No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/04/2008 - RESOLUTION 2008-030 APPROVING TWO AGREEMENTS RELAT ITEM NUMBER: 27 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: March 4, 2008 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Pete Wray SUBJECT Resolution 2008-030 Approving Two Agreements Related to the Possible Improvement of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. On November 26, 2007 the Windsor Town Board voted(7-0)to adopt the Resolution to accept the Plan and two Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs). FINANCIAL IMPACT The Resolution includes two Intergovernmental Agreements with associated cost sharing commitments for the City's contribution as follows: 1. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and Developer(Metro Acquisitions,LLC)for a cost sharing agreement to file a Justification for Separate Action (RSA) with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and Federal Highway Works Administration(FHWA). The cost sharing agreement confirms the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins will contribute twenty five percent each, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC will contribute fifty percent of the costs for the RSA and 1601 Study. The total cost for the RSA is $15,010. The City share is $3,753 (25%). If the RSA is approved,the three parties of this agreement will apply to CDOT,NFR-MPO,and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process and agree to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 process, total cost is $138,551. The City's share of this amount is $34,638 (25%). As such,the total cost for the City contribution for these two actions is$38,391. In addition, the Town and City agree to equally share in the reimbursement of the Developer for Developer's contribution towards the costs for preparing and filing for a Justification for Separate Action and approval of the Interchange Improvements pursuant to the 1601 Approval Process if the Proposed Development does not proceed,up to a maximum amount of$76,782. Town and City will each contribute 50%to any such Developer reimbursement under this provision. In such event, any engineering or other documents prepared for the Interchange Improvements will become the property of Town and City. 2. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and City as part of the Justification for Separate March 4, 2008 -2- Item No. 27 Action and 1601 Process. The estimated cost for this review is $33,563. The City's share (50%) is $16,782. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY With new growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins in recent years, the permanence of the existing I-25/392 interchange has been significantly impacted. The interchange is an integral, yet poorly functioning part of the transportation network. In January 2006,the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Windsor entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement(IGA)to develop a plan for the improvement of the interchange,including implementation strategies. A Plan has been prepared and presented to both the City and Town, and affected interests. The next step is to apply to CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for a determination that Separate Action from the North Colorado I-25 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)is justified and to undertake CDOT's 1601 Interchange Approval Process. This will include a public private partnership of the City, Town and Metro Acquisitions LLC (Metro has ownership interest in large tracts of land on both sides of the interchange). As described in the Resolution, approval of the two IGA's does not commit the City to help fund the construction of the Interchange Improvements; the IGA's will facilitate additional planning, public outreach,and design approval within an accelerated time frame and will expedite the possible construction of the improvements, assuming the City, Town and CDOT can reach agreement as to how to fund the improvements. The resolution approves two intergovernmental agreements regarding cost sharing of preparing, filing, and processing the Separate Action and 1601 Process materials, as follows: 1. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and Developer(Metro Acquisitions,LLC)for a cost sharing agreement to file a Justification for Separate Action (RSA) with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and Federal Highway Works Administration (FHWA) and upon its approval, will apply to CDOT,NFR-MPO,and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process,and whereby the Town,the City,and Metro Acquisitions,LLC have also agreed to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 Process.. 2. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process. BACKGROUND With new growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins in recent years, the permanence of the existing I-25/392 interchange has been significantly impacted. The interchange is an integral, yet poorly functioning part of the transportation network. The Interchange has both design and March 4, 2008 -3- Item No. 27 operational problems. In January 2006,the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Windsor entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to develop a plan for the interchange area, including action strategies to implement improvements to the interchange. A Plan has been prepared and presented to the City and Town. The City Council has previously discussed at a work session and hearing meeting, the issues of improving the I-25/SH 392 interchange. On December 4,2007,the Fort Collins City Council tabled taking action on these items, allowing additional time to discuss the I-25 Corridor vision. Staff received direction at the February 12, 2008 Work Session to proceed with scheduling the pending application at the March 4, 2008 Hearing. The Windsor Town Board approved acceptance of the Plan and approved the two IGA's on November 26, 2007. Next Steps in Improving the Interchange There are two options to receive approval for interchange improvements as follows: I. Wait for the current North I-25 EIS process being conducted by CDOT to be completed. The final EIS and Record of Decision (ROD) are tentatively scheduled to be completed at the end of 2009. According to the EIS Program, even with the completion of the ROD, a 1601 Study and design is still required, along with having financing in place. The earliest construction could begin in late 2011-early 2012. 2. Pursue a parallel process by submitting to CDOT a Justification for Separate Action; if approved, this would allow the submittal of a CDOT 1601 Policy Directive, estimated to allow construction to begin potentially in late 2009—2010, saving critical time. Based on a request by Metro Acquisitions, LLC (Metro ownership/development interest on properties on both the east and west sides of the Interchange),Windsor and City staff has determined it is more advantageous to pursue the second option. The three parties identified in the first IGA will request a justification for separate action from CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) later in March(see attached Schedule). The cost for this request will be shared between the Town, City and developer. If approved, the three parties can then proceed with an accelerated 1601 Process using a similar cost sharing arrangement. Justification for Separate Action The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that any "federal action" must undergo a process to assess the environmental impacts of such action. Since the Interchange is on an interstate highway, and because there are currently federal funds being considered for use in this effort, the improvements are considered a federal action. Further complicating the matter is the fact that CDOT and the FHWA are currently performing a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of the I-25 Corridor from Denver to north of Fort Collins. The EIS is evaluating a broad range of transportation issues and options,including the need to replace or upgrade the interchange. NEPA technical procedures require that if an element of the comprehensive solution is to be broken out or completed in advance of the final "record of decision", then it must be "separated" from the EIS. The separate action would then have its own planning and environmental process that is essentially what CDOT does for all of the March 4, 2008 -4- Item No. 27 projects in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The process to separate involves a formal request to FHWA and a presentation regarding several policy points that insures that an adequate planning and public involvement process occurs along with the appropriate level of environmental analysis. The I-25 EIS has been ongoing for approximately four years. Although CDOT is currently projecting late 2009 for issuance of a Final EIS (FEIS), and Record of Decision(ROD), observers predict that these will occur in 2010 at the earliest. The process has already been partly conducted for this Interchange, and much of the information previously provided is still relevant. Thus the Justification for Separate Action could take as little as 45-60 days. The Town of Windsor has initiated a contract with the consulting firm of DMJM - Harris to prepare the Justification for Separate Action. CDOT 1601 Study The 1601 Process is the Colorado Department of Transportation's policy to evaluate new interchanges or major improvements to existing interchanges along interstates and major highways. Since CDOT has earmarked 2 million dollars for the improvement of the I25/SH 392 Interchange, representing a shared funding proposal, the 1601 Process will follow a Type I (Local Agency Initiated Interchange Proposal) approval process, with the Transportation Commission as the approving authority. This process focuses on three issues: environmental clearance (if the project has not already been cleared through a NEPA process); technical feasibility, relates to operational acceptability—FHWA process is the Interstate Access Request(IAR);and identification of funding for the project. More specifically, the 1601 Process will initiate a feasibility study for the I-25/SH 392 Interchange and will include the following steps: 1. Operation and capacity 2. Identify all reasonable and feasible interchange access alternatives 3. Screen all of the alternatives (identify pros and cons) 4. Review environmental conditions in area 5. Work toward a single best alternative 6. Develop a funding plan The 1601 Process serves as a framework for all of the steps involved in moving an interchange improvement from concept to construction. The purpose of the policy is that it represents a roadmap for local entities and that it will streamline the administrative procedures that must be followed. In this case, since the interchange already exists, and it is known to be functionally obsolete, the approval should be a relatively routine process as compared to developing a new interchange. Most of the discussion will relate to the environmental process and with the proposed public-private funding partnership which has yet to be fully defined. The City/Town will submit its application for the 1601 Process based upon the recommendation of the North I-25 EIS identifying the I-25/SH 392 Interchange for a"Tight Diamond" configuration as a proposed final solution for reconstruction,avoiding impacts on adjacent aquatic and biological resources. This future conceptual design includes a 4-lane bridge (with turn lanes), ramps and frontage road alignments (See Attachment 1). March 4, 2008 -5- Item No. 27 Additional environmental analysis may be necessary which will most likely include an Environmental Assessment (EA). Both the 1601 and the EA will utilize the data currently being collected as part of the EIS and SH 392 EOS, and contained in the Improvement Plan. The 1601 Process would be completed and approved prior to final design of the interchange improvements. It is anticipated that the Justification for Separate Action and CDOT 1601 Process will take approximately six months. Again,if the Justification for a Separate Action is denied,the alternative would be to wait for the North I-25 EIS to be completed in 2009/2010. At the conclusion of the 1601 Process, the local jurisdictions review the results and recommendations of the consultants, based on the data, public input, and input from the local jurisdictions, and approve, refine, or reject the final report. When the local jurisdictions have approved the final report,it is presented to the CDOT Transportation Commission as part of a Type I approval process. The Commission reviews and approves the report at a public hearing and then the final report is reviewed/approved by the Transportation Commission. As described in the Resolution, approval of the two IGA's does not commit the City to help fund the construction of the Interchange Improvements. Staff will schedule work sessions with City Council to review the information developed in the 1601 Process report including design feasibility,environmental analysis and funding. The Windsor Town Board and City Council will hold hearings to approve of the findings of the 1601 Process report prior to approval by CDOT and FHWA. Additional actions needed over the next two years include development of interchange preliminary design, completion of the North I-25 EIS and other environmental compliance actions by CDOT, and securing funding. Once all of this is completed and in place, reconstruction of the interchange can begin. Plan Public Process Throughout each facet of the development of the Plan,the process included public involvement and input from the key stakeholders including residents, property owners and businesses in the area. Two municipal websites provided the community with up-to-date information. The planning process was guided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of 29 members, including representatives from the City of Fort Collins, Town of Windsor, Larimer County, Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Northern Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization(NFRMPO),and consultants. In addition to the stakeholders meetings,the consulting team and representatives of the TAC also facilitated 2 public open houses to receive additional information,comments and feedback from the public. City staff presented updates and progress to the Planning and Zoning Board, Transportation Board and Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. A similar public participation effort is expected to be undertaken for the 1601 Process. March 4, 2008 -6- Item No. 27 ATTACHMENTS 1. Intergovernmental Agreement between Town, City and Metro Acquisitions,LLC for a cost sharing agreement. 2. Intergovernmental Agreement between Town and City to reimburse CDOT. 3. Questions and Answers, dated December 18, 2007. 4. Summary of Council Work Session held on February 12, 2008. 5. CDOT Map, I-25/SH 392 Interchange Design Configuration from EIS. 6. Implementation Schedule Comparison — EIS/Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process, Prepared by DMJM -Harris. 7. PowerPoint Presentation. ATTACHMENT 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING HIGHWAY 392 INTERCHANGE This Intergovernmental Agreement ("IGA") dated as of February _, 2008, by and between the TOWN OF WINDSOR ("Town"), a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; the CITY OF FORT COLLINS ("City"), a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; and METRO ACQUISITIONS, LLC, an Indiana limited liability company ("Developer"). Town, City, and Developer may hereinafter be referred to as the 'Parties." RECITALS A. The Town and City are parties to an existing Intergovernmental Agreement in which the parties pledged to cooperate to explore and implement solutions to existing traffic issues related to the State Highway 392/I-25 Interchange located at Exit 262 ("the Interchange"); B. Developer is the contract purchaser of that certain property, known as the Ptarmigan Towne Center at Windsor, located within the Town in the northeast quadrant of the Interchange, which property Developer is in negotiations to develop as a commercial retail center. Developer also holds an option to purchase property located on the western side of the Interchange. Both properties may hereinafter be referred to as the 'Proposed Development." C. The Proposed Development would include at least 650,000 square feet of retail space and is projected to generate significant annual sales tax revenue for the Town, and an additional smaller percentage of annual sales tax revenue for the City from future development on the west side of the Interchange. D. The Interchange is an integral component of the local and regional highway system serving the Town, the City, and the North Front Range sections of the I-25 corridor. E. The Interchange provides the main access from Interstate 25 to the Town and to the Proposed Development and provides access to the southern portion of the City. F. Traffic volumes at the Interchange are increasing due to significant state and regional growth and development pressures in the vicinity of the Interchange. The Interchange is currently over-capacity and operates at an unsafe and inadequate level of service to accommodate present and future growth. G. Although the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") and the North Front Range Transportation& Air Quality Planning Council, as the area I metropolitan planning organization ("NFR-MPO"), acknowledge the development pressure in the vicinity of the Interchange and the need to accommodate future growth and ensure mobility in the area, and an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") is currently underway for the entire I-25 corridor from Denver through the City, funding for improvements at the Interchange has not yet been identified. H. The Parties desire to accelerate the planning and improvement of the Interchange ("Interchange Improvements") to address current and future traffic concerns, to provide adequate access for the Proposed Development, and to facilitate the future development of all four quadrants of the Interchange. The current estimate for the cost (without including right-of-way acquisition) to design and construct the Interchange Improvements is $28,000,000, as identified by CDOT as part of the north I-25 EIS process. L Failure to make the necessary Interchange Improvements in the near term will increase congestion and safety concerns, and may preclude construction of the Proposed Development. J. To accelerate commencement and completion of the Interchange Improvements, CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") must render a determination that Separate Action from the Northern Colorado Interstate 25 Corridor EIS is justified for the Interchange Improvements ("Justification for Separate Action"). K. CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA must approve the Interchange Improvements in accordance with CDOT's 1601 Interchange Approval Process (the "1601 Approval Process"). This process requires that a governmental entity apply for authorization to construct the Interchange Improvements and provide a statement regarding the source of funding for the proposed improvements. The process also requires that, in advance of the establishment of any funding methodology, a preliminary design of the Interchange Improvements and an environmental assessment be funded and prepared. L. This IGA sets forth the understanding of the Parties as to their roles in the process of working together to secure approval and financing for the Interchange Improvements. 2 AGREEMENT The Parties to this IGA hereby agree as follows: 1. Role of Town and City. (a) This IGA serves to implement the cooperation pledged by the City and Town in the Existing IGA. Town and City each agree to continue that cooperation, and further agree that this IGA and the actions detailed herein are part of that cooperation. Town and City further agree that Town will take the lead on actions detailed herein with respect to matters affecting the eastern portion of the Interchange and City will take the lead on actions detailed herein with respect to matters affecting the western portion of the Interchange. (b) Town and City will jointly file a Justification for Separate Action with CDOT and FHWA and, upon its approval, Town and City will jointly apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements pursuant to the 1601 Approval Process. (c) Town and City will engage engineers to work on the Justification for Separate Action and the 1601 Approval Process. (d) Town and City understand that, to the extent consultants are engaged to proceed with working on the 1601 Approval Process and preliminary design of the Interchange prior to approval by CDOT and FHWA of a Separate Action request, such costs are undertaken at the risk that CDOT and FHWA may not approve the Separate Action. Town and City accept this risk and agree to pay their pro rata share of consultant costs as set forth in this IGA. (e) The 1601 Approval Process will include, among other things, the design of the frontage road on the west side of I-25 to locate said frontage road close to I-25 (the "Tight Design") 2. Role of Developer. (a) Subject to the Parties entering into a cost-sharing agreement as described in paragraph 3(c) below, Developer will coordinate with Town, City, CDOT, and FHWA, and will engage additional consultants as necessary to prepare the Justification for Separate Action, and will contribute to the consultant costs as set forth in this IGA. 3. Joint Responsibilities. (a) The Parties agree to undertake in good faith all reasonable means to obtain the necessary authorization and funding for, and construction of, the Interchange Improvements, within a reasonable period of time. 3 (b) The Parties agree to work together in good faith to file a Justification for Separate Action and, upon its approval, to take the necessary steps to complete the 1601 Approval Process, environmental clearance, and preliminary design of the Interchange. (c) The Parties acknowledge that certain costs related to the design and approval of the Interchange Improvements will be incurred at the outset of this project. The Parties therefore agree to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 interchange study and the costs of the CDOT 1601 review process on the following basis: Developer to pay fifty percent (50%); Town to pay twenty-five percent (25%); and City to pay twenty-five percent (25%). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties agree that the total combined costs paid by Town and City shall not exceed $76,782.00; provided, however, that Town and City agree to equally share in the reimbursement of the Developer for Developer's contribution towards the costs for preparing and filing for a Justification for Separate Action and approval of the Interchange Improvements pursuant to the 1601 Approval Process if the Proposed Development does not proceed, up to a maximum amount of $76,782.00. Town and City will each contribute 50% to any such Developer reimbursement under this provision. In such event, any engineering or other documents prepared for the Interchange Improvements will become the property of Town and City. TOWN OF WINDSOR, COLORADO, By: Edward Starck, Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Frey, Town Attorney 4 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, By: Doug Hutchinson, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney DEVELOPER: METRO ACQUISITIONS, LLC, an Indiana limited liability company By: Gregory C. Gurnik, President 5 ATTACHMENT2 (Local SCDOTWRK) Rev 10/03 Prgjcct No. 1M 392A-012 / (16639) 06 HA# 00000 Local Agency Region 4 (RP) CMS ID 06-000 CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT made this day of__ 2007, by and between the State of Colorado for the use and benefit of the COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("State"): the TOWN OF WINDSOR ("Town"or"Windsor"), a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, 301 Walnut Street, Windsor, Colorado, 80550, Vendor Number 2000340, FEIN: 846000728: and the CITY OF FORT COLLINS ("City" or "Fort Collins"). a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, PO Box 580 80522-0580, 2000023 FEIN: 846000587 . Town and City may hereinafter be collectively referred to as the "Local Agencies." RECITALS 1. Authority exists in the law and funds have been budgeted, appropriated and otherwise made available and a sufficient uncommitted balance thereof remains available for payment of project and Local Agency costs in Fund Number 400, Appropriation Code 010, Organization Number 9991, Program 2000. Function 3020, Object 2312 1N Phase D, Reporting Category ####, Contract Encumbrance Number#####, (Contract Encumbrance Amount: $0.00). 2. Required approval, clearance and coordination have been accomplished from and with appropriate agencies. 3. Pursuant to 43-2-104.5 C.R.S. as amended,the State may contract with Local Agencies to provide maintenance and construction of highways that are part of the state (or local agency) highway system. 4. The Local Agencies anticipate a project for a new interchange and by the date of execution of this contract, the Local Agencies and/or the State has completed and submitted a preliminary version of CDOT form #463 describing the general nature of the Work. The Local Agencies understand that, before the Work begins, form #463 may be revised as a result of design changes made by CDOT, in coordination with the Local Agencies, in its internal review process. The Local Agencies desire to perform the Work described in form #463, as it maybe revised. 5. The Local Agencies will be preparing conceptual designs, studies, and other documents in anticipation of a new interchange at State Highway 392 and Interstate 25 ("Interchange"). The interchange project will be subject to the procedures outlined in CDOT's procedural directive 1601. which is attached hereto by this reference. 6.The Interstate borders the western edge of the Town and the southeastern limits of the City. Nearly Page I of 12 1. This contract 2. Exhibit A (Scope of Work) 3. Exhibit C (Contract Modification Tools) 4. Other Exhibits in descending order of their attachment. Section 3. Term This contract shall be effective upon the latest date of execution of this contract by the State. Town, or City, as indicated on the signature page. The term of this contract shall continue through the completion and final acceptance of the Project by the State, FHWA and the Local Agencies. Section 4. Project Funding Provisions A. The Local Agencies have estimated the total cost of the Work and are prepared to provide the funding required for the Work, as evidenced by an appropriate ordinance or resolution duly passed and adopted by the authorized representatives of, both, the Town and the City, which ordinance or resolution expressly authorizes the respective Local Agency to enter into this contract and to expend its funds for the Work under the project. Copies of each ordinance or resolution are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. B. The parties have estimated the total cost the Work to be $33,563.41, which is to be funded as • follows: a. Local Agency Funds $33,563.41 Total Funds: $33.563.41 C. The maximum amount payable by the Local Agencies under this contract shall be $33,563.41, unless such amount is increased by an appropriate written modification to this contract executed before any increased cost is incurred. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the total cost of the Work stated herembefore is the best estimate available, based on the design data as approved at the time of execution of this contract, and that such cost is subject to revisions(in accord with the procedure in the previous sentence) agreeable to the parties prior to bid and award. D. The parties hereto agree that this contract is contingent upon all funds designated for the project herein being made available from Local Agency sources.as applicable. Should these sources fail to provide necessary funds as agreed upon herein,the contract may be terminated by any of the parties, provided that any party terminating its interest and obligations herein shall not be relieved of any obligations which existed prior to the effective date of such termination or which may occur as a result of such termination. Section 5. Project Payment Provisions Page 3 of 12 accordance with the requirements of the current federal and state environmental regulations including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) as applicable. Section 8. Record Keeping The parties shall maintain a complete file of all records, documents, communications, and other written materials, which pertain to the costs incurred under this contract. The parties shall maintain such records for a period of six (6) years after the date of termination of this contract or final payment hereunder, whichever is later, or for such further period as maybe necessary to resolve any matters which maybe pending. Each party shall make such materials available for inspection at all reasonable times and shall permit duly authorized agents and employees of the state and the Local Agencies to inspect the project and to inspect, review and audit the project records. Section 9. Termination Provisions This contract may be terminated as follows: A. Termination for Convenience. The State may terminate this contract at any time the State determines that the purposes of the distribution of moneys under the contract would no longer be served by completion of the project. The State shall effect such termination by giving written notice of termination to the Town and the City and specifying the effective date thereof, at least twenty(20) days before the effective date of such termination. B. Termination for Cause. If, through any cause,the Local Agencies shall fail to fulfill, in a timely and proper manner,their obligations under this contract, or if the Local Agencies shall violate any of the covenants,agreements,or stipulations of this contract,the State shall thereupon have the right to terminate this contract for cause by giving written notice to the Town and the City of its intent to terminate and at least ten (10)days opportunity to cure the default or show cause why termination is otherwise not appropriate. In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys,drawings,maps,models,photographs and reports or other material prepared by the Local Agencies under this contract shall, at the option of the State, become its property, and the Local Agencies shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any services and supplies delivered and accepted. The Local Agencies shall be obligated to return any payments advanced under the provisions of this contract. Notwithstanding the above, the Local Agencies shall not be relieved of liability to the State for any damages sustained by the State by virtue of any breach of the contract by the Local Agencies, and the State may withhold payment to the Local Agencies for the purposes of mitigating its damages until such time as the exact amount of damages due to the State from the Local Agencies is determined. If after such termination it is determined, for any reason, that the Local Agencies were not in default or that the Local Agencies'action/inaction was excusable,such termination shall be treated as a termination for convenience,and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be the same as if the contract had been terminated for convenience, as described herein. Page 5 of 12 • Section 13. Third Party Beneficiaries It is expressly understood and agreed that the enforcement ofthe terns and conditions ofthis contract and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the State and the Local Agencies. Nothing contained in this contract shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other third person. It is the express intention of the State and the Local Agencies that any such person or entity, other than the State and the Local Agencies receiving services or benefits under this contract shall be deemed an incidental beneficiary only. Section 14. Governmental Immunity Notwithstanding any other provision of this contract to the contrary,no term or condition of this contract shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights,benefits,protection,or other provisions ofthe Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, § 24-10-101. et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. The parties understand and agree that liability for claims for injuries to persons or property arising out of negligence of the State of Colorado, its departments, institutions, agencies, boards, officials and employees is controlled and limited by the provisions of§ 24-10-101, et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended and the risk management statutes, §§ 24-30-1501, et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. Section 15. Severability To the extent that this contract may be executed and performance of the obligations of the parties maybe accomplished within the intent ofthe contract,the terms of this contract are severable, and should any term or provision hereof be declared invalid or become inoperative for any reason. such invalidity or failure shall not affect the validity of any other term or provision hereof. Section 16. Waiver The waiver of any breach of a term, provision, or requirement of this contract shall not be construed or deemed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of such term,provision, or requirement, or of any other term, provision or requirement. Section 17. Entire Understanding This contract is intended as the complete integration of all understandings between the parties. No prior or contemporaneous addition, deletion,or other amendment hereto shall have any force or effect whatsoever, unless embodied herein by writing. No subsequent novation, renewal, addition, deletion, or other amendment hereto shall have any force or effect unless embodied in a writing executed and approved pursuant to the State Fiscal Rules. Section 18. Survival of Contract Terms Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the parties understand and agree that all terms and conditions of this contract and the exhibits and attachments hereto which may require Page 7 of 12 i123,\1\109EEiE., THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE EXECUTED THIS CONTRACT �ONTRACfORS: STATE OF COLORADO: BILL RITTER GOVERNOR Town of Windsor, Colorado By For Executive Director Department of Transportation FEIN: 846000728 Signature of Authorized Officer Ed Stark, Mayor CORPORATIONS: (A corporate seal or attestation is required.) Attest (Seal) By (Corporate Secretary or Equivalent, or Town/Local Agency/County Clerk) 0 Effective: , 2007 Citv of Forth Collins, Colorado FEIN: 846000587 Signature of Authorized Officer Doug Hutchinson, Mayor CORPORATIONS: (A corporate seal or attestation is required.) Attest (Seal) By _ (Corporate Secretary or Equivalent, or Town/Local Agency/County Clerk) • Effective: 2007 Page 9 of 12 Exhibit A FORM 463 or SCOPE OF WORK iiz34�i�ioGeesE.z Exhibit B • LOCAL AGENCY ORDINANCE or RESOLUTION Exhibit C COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONTRACT AUTHORITY: DING INCREASE/DECREASE AND APPROVAL LETTER Region: State Controller Policy letter on June 12, 1996 lete section 1 and submit to COOT Controller's office. CDOT Controller letter on May 23, 1996 (1)This form to be used for the following contracts/situations only (check the appropriate situation): _indefinite quantity, order more/add more _utility/railroad, underestimated total cost _CDOT construction, sum of CMO's _LA construction, underestimated cost CDOT construction, underestimated total cost _CDOT consultant, underestimated cost SECTION 1 (Region use) Date: (2) Project code (3) To: COOT Controller (FAX #(303) 757-9573 or e-mail CONTROLLER) Project # (4) From: Office: (5) Phone At (5) FAX # (5) Re ion # (5) CDOT has executed a contract with: (6) Address: (6) FEIN # (6) Contract routing # (7) COFRS encumbrance#(indicate PD.SC or Pc#) 18) Fund Orgn. Appro. Prgrm. Func. Object/Sub-obj N/P GBL Reporting Catg. Proj/Sub/Phase (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) 0 final contract amount Has a Budget Request been processed to cover the contract amount increase? 10) es no (14) Previous Funding Letter(s) total Preparer's name (1 5) It (11) (funding letter*I thin x i PHONE NO: This Funding Letter total Contract Administrator's/Business Manager's Approval $ (12) (16) (# ) PHONE NO: Adjusted contract amount CDOT Designee Approval $ (13) (17) Local Agency approval (18) SECTION 2 (Controller's Office use) (19) Total allotment amount Commission budget $ (19) $ (19) If construction. [CEarges Indirect chgs Adjusted convact amount plus total CL& Indtrect CE pool elig. (19) $ (19) charges calculation $ (19) ve reviewed the financial status of the project, organization, grant and have determined that sufficient funds are available over this increase, effective as of (19) State Controller or Dele ee I Date Exhibit C— Page 1 of 1 ll 235\1U L9685f.� iExhibit D LOCAL AGENCY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CHECKLIST CDOT Form 1243 Exhibit D — Page 1 of I 11239A1\1096956.2 ATTA HMENT 3 4`1 City Planning 8, Community Development 28J01 N College Av PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 City of Fort Collins 970.221.6376 970.224.6111 fax 970,224.6002 TDD fcgov.com/cityplanning I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan Questions and Answers December 18,2007 The following are responses to questions raised by City Council at their December 4 h, 2007 hearing regarding the I25/SH 392 Improvement Plan and implementation. Ouestions and Answers: 1. What does this Resolution include? This Resolution includes two items: A. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and Developer(Metro Acquisitions, LLC) for a cost sharing agreement to file a Justification for Separate Action(RSA)with the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT) and Federal Highway Works Administration(FHWA) ), and upon its approval, will apply to CDOT,NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process, and whereby the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have also agreed to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 Process. B. Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Windsor and City of Fort Collins to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process. 2. What is the status of the Plan? The City Council has previously discussed at a work session and hearing meeting,the issues of improving the I25/SH 392 interchange. On December 4, Fort Collins City Council tabled taking action on these items, allowing additional time to discuss the I-25 Corridor vision. Staff received direction at the February 12 Work Session to proceed with scheduling the pending application at the March 4`" Hearing. The Windsor Town Board approved acceptance of the Plan and approved the two IGA's on November 26, 2007. Unlike a traditional Plan, the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan represents a strategic process to identify critical action strategies to ultimately reconstruct the Interchange. The work that went into the creation of the Plan is important in establishing a foundation for future decisions. With continued concerns by members of Council on the content of the Plan, and in pursuing an accelerated 1601 Study schedule, staff has determined that the purpose of the Plan is accomplished in providing the necessary information to proceed with implementation, and as such is not included in the revised Resolution approving two intergovernmental agreements. 3. How does the Plan compare with the CDOT EIS Recommendation? The Plan is consistent with the recommendation of the North I-25 EIS identifying the I-25/SH 392 Interchange for a"Tight Diamond" configuration as a proposed final solution for reconstruction. This future conceptual design includes a 4-lane bridge (with turn lanes), ramps and frontage road alignments. The EIS Study considered a range of different alignments for I-25, frontage roads, and several different configurations for the I-25/SH 392 Interchange. In the western quadrants, CDOT evaluated frontage road alignments that had greater or lesser impacts to the natural resources adjacent to the Swede Lake area. As part of the NEPA regulatory requirements and the associated Corp of Engineers 404 Permitting process, CDOT staff was required to identify the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). This means that while there may be other alternatives that work from a traffic or community development perspective, only that alternative that most minimizes the impact to the aquatic and biological resources may move forward in the EIS. Thus, the alternative that CDOT refers to as the "Tight Diamond" alignment emerged as the most likely candidate to move forward in the EIS. With the current state of affairs,the Town of Windsor, City of Fort Collins and Metro Acquisitions, LLC are proposing to move forward with a plan to reconstruct the interchange in advance of the EIS Record of Decision(ROD). In doing this, necessitates "separation" from the EIS into a parallel Federal process. In an effort to streamline the process, the local parties involved have agreed to maintain the "tight diamond" configuration as the proposed final solution. This decision is beneficial for all parties in that it minimizes technical difficulties of clearing the project at the Federal level, it is consistent with the Corp of Engineers and Fish& Wildlife expectations for resource conservation, and is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Natural Area Standards. As a result,the"tight diamond" alignment is being proposed as the suggested alternative to move forward in the 1601 process. Any changes to this proposed alignment, in particular the western frontage road, as a result of proposed future development will require an Access Application with CDOT. 4. If we remove the Interchange from the 125 EIS, does that mean that no environmental review of the proposed Interchange Improvements will occur? No. The CDOT 1601 Process requires an environmental evaluation that is similar to the EIS. The 1601 environmental assessment will incorporate previous analysis conducted as part of the I-25 EIS and Environmental Overview Study (EOS) for SH 392. . 5. What opportunities for public input will be provided in the 1601 process? Page 2 The CDOT 1601 Policy Process requires that a public input process be conducted, but does not specify methodology, number of meetings, or other details. The consultant selected to conduct the 1601 Process for this Interchange will be required as part of the scope of work to design and propose a public input process for the review and approval of both the Town and the City. 6. Will the Fort Collins Council have additional opportunities to provide input regarding environmental issues, frontage road alignments, and funding options? Yes. At a bare minimum, at the conclusion of the 1601 Policy Process, nothing will be presented to CDOT for its approval unless and until both the Town and the City have approved the final report. In addition to that minimum, however, the 1601 Policy Process can include as many work sessions, information items, or other opportunities for Council to provide input, as Council desires. Staff will assess opportunities for Council review over the next 2-3 years throughout the implementation schedule. 7. Is Council restricted to the funding options outlined in the Plan? No. The 1601 Process also includes a process for identifying a funding plan. If the local jurisdictions have identified funding sources that do not require any CDOT or federal funding, then the final output of the 1601 Process will also include an IGA between the local jurisdictions setting forth the funding mechanism(s) and each jurisdiction's contribution. While the funding sources listed in the Plan will be included among those considered in the 1601 Process, they are by no means exclusive. As a practical matter,the Plan was prepared at a time when no single developer had come forward with a plan that included large tracts of land near the interchange, so by necessity, the Plan had to consider funding sources other than this possibility. Nor should the Plan be revised, now that such a possibility exists; the Plan should stand on its own, and identify funding sources if no such possibility exists. However, as Metro Acquisitions LLC has come forward with a proposal to develop more than 160 acres on both sides of the Interchange, this provides an opportunity for a funding source not considered in the Plan. This funding source should be considered in the 1601 Process. 8. How does approval of the Resolution relate to land planning issues, such as the appropriate uses and design of development to be located surrounding the Interchange? The Resolution does not directly address land use issues, except insofar as decisions made regarding transportation, environmental issues and funding will impact land use issues. That is, approval of the resolution and moving forward with the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Policy Process does not affect or limit the Council's ability to have input, and ultimately make decisions regarding, land use and development within the jurisdiction of the City in the vicinity of the Interchange. Council has expressed an interest in ensuring that developments at this Interchange create a high quality"gateway"to the City. If staff receives direction from Council, staff will assess Page 3 developing new design and development standards for the City's "Gateway"areas for all of the affected interchanges. Development on the east side of the Interchange is within the Town of Windsor, and, as such, is not within the City's jurisdiction. This property is designated commercial and employment in the Town's Comprehensive Plan, and is currently zoned the same. The property on the west side of the interchange, both north and south of Highway 392, is located in unincorporated Latimer County, but is within the Fort Collins GMA. These properties are currently designated commercial in City Plan. Thus, to a large extent,the City has already made significant decisions regarding the desired land uses at this Interchange. Most of these properties are eligible for annexation. Future development will follow a petition for annexation and zoning and development application process. Staff will have the opportunity to review land use applications for any development that occurs on the west side of the Interchange for projects annexing into the City and for those not eligible through the County referral review process. The Planning and Zoning Board will be the final decision authority for City projects, unless appealed, and then City Council will have an opportunity to review the proposed development project. 9. Explain why more money is not being allocated from CDOT? The short answer is CDOT simply does not have money to allocate for this project, other than the $2 million earmarked for design and other improvements. During the summer, CDOT completed interim safety improvements on the interchange at a cost of$1.2 million. CDOT gets its funding from a highway users tax at the state level (55%) and federal level, in addition to a percentage of transportation related sales tax. In 2006—2007 CDOT received about$740 million from State and Federal sources. The list of projects to implement improvements is identified in the long range plan and coordination with the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)priority list of projects. 10. Why does the gas tax not contribute to this? The Highway Users Tax fund (HUTF) "gas tax"does contribute to CDOT revenues. What has happened over the past several decades in relation to the gas tax is that vehicle efficiencies have improved and at the same time people are driving more. As a result, the revenue received from the gas tax has flattened out while more wear and tear on State roads and other facilities has increased, as well as the cost of projects has increased significantly. The State gas tax has not been adjusted since the early 90's and as a result available funding has not kept up with inflation. CDOT has less to work with in allocating money statewide for the long list of projects and programs including road maintenance and repairs and new projects. 11. How does CDOT allocate funds, considering this is one of the worst interchanges (what does it take to get funding)? Available funds from CDOT are assessed through several processes including looking at revenue projections, reserve allocations, and long range planning. As part of the Northern Colorado 1-25 corridor EIS process, a priority list of projects will be identified for future funding and will be coordinated with the NFR MPO. This interchange could very likely come out on the top list of Page 4 projects to receive funding. As money becomes available through Senate Bill funding, it will then be allocated to cover planning, design and construction 12. Where is Larimer County? Since the beginning of the planning process, County staff has been participating with other City and Town staff and consultant team. The County has made it clear from the beginning they do not have available funds to contribute to this project. Over this past year, County staff has been coordinating development projects near this Plan area. In addition, as we move forward with implementation of the plan, the County will be involved with any properties not annexed by the two jurisdictions in reviewing future development and administering a special district. 13. If the two jurisdictions proceed with implementation and final funding package,will this interchange then be taken off of any CDOT funding lists or out of RTA funding if that should pass in the future? No. The list of projects by the State and NFR MPO is still in place. If funds become available from CDOT, MPO or other sources such as a possible future Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), they will be coordinated with the Plan implementation funding package. Page 5 ATTACHMENT `City Planning and Community Development P.O.Box 580 281 N.College Ave. City of Fort Collins Fort Collins,co sosza 970-221-6376 970-224-6111 Fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: February 15, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Councilmember�s l TH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager i f�� Iv Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager / Jeff Scheick, Executive Director, Planning Development and Transportation Joe Frank, Director, City Planning and Community Development FM: Ken Waido, Chief Planner RE: February 12, 2008, Work Session Summary— I-25 Corridor ATTENDANCE The Mayor and all Council members were in attendance. Staff members presenting included Darin Atteberry, City Manager; Mike Freeman, Chief Financial Officer; Joe Frank, Director, City Panning and Community Development; Ken Waido, Chief Planner; and Mark Jackson, Interim Transportation Director. Josh Birks, Economic and Planning Systems, and Bob Garcia, Colorado Department of Transportation also addressed the Council. SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION The work session covered the I-25 Corridor, including: the current City Plan vision and policies related to the development of community/regional retail centers; environmental influences; the review of three pending applications in the I-25 Corridor; changes and trends in the retail market and regional conditions; the need for, and financing of, I-25 interchange transportation improvements; and direction from the Council granting permission for the further processing of the pending applications. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Council requested that staff prepare additional information to respond to the following questions as the pending applications are brought forward: where renewal is a way of hfo • Do any of the pending applications conflict with existing City Plan policies, and if they do, how do they differ? • What changes in the amounts of undeveloped land within the various use categories are affected by the rezoning requests? • How would the rezonings change the retail square footage absorption capacities of vacant properties within the GMA? • Is there a "preference study" that indicates where people would like to shop, or indicates why they shop at certain locations? • What are the impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) of the rezonings? • Can a summary of commuting patterns into and from the city for employment and shopping purposes be produced? • Can the economic impacts be calculated of that portion of the trips through the interchanges that are for doing business and shopping in Fort Collins? NEXT STEPS Staff obtained Council approval for the further processing the three pending applications as follows: March 4, 2008, Regular Council Meeting • SH-392 Interchange Improvement Plan • NE I-25/Prospect Road—City Plan amendments and rezoning request. March 25, 2008, Council Work Session • Harmony Interchange—City Plan amendments, development standards, and annexation/initial zoning request. •� rl `�;`•�• • •1 t f 4 009M .0 r` KL L• }; `i: : ��. r :• Lv.>:: � � r � ��: v�.�:r::.Y.: fir:. - , r .,:.'.��.}�. ,J. a . .. �:err.:•�+'a°o- t�efr.:iaf}:ox,;.�ay,;r:.: v:::• - .. . __ -ter .s- - ' 1 "_�`e :f�r_ _ S r• _ L � I1 ! }I { ..f01 ■ ■ % ter ♦ � ' ,.� : X • • Timeline of Current vs Proposed Process for SH392 Interchange Improvements Current North 1-25 EIS Process 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 FEIS .� Proposed CDOT 1601 Policy Directive Funding Source Unknown 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2-3 months REM El 2-3 months FHWA Justification for Separate Action approval 3-5 months CDOT Trans.Commission conditional approval ® 6-8 months FHWA/CDOT Environmental approval ®' 5-7 months Definitions: 46 months DEIS=Draft Environmental Impact Statement Council/s,CDOT, Developer approve financial plan FEIS=Final Environemental Impact Statement ROD=Record of Decision 6-8 months IGA =Intergovernmental Agreement •MMM JSA=Justification for Separate Action Property owners approve district formation IAR =Interchange Access Request Council/s approve district formation NEPA=National Environmental Policy Act y H 6.8 months CDOT approves construction permit x Construction12-14 months z .i Resolution 2008430 Approving 2 Agreements Related to Possible Improvement of the 1 =25/SH 392 Interchange City of 00 I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvements Existing Intergovernmental Agreement ■ IGA established in March 2006 between Windsor/Fort Collins ■ Continue previous annexation agreements ■ Agree to Jointly create Comprehensive Development Plan for Corridor Activity Center (CAC) ■ Agree that primary purpose of Plan is to reconstruct Interchange ■ Establish framework for Implementation actions City of Lt.f� 125/SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan Previous Meetings : 1 . October 18, 2007 — Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - Recommendation to Accept Plan 2 . November 26, 2007 — Windsor Town Board Hearing - Adopted Resolution to Accept Plan/2 IGA's 3 . December 4, 2007 — City Council Hearing - Tabled Item to allow more time to discuss 1-25 Corridor Vision 4. February 12, 2008 — City Council Work Session - Direction to proceed with pending application 5. March 4, 2008 — City Council Hearing - Resolution to adopt 2 IGA's City of North 1 -25 Environmental Impact Statement ( EIS) • Initiated in early 2006 • Required by NEPA (economic/social/environmental effects of transportation project) • 1 -25/SH 392 Interchange Preferred Alternative — "tight diamond " • Potential future Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) station (one of the two alternatives) • The Final EIS/Record of Decision projected completion late 2009 �rtf, _ 1 9 I ' 4 TIGHT DIAMOND L City of ANNFort Collins Implementation Actions Identified in Plan : Approve new IGA' s to continue partnership/implementation : ❑ Request Justification for Separate Action or utilize existing EIS ❑ Cost Sharing Agreement for 1601 Study/other compliance activities ❑ 1601 Technical Feasibility ❑ 1601 Environmental Assessment ❑ 1601 Project Funding Steps After 1601 Process : ❑ Form Improvement District ❑ Preliminary/Final Engineering ❑ Begin construction in 2009 — 2010 Lt.f� 392 InterchangeImprovement Options Follow1 . Process . Final EIS (Late 11 ' Record of Decision11 1601 Study11 ' Design 1 1 . Construction 12012 earliest) Funding source unknown Separate2. Proposed CDOT 1601 Policy Directive Process - Justification for Action 11 : 1601 Study11 ' - Environmental Clearance 11 - Preliminary/Final Design 11 : 11 - Construction 11 ' 1 1 FbFicollins Timeline of Current vs Proposed Process for SH392 Interchange Improvements Current North iM 8S Prelxn M8f MII MM M18 MI M12 M13 1 1 1 16 b i i 1 i b a i M M j I a M i a . a1 FEIS DESIGN11M.T Prepmed CDOT 1601 Policy Directive Funding Source Unknown M8] MM MM MM M 1 =2 MIS to i . 0 0 i i 0 6 in I M i m 6 i i . 1 . . . 1 . . M a m m i M 0 . . ❑ 2-3 m inhs © 2-3 months FHWA Justification for Separate Action approval 35 monhs ♦COOT Trans. Commission conaaional approval ® 6-8 months �FHWIIICDOT Environmental approval S] ma Ms Definitions: <£ monhs DEIS = Draft Enyionmental Impact SWement �Councills, CDOT, Developer approve financial plan FEIS = Final Environmental knpact Statement ROD = Recoml of Decision 64 months DA = Intergovernmental Agreement JSA = Justifiation for Separate Acton Property owners approve district formation MR = Interchange Access Request ♦Couriilfs approve distnut formation NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act 6 8 mon1M COOT approves corstruction permit ® t ata months 4 Resolution 2008 =030 1 . Intergovernmental Agreement: - Windsor, City, Metro Acquisitions, LLC - Cost Sharing agreement to fund 2 actions (Total $153,561 .00) (Town 25%, City 25%, Metro Acquisitions, LLC 50%) - File Justification for Separate Action (JSA) - If approved , implement 1601 Study - City Cost Share (25% ), $38,391 .00 2. Intergovernmental Agreement: - Windsor and City of Fort Collins - To reimburse CDOT for review work on JSA and 1601 Study - City Cost Share (25%) , $ 16,782.00 of total cost of $33, 563.41 City of I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvements Justification for Separate Action • NEPA requires if an element is broken out/completed in advance of Record of Decision — then must be separated from EIS • Requires formal request to FHWA for approval • Separate Action has own planning & environmental process • If approved , implement 1601 Study �rttins f� I-25✓SH 392 Interchange Improvements 1601 Study Process (3-5 Months) • Technical Feasibility (operational acceptability) • Environmental Assessment (can use EIS analysis) • Project Funding • With Town Board & City Council Approval — Report presented to CDOT Transportation Commission for Type I Approval City of Resolution 2008=030 Approving 2 Agreements Related to Possible Improvement of the 1 =25/SH 392 Interchange .fittins r :S n pRT 11' F YAW I.IJ Improvement Costs from Plan Project Element INost (Millions) Bridge FrontageInterchange Ramps $3.5 West . . . Subtotal Engineering $1 .6 Construction Management $1 .8 Agency Review $0.4 Total Cost $22.0 (not including ROW acquisition costs) Recent estimate from the CDOT EIS ($28 Million) - Final project costs will be identified in 1601 Study �f� RESOLUTION 2008-030 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING TWO AGREEMENTS RELATED TO THE POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSTATE 25/STATE HIGHWAY 392 INTERCHANGE WHEREAS,the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange("Interchange"),located at Exit 262,borders the western edge of the Town of Windsor("Town")and the southeastern limits of the City of Fort Collins ("City"); and WHEREAS, the Interchange is an integral part of the regional transportation network; and WHEREAS,in recent years,the capacity of the Interchange has been significantly impacted by state and regional growth,as well as local growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins, so that the Interchange is unable to handle current traffic capacity during peak hours; and WHEREAS, the Interchange is characterized by numerous design and operational deficiencies and substandard safety features; and WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") and the North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council, as the area metropolitan planning organization ("NFR-MPO"), acknowledge the development pressure in the vicinity of the Interchange and the need to accommodate future growth and ensure mobility in the area, and an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") is currently underway for the entire I-25 corridor from Denver through the City, although funding for improvements at the Interchange has not yet been identified; and WHEREAS,the enhancement and improvement of the Interchange will promote the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City by facilitating the timely and safe movement of people,goods,information,and services,by providing access to new services,by increasing property values and facilitating future development of properties in the immediate vicinity of the Interchange, and by increasing commerce at local establishments; and WHEREAS, the Town and the City are parties to an Intergovernmental Agreement ("Windsor/FTC IGA") in which the parties have pledged to cooperate to explore and implement solutions to existing traffic issues related to the Interchange; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Windsor/FTC IGA, an I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan has been prepared for the Town and City; and WHEREAS, in order to pursue additional planning and the eventual completion of the Interchange Improvements, the Town and the City have agreed to jointly apply to CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") for a determination that Separate Action from the Northern Colorado Interstate 25 Corridor EIS is justified for the Interchange Improvements ("Justification for Separate Action") and in accordance with CDOT's 1601 Interchange Approval Process ("1601 Process"),to undertake the following activities: (1) apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for authorization to construct the Interchange Improvements; (2) provide a statement regarding the source of funding for the proposed improvements; and (3) cause a preliminary design of the Interchange Improvements and an environmental assessment to be prepared and funded based in part on preliminary design work already completed as part of the EIS; and WHEREAS, the 1601 Process includes a requirement for public involvement and environmental review of the proposed Interchange Improvements; and WHEREAS, Metro Acquisitions, LLC is a private entity that is the owner or contract purchaser of certain parcels of developable land in the area of the Interchange; and WHEREAS,the Town,the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have negotiated a proposed Agreement Regarding Highway 392 Interchange ("Cost Sharing Agreement") whereby the parties set forth their respective responsibilities with regard to securing approval and financing for the Interchange Improvements; and WHEREAS,the Town,the City,and CDOT have negotiated a separate proposed Agreement whereby the Town and the City would agree to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process ("First CDOT IGA"); and WHEREAS,the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City to enter into these agreements; and WHEREAS, the execution of the agreements will not obligate the City to help fund the construction of the Interchange Improvements but will facilitate additional planning,public outreach and design approval within an accelerated time frame and will expedite the possible construction of the Improvements, assuming that the City,the Town and CDOT can reach agreement as to how to fund the Improvements; and WHEREAS,sufficient unexpended funds have heretofore been appropriated by the Council to satisfy the City's financial obligations under the Cost Sharing Agreement and the First CDOT IGA. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, as follows: -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Cost Sharing Agreement whereby the Town and the City will jointly file a Justification for Separate Action with CDOT and FHWA and, upon its approval, will apply to CDOT,NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process,and whereby the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have also agreed to share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 Process. Section 2. That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the First CDOT IGA whereby, subject to the provisions of the Cost Sharing Agreement, the Town and the City will reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies,and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of March, A.D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk -3- OPTION B RESOLUTION 2008 -030 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING TWO AGREEMENTS RELATED TO THE POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSTATE 25/STATE HIGHWAY 392 INTERCHANGE WHEREAS , the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange ("Interchange"), located at Exit 262, borders the western edge of the Town of Windsor ("Town") and the southeastern limits of the City of Fort Collins ("City") ; and WHEREAS , the Interchange is an integral part of the regional transportation network; and WHEREAS , in recent years, the capacity of the Interchange has been significantly impacted by state and regional growth, as well as local growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins, so that the Interchange is unable to handle current traffic capacity during peak hours ; and WHEREAS , the Interchange is characterized by numerous design and operational deficiencies and substandard safety features, including the absence of any transit facilities ; and WHEREAS , the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") and the North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council, as the area metropolitan planning organization ("NFR-MPO"), acknowledge the development pressure in the vicinity of the Interchange and the need to accommodate future growth and ensure mobility in the area, and an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") is currently underway for the entire I-25 corridor from Denver through the City, although funding for improvements at the Interchange has not yet been identified; and WHEREAS , the enhancement and improvement of the Interchange, including the development of a transit component, will promote the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City by facilitating the timely and safe movement of people, goods, information, and services while minimizing the environmental impacts of increased traffic at the Interchange ; by providing access to new services; by increasing property values and facilitating future development of properties in the immediate vicinity of the Interchange; and by increasing commerce at local establishments ; and WHEREAS , the Town and the City are parties to an Intergovernmental Agreement ("Windsor/FTC IGA") in which the parties have pledged to cooperate to explore and implement solutions to existing traffic issues related to the Interchange; and WHEREAS , in furtherance of the Windsor/FTC IGA, an I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan has been prepared for the Town and City; and WHEREAS , in order to pursue additional planning and the eventual completion of the Interchange Improvements, the Town and the City have agreed to jointly apply to CDOT and the OPTION B Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") for a determination that Separate Action from the Northern Colorado Interstate 25 Corridor EIS is justified for the Interchange Improvements ("Justification for Separate Action") and in accordance with CDOT ' s 1601 Interchange Approval Process (" 1601 Process"), to undertake the following activities : ( 1 ) apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for authorization to construct the Interchange Improvements ; (2) provide a statement regarding the source of funding for the proposed improvements ; and (3 ) cause a preliminary design of the Interchange Improvements and an environmental assessment to be prepared and funded based in part on preliminary design work already completed as part of the EIS ; and WHEREAS , the 1601 Process includes a requirement for public involvement and environmental review of the proposed Interchange Improvements ; and WHEREAS , Metro Acquisitions, LLC is a private entity that is the owner or contract purchaser of certain parcels of developable land in the area of the Interchange; and WHEREAS , the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have negotiated a proposed Agreement Regarding Highway 392 Interchange ("Cost Sharing Agreement") whereby the parties set forth their respective responsibilities with regard to securing approval and financing for the Interchange Improvements ; and WHEREAS , the Town, the City, and CDOT have negotiated a separate proposed Agreement whereby the Town and the City would agree to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process ("First CDOT IGA") ; and WHEREAS , the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City to enter into these agreements ; and WHEREAS , the execution of the agreements will not obligate the City to help fund the construction of the Interchange Improvements but will facilitate additional planning, public outreach and design approval within an accelerated time frame and will expedite the possible construction of the Improvements, assuming that the City, the Town and CDOT can reach agreement as to how to fund the Improvements; and WHEREAS , sufficient unexpended funds have heretofore been appropriated by the Council to satisfy the City ' s financial obligations under the Cost Sharing Agreement and the First CDOT IGA. -2- OPTION B NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS , as follows : Section 1 . That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Cost Sharing Agreement whereby the Town and the City will jointly file a Justification for Separate Action with CDOT and FHWA and, upon its approval, will apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process, and whereby the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have also agreed to share the project ' s initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 Process . Section 2 . That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the First CDOT IGA whereby, subject to the provisions of the Cost Sharing Agreement, the Town and the City will reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process. Section 3 . That the City Council's approval of the foregoing agreements is based on its understanding that the final design of the Interchange Improvements will include facilities for mass transit at the Interchange and that, upon completion of the Interchange Improvements, a viable transit system will be made available to the public at that location. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of March, A.D . 2008 . Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk -3 - OPTION C RESOLUTION 2008 -030 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING TWO AGREEMENTS RELATED TO THE POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSTATE 25/STATE HIGHWAY 392 INTERCHANGE WHEREAS , the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange ("Interchange"), located at Exit 262, borders the western edge of the Town of Windsor ("Town") and the southeastern limits of the City of Fort Collins ("City") ; and WHEREAS , the Interchange is an integral part of the regional transportation network; and WHEREAS , in recent years, the capacity of the Interchange has been significantly impacted by state and regional growth, as well as local growth in Windsor and southeast Fort Collins, so that the Interchange is unable to handle current traffic capacity during peak hours ; and WHEREAS , the Interchange is characterized by numerous design and operational deficiencies and substandard safety features, including the absence of any transit facilities ; and WHEREAS , the Colorado Department of Transportation ("CDOT") and the North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council, as the area metropolitan planning organization ("NFR-MPO"), acknowledge the development pressure in the vicinity of the Interchange and the need to accommodate future growth and ensure mobility in the area, and an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") is currently underway for the entire I-25 corridor from Denver through the City, although funding for improvements at the Interchange has not yet been identified; and WHEREAS , the enhancement and improvement of the Interchange, including the development of a transit component, will promote the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City by facilitating the timely and safe movement of people, goods, information, and services while minimizing the environmental impacts of increased traffic at the Interchange ; by providing access to new services; by increasing property values and facilitating future development of properties in the immediate vicinity of the Interchange; and by increasing commerce at local establishments ; and WHEREAS , the Town and the City are parties to an Intergovernmental Agreement ("Windsor/FTC IGA") in which the parties have pledged to cooperate to explore and implement solutions to existing traffic issues related to the Interchange; and WHEREAS , in furtherance of the Windsor/FTC IGA, an I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan has been prepared for the Town and City; and WHEREAS , in order to pursue additional planning and the eventual completion of the Interchange Improvements, the Town and the City have agreed to jointly apply to CDOT and the OPTION C Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") for a determination that Separate Action from the Northern Colorado Interstate 25 Corridor EIS is justified for the Interchange Improvements ("Justification for Separate Action") and in accordance with CDOT ' s 1601 Interchange Approval Process (" 1601 Process"), to undertake the following activities : ( 1 ) apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for authorization to construct the Interchange Improvements ; (2) provide a statement regarding the source of funding for the proposed improvements ; and (3 ) cause a preliminary design of the Interchange Improvements and an environmental assessment to be prepared and funded based in part on preliminary design work already completed as part of the EIS ; and WHEREAS , the 1601 Process includes a requirement for public involvement and environmental review of the proposed Interchange Improvements ; and WHEREAS , Metro Acquisitions, LLC is a private entity that is the owner or contract purchaser of certain parcels of developable land in the area of the Interchange; and WHEREAS , the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have negotiated a proposed Agreement Regarding Highway 392 Interchange ("Cost Sharing Agreement") whereby the parties set forth their respective responsibilities with regard to securing approval and financing for the Interchange Improvements ; and WHEREAS , the Town, the City, and CDOT have negotiated a separate proposed Agreement whereby the Town and the City would agree to reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process ("First CDOT IGA") ; and WHEREAS , the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City to enter into these agreements ; and WHEREAS , the execution of the agreements will not obligate the City to help fund the construction of the Interchange Improvements but will facilitate additional planning, public outreach and design approval within an accelerated time frame and will expedite the possible construction of the Improvements, assuming that the City, the Town and CDOT can reach agreement as to how to fund the Improvements; and WHEREAS , sufficient unexpended funds have heretofore been appropriated by the Council to satisfy the City ' s financial obligations under the Cost Sharing Agreement and the First CDOT IGA. -2- OPTION C NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS , as follows : Section 1 . That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Cost Sharing Agreement whereby the Town and the City will jointly file a Justification for Separate Action with CDOT and FHWA and, upon its approval, will apply to CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with the 1601 Process, and whereby the Town, the City, and Metro Acquisitions, LLC have also agreed to share the project ' s initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs generated by the 1601 Process . Section 2 . That the City Council hereby approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute the First CDOT IGA whereby, subject to the provisions of the Cost Sharing Agreement, the Town and the City will reimburse CDOT for the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs, studies, and other documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601 Process. Section 3 . That the City Council's approval of the foregoing agreements is based on its understanding that transit elements outlined in the Transfort Strategic Plan update of 2008-09 may be included as part of the Interchange Improvements if such elements are determined to be appropriate . Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 4th day of March, A.D . 2008 . Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk -3 -