide view, often times we will see these contracts are developed as costs plus around the materials portion of these contracts. There are limited contractual tools available to protect the city and pass that risk to the contractor. Gerry Paul, our Purchasing Director is on the line and can provide some examples or context around how we manage primarily materials cost inflation. Gerry Paul; CM/GC is a Contract Manager / General Contractor form of cost-plus contracts which are based on actual costs plus a mark up and as part of that process; 30% design, 60% design and 90% design and at each of those points they are going out and getting quotes and estimates of what the costs will be, and costs are not locked in until we reach 90% design. Vine & Lemay - landscaping and irrigation prices were not locked in until 90% design which was after the inflation surge hit ACTION ITEM Kelly Ohlson; would like to see a 1 - 2-page memo describing how we do our major projects and is that is the way -90% of city and state governments do it? Normally what the 10-15% contingency is for if we decide we want to do something different - contingency is different than things getting more expensive. Would like to have information for Council in 1-2 months on how we actually bid and how we protect the taxpayers. Gerry Paul; I will take the lead to follow up to provide an overview of the city-wide approach to capital contracting and I will work with Brad Buckman and his team. I think what we are doing is very similar to other municipalities where some jobs are firm fixed price bid and others are cost plus depending on the project. Travis Storin; we could have that for the July 7th Council Finance Committee discussion around inflation. We could also include an overview of the different types of contracts that we do and why a certain tool is selected for a certain project. Kelly Ohlson; That sounds good - doesn’t need to be sooner than that - we are talking big picture - I support the funding and I think we just finish the projects doing the best we can and being as fiscally responsive as possible. Did we explore wildlife crossing at either of these two projects (Vine & Lemay or South Timberline)? Colorado probably has 10 of them and maybe 10 more in the works - Were they needed anywhere? Dana Hornkohl; I will get the answer and follow up. Kelly Ohlson; does either project add road capacity? Dana Hornkohl; in the case of Timberline, yes additional capacity is added as part of this project. Kelly Ohlson; I don’t want to hear that we don’t add road capacity anymore because we actually do. Kelly Ohlson; your charts show 10-15% inflation in many cases, but our fees we added based on inflation (adjusted annually) were 2%. In the future can we use the same data for construction projects that we use for fees - fees are not based on construction inflation Travis Storin; the fees we charge for impact fees so capital expansion across police, fire, general government, and parks – the assumptions that are used in developing those fees, pricing those fees should track with what we are doing on the project side. The transportation capital expansion fee tracks to the construction cost index, the other fee components do not – they follow the traditional consumer price index – that is adjusted annually And then every 4 years – we do a fee study that comes through Council Finance Committee where we can update any of the underlying assumptions within the fee development - fees should come up for adoption in January 2023 – you are right, there is a conversation worth having around fee inflation assumptions that are used on the revenue side versus the cost side Kelly Ohlson; I don’t want the high number used for the construction cost and the low number used for fee increase. What are the conservation trust fund dollars being used for? Dana Hornkohl; it is only being used for the trail portion planned for the underpass under Vine & Lemay which is part of the future Northeast trail system. Kelly Ohlson; I support funding so we can complete these projects Emily Francis; I know we didn’t see this coming, but I am concerned about how many projects we are going to see impacted by inflation and if we fully fund this how does that impact fully funding of future projects that come to us. I don’t think we have enough information to understand the tradeoff of partially funding. For the Linden Street project, I see seat wall caps and outdoor furniture - does that really cost $500K? Dana Hornkohl; there are seat walls that are planned around some of the planters at the ends and in the middle section of the street – the seat wall caps are one of the more expensive elements going around those - Those are the two primary or highest costs items that would be short changed if we were unable to complete the project. Emily Francis; for South Timberline it says ‘remaining improvements’ – So, if we didn’t want to fund the entire amount - What is the gap? What are you suggesting that we do not fund? Dana Hornkohl; essentially there are three items on Timberline that we have the option of funding or not funding which include; traffic signals, irrigation and landscaping with the traffic signals being integral to the work. We could fund just the traffic signals and not the irrigation and landscaping Emily Francis; so, what does that mean for the project? that it just doesn’t look as nice? What are we delaying? Is it just aesthetics? How do we get that funding? For Vine & Lemay – is that the whole underpass as well? Brad Buckman; the underpass at Vine & Lemay is currently funded - the additional funds that are needed for Vine & Lemay would be totally applied to the irrigation and landscaping. The project budget did have sufficient continency funding to complete the underpass – the cost overruns that contributed were partially attributed to the underpass. ACTION ITEM: Emily Francis; for future conversations like this, it would be helpful to have information about different levels of not fully funding and what those tradeoffs involve. Brad Buckman; for South Timberline, there was the difference between the signals and the landscaping and irrigation – the signals are absolutely needed – that difference is $1.6M to get the project done with the signals. The additional $500K (for a total of $2.1M) is with the landscaping and irrigation which we view as integral to completing the project but not needed for traffic. Emily Francis; that information would be so helpful so we understand what 70% funding might look like. It is only going to get more expensive. It sounds like we will look at this more holistically at the July Council Finance meeting about how we are looking at all of the budget items. Travis Storin; that is correct - and moreover, those projects are further upstream in their design phases and are not yet in construction so there is a greater deal of flexibility around partial funding types of options as you describe versus the projects in front of you today which are currently in construction and needed to jump to the front of the conversation. Emily Francis; that makes sense - there are a whole list of projects that are going to be impacted. Does that mean that if we say yes we are going to go ahead with funding these, does that mean we are going to have to look at funding for the projects listed as well? Travis Storin; I don’t think we can speak with certainty to that level, there are conversations around the scoping, design, and partial funding rather than us simply saying we have double digit inflation, and we need to ask Council for a bigger appropriation. To what extent to the other projects fall into the categories, I can’t speak to that at this point. ACTION ITEM; Kelly Ohlson; a request for July or August - Can we have a list of the major transportation projects we anticipate in the next 5 years as things stand now? What department owns the Mulberry project and why is that different that Vine / Lemay and South Timberline? Who handles what transportation projects? When you are replacing bridges, resurfacing the road, and adding bike lanes, a lot of us think of that as a transportation road project. Brad Buckman; Mulberry is a combination within PDT of Streets, Traffic, FC Moves and Engineering. A consolidated transportation projects. The three projects we are talking about today are Engineering projects. Kelly Ohlson; so, who is overseeing that one? So, a bit confusing when we are told there are only three in the pipeline, what we drive on Mulberry and have to go another way – we see that as a street project and then today we are told these are the only three. Dean Klingner; Mulberry is confusing, we completed a project on Mulberry in the last few years that really did change the way the transportation operated, and that project is completed. What is going on with Mulberry right now that is causing the closures in an under-street Utilities project Kelly Ohlson; so, is it Laporte that is going to replace two bridges? Dean Klingner; for Laporte, that project is not currently in construction which may be causing some confusion. Julie Pignataro;. I feel much better supporting Linden project and the Vine & Lemay overpass. I don’t feel as good about supporting the whole Timberline project especially now knowing that it includes adding lanes. Obviously we are adding safety as well – to that point when I look at the back up slide (see below) the potential future project impacts - when you look at the pipeline. I hope that we are prioritizing things such as the Power Trail crossing, because maybe there wouldn’t be as much traffic on Timberline if someone could actually ride their bike safely. Things that enable people to get around in ways other than a car Julie Pignataro; I will support but this is not a good news item - I am supportive but very cautious – I appreciate, and I see that your whole department is being that way as well. Emily Francis; I agree - I support Linden and the Vine /Lemay but I am also hesitant with South Timberline as well. Will we have information on how appropriating this might impact the other projects listed by the time it comes to Council? Brad Buckman and Dana Hornkohl; absolutely Brad Buckman; we definitely have a focus on bike and ped projects and multimodal projects. The South Timberline project is also multimodal – we are vastly improving the bike and pedestrian network there. We are adding a relatively short stretch of extra traffic capacity which is due to development in that area. We very much take your point and agree with the direction for sure. Julie Pignataro; would be great to tie in how each of these projects meets Council’s goals Travis Storin - Summary of Discussion • Consensus reached on bringing this forward to the full Council • Good feedback around expectations for a fee study for future capital improvement fees • A desire for an inventory of projects Note; In each year’s Budget document on page 30 you will see a map of all projects that are proposed regardless of the department they come from, and they are flagged by outcome area. • Come forward with partial funding options in addition to the fully funded options Julie Pignataro; will the information on page 30 of the budget document include who owns the project? Travis Storin; it would be easy for us to add the Service Area to that map display in future budget documents. Kelly Ohlson; and for July, to understand how we bid for projects and practices to protect the taxpayers and residents of Fort Collins as well as making sure we get an adequate number of bids. Also, a simple chart of major construction projects that are coming in the next five years leading with transportation - just the best guess at that moment in time -1- ORDINANCE NO. 076, 2022 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES AND AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE VINE AND LEMAY BNSF INTERSECTIONS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND RELATED ART IN PUBLIC PLACES WHEREAS, the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersections Improvement Project (the “Project”) is the City’s top transportation capital improvement project and includes construction of a new road and intersection slightly east of the original Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue intersection, as well as a new bridge over the BNSF railway and existing Vine Drive; and WHEREAS, primary construction of the Project began pursuant to an accelerated schedule in April of 2021, and most infrastructure elements were completed in December 2021, resulting in the roadway opening several weeks ahead of schedule; and WHEREAS, as of January 2022, the primary remaining work for this project included urban design elements, Art in Public Places, irrigation, landscaping, and work needed to complete the pedestrian underpass (future northeast trail system) at the north end of the Project; and WHEREAS, beginning in the Summer of 2021, the nation, the State of Colorado, and the northern Colorado region began experiencing significant inflation in construction costs, reflected in the two most recent Colorado Department of Transportation Colorado Construction Cost Index reports, indicating annual percentage changes of 17.45% (Q4 2021) and 31.79% (Q1 2022); and WHEREAS, these inflationary pressures impacted the Project as pricing was being finalized for irrigation and landscape elements during this time; and WHEREAS, despite considerable effort to lower costs and increase value by reviewing irrigation and landscaping elements of the Project, the estimated cost for this work exceeded the identified budget by $570,000; and WHEREAS, construction of the underpass also experienced significant cost overruns due to its late inclusion in the design effort, coupled with the accelerated schedule; and WHEREAS, inflation also adversely affected construction costs of the underpass as the design and pricing were finalized during the same period, resulting in construction costs exceeding the budget by approximately $790,000; and WHEREAS, City staff has identified two alternatives to reach Project completion; and WHEREAS, the first option would be to delay the landscaping and irrigation scope of work items until additional funding can be secured; and -2- WHEREAS, the second option would be to secure supplemental appropriation at this time in the amount of $1,380,000 to meet the Project requirements; and WHEREAS, approving a supplemental appropriation at this time is preferred because the first option would result in the project not meeting the identified project goals within the promised time frame, it would expose the remaining work to the likelihood of continued inflation of costs, and it would negatively impact the schedule and budgets for other transportation capital projects in the design, acquisition, and construction pipeline; and WHEREAS, costs for three intersection signals for the Project (totaling $995,550) were to be funded by Transportation Capital Expansion Fee program administration funds appropriated for arterial intersections in fiscal year 2021; however, due to an administrative error, $232,930 of this total was charged towards the administrative TCEF fund, leaving $762,620 to be appropriated as part of fiscal year 2022, which is also included in the supplemental appropriation in this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, this appropriation benefits the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of improving transportation infrastructure within the City; and WHEREAS, this Project involves construction estimated to cost more than $250,000 and, as such, City Code Section 23-304 requires one percent of these appropriations to be transferred to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for a contribution to the Art in Public Places program (“APP Program”); and WHEREAS, the total project cost of $30,103,269 includes a prior appropriation of $27,961,009 completed in the 2021 Budget, and the total project cost has been used to calculate the contribution to the APP Program; and WHEREAS, a contribution to the APP program in the amount of $279,610 was included in the 2021 Budget; therefore, the amount to be contributed to the APP Program by this Ordinance will be $21,423; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon the recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, the Interim City Manager has recommended the appropriations described herein and determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund, General Fund, Community Capital Improvement Program Fund, and the Conservation Trust Fund, as applicable, and will not cause the total amount appropriated in Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund, General Fund, Community Capital Improvement Program Fund, and the Conservation Trust Fund, as -3- applicable, to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in these funds during this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council, upon recommendation by the City Manager, to transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one fund or capital project to another fund or capital project, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged, the purpose for which the funds were initially appropriated no longer exists, or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital project in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Interim City Manager has recommended the transfer of $21,423 from the Capital Projects Fund to the Cultural Services & Facilities Fund and determined that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds for a capital project that such appropriation shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made but continue until the completion of the capital project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund the sum of ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED NINETY THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DOLLARS ($1,190,120) to be expended in the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund for transfer to the Capital Projects Fund for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project and appropriated therein. Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($427,500) to be expended in the General Fund for transfer to the Capital Projects Fund for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project and appropriated therein. Section 5. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Community Capital Improvement Program Fund the sum of TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY- THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($283,000) to be expended in the Community Capital Improvement Program Fund for transfer to the Capital Projects Fund for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project and appropriated therein. -4- Section 6. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Conservation Trust Fund the sum of TWO HUNDRED FORTY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($242,000) to be expended in the Conservation Trust Fund for transfer to the Capital Projects Fund for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project and appropriated therein. Section 7. That the unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of SIXTEEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TEN DOLLARS ($16,710) in the Capital Projects Fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and appropriated and expended therein to fund art projects under the APP Program. Section 8. That the unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of FOUR THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($4,285) in the Capital Projects Fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and appropriated and expended therein for the operation costs of the APP Program. Section 9. That the unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-EIGHT DOLLARS ($428) in the Capital Project Fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and appropriated and expended therein for the maintenance costs of the APP Program. Section 10. That the appropriation herein for the Vine and Lemay BNSF Intersection Improvements project is hereby designated, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as an appropriation that shall not lapse at the end of this fiscal year but continue until the completion of the project. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 21st day of June, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk -5- Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of July, A.D. 2022. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk