HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 09/14/2004 - BUILDING ON BASICS 2005 CITIZEN FEEDBACK AND PROJE DATE: September 14, 2004 STUDY SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Diane Jones FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Ann Turnquist
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Building on Basics 2005 Citizen Feedback and Project Update.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
On May 25, City Council and staff met in study session for an update on the process for renewing
the Building Community Choices capital sales taxes, Building on Basics (BOB) 2005. Since that
time,Staff has conducted an extensive citizen outreach process to gather information from members
of the community about the projects that should be considered for the proposed BOB 2005 sales tax
renewal.
This study session is both an update to Council regarding staff's progress on the project and an
opportunity to narrow and focus the scope of the process as the April election grows closer.
1. Council has provided direction to staff to develop a proposal for the April 2005 Municipal
Election ballot. Does Council still plan to place one or both of the tax renewals on the April
ballot?
2. Is City Council ready to narrow the proposed project list at this point in the process? Are
there any projects which can be eliminated from further consideration? Are there any
projects that are not on the list that should be considered?
3. Two projects,the Downtown Civic Center Library($39 million)and a new Performing Arts
Center($42.8 million)represent 35% of the cost of the full list of 34 projects. Should these
two large projects remain part of the discussion for renewal or for an additional quarter cent
tax?
4. Council has discussed the option of asking voters to consider an additional 1/4 cent sales and
use tax to fund additional high priority projects. Does Council wish to continue to explore
this option?
5. Operations and Maintenance costs are a significant factor in the long-term affordability of
some capital projects. Though a decision need not be made about how to fund O&M until
the final projects are identified, does Council favor any of the options described? Are there
any that Council does not want to consider?
6. Staff has provided a detailed description of the community outreach that has been conducted.
This process will continue through the fall. Are there any other avenues that Council can
suggest for enhancing citizen involvement in this process?
MEMORANDUM
To : Mayor and City Council Members
From : Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager
Ann Turnquist, Council Policy Manager
Thru : Darin Atteberry, Interim City Manager
Re : Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
Date : September 8 , 2004
On May 25 , City Council and staff met in study session for an update on the process for
renewing the Building Community Choices capital sales taxes, Building on Basics (BOB)
2005. Since that time, Staff has conducted an extensive citizen outreach process to gather
information from members of the community about the projects that should be considered for
the proposed BOB 2005 sales tax renewal.
This study session is both an update to Council regarding Staff s progress on the project
and an opportunity to narrow and focus the scope of the process as the April election
grows closer.
1 . Council has provided direction to staff to develop a proposal for the April 2005
Municipal Election ballot. Does Council still plan to place one or both of the tax
renewals on the April ballot?
2 . Is City Council ready to narrow the proposed project list at this point in the
process? Are there any projects that can be eliminated from further
consideration? Are there any projects that are not on the list that should be
considered?
3 . Two projects, the Downtown Civic Center Library ($39 million) and a new
Performing Arts Center ($42 . 8 million) represent 35 % of the cost of the full list of
34 projects . Should these two large projects remain part of the discussion for
renewal or for an additional quarter cent tax?
4. Council has discussed the option of asking voters to consider an additional '/4-cent
sales and use tax to fund additional high priority projects . Does Council wish to
continue to explore this option?
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 2
5 . Operations and Maintenance costs are a significant factor in the long-term
affordability of some capital projects. Though a decision need not be made about
how to fund O&M until the final projects are identified, does Council favor any of
the options described? Are there any that Council does not want to consider?
6 . Staff has provided a detailed description of the community outreach that has been
conducted. This process will continue through the fall . Are there any other
avenues that Council can suggest for enhancing citizen involvement in this
process?
BACKGROUND :
Election Schedule :
At a Study Session in December 2003 , City Council discussed options for seeking voter
renewal of two sales tax measures . Two Building Community Choices capital sales taxes
are set to expire December 31 , 2005 . In order to ensure that the taxes could be renewed
prior to their expiration, City Council directed staff to work toward placing the two
renewals on the April 2005 Municipal Election ballot. With this schedule in mind, the
ballot language would need to be set by Council no later than February 1 , 2005 .
City Council also discussed the possibility of falling back to the November 2005 General
Election, if voters failed to approve one or both of the renewals at the April election. The
November ballot would allow Council to modify its proposal to voters before the
expiration, if the measures fail to pass in April.
Proposed Project List:
At the May 25 Study Session, staff presented a list of 34 high priority projects for
consideration as part of the Building on Basics sales tax program. The projects total over
$229 million in funds needed, and cross many different service needs, including
roads/multi-modal projects, transit, bike/pedestrian projects, libraries, cultural facilities ,
parks and recreation, police and natural areas. The projects were identified by a
combination of work by various Boards and Commissions, review of master plans such
as the Transportation Master Plan, and a staff analysis of the capital improvement
inventory of needs across all services .
Though the projects on the list represent many high priority needs, the cost of
constructing these projects far outweighs the $ 50 million per quarter-cent that could be
raised over the next ten years . Assuming that one of the Building Community Choices
sales taxes set to expire in 2005 is renewed for the Street Maintenance Program, the
remaining '/4 cent that is currently allocated to Community Enhancements would only pay
for a small portion of the identified needs. Further narrowing of the list will be necessary
prior to drafting ballot language for the April 2005 election.
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 3
Citizen Outreach Process and Feedback Summary:
To help provide Council with feedback from the community on the highest priority
projects, staff has conducted a citizen outreach process throughout the summer. At the
May Study Session, Council encouraged staff to ensure that citizens have ample
opportunities to participate in the process. Staff has employed a variety of tools, including
public meetings, speaking opportunities, Channel 27 programming, City News,
Neighborhood News, and the City ' s Web site. Attached is a list of all of the activities
undertaken so far, including all of the community groups who have had presentations at their
meetings. (Attachment A)
Throughout this outreach and information sharing process, staff has collected input via
"listening logs" and an informal web survey. (See Attachment B) Over 325 citizens have
provided feedback on the project so far. Attached is a report that details the comments, and
summarizes the number of citizens who selected each project as being a high priority. The
graphs in Attachment B illustrate that several projects are consistently on citizens ' list of
highest priorities . The highest priority projects in each service category include :
Highest Priority Projects by Service Area
Based on Citizen Feedback
May-September 2004
Libraries Library Materials
Library Technology
Cultural Facilities Performing Arts Center
Parks and Recreation Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements
Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration
Police Services Police Services CAD Replacement Project
Roads/Multi-Modal Harmony--Seneca to College
Timberline--Drake to Prospect
Bike/Pedestrian Enhancements
Bike/Pedestrian Trail - Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC)
Transit Replacement Buses Transit Fleet
Staff plans to continue to seek citizen involvement in developing the tax proposals during the
coming months . Outreach efforts will include continuing speaking engagements, use of
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 4
Cable Channel 27 for informational programming, conducting a statistically valid phone
survey and other outreach efforts .
The two large-scale projects under consideration, the Downtown Civic Center Library and
a new Performing Arts Center represent 35 % of the cost of the full list of 34 projects. At
approximately $40 million each, they represent substantial individual projects, with high
annual operation and maintenance costs . The inclusion of one or both of these projects
on the final list of projects for funding will result in little other money being available for
other capital needs. Two significant questions are raised by these two projects : Is
Council interested in including either of these projects on the list of projects to be funded
by the '/4-cent renewal? Is Council interested in funding either of these projects through a
new 1/4-cent tax?
Council Feedback on Project List:
As Council considers questions of how to narrow the list from $229 million worth of
projects, it may be helpful for Council Members to individually complete the same informal
survey that citizens used on-line . Attachment C is a copy of the informal survey used on line.
Citizens were asked to select either $50 million (one 1/4-cent tax) or $ 100 million (two 1/4-cent
taxes) in projects that represent their highest priorities. By completing the exercise of trying
to narrow down individual preferences, Council may be better prepared to offer suggestions
on projects that could be eliminated at this stage of the process.
Possible Additional Sales Tax :
City Council generally agreed that it is appropriate to ask citizens for feedback on the option
of asking for an additional tax (beyond the renewals) that would fund additional high priority
construction projects . Staff asked citizens their opinions regarding the addition of a 1/4-cent
tax to pay for more high priority projects. They were asked:
"Would you support an additional sales tax?"
Results of the informal survey : Yes 226 66%
(Paper and web based) No 105 31 %
Maybe 9 3 %
The outreach to date has not included a statistically valid survey, constructed to forecast
the outcome of an election on the issue. Given the general indication from interested
citizens, City Council may want to continue considering an additional sales tax for
capital. If an additional 1/4-cent tax were approved by voters, the City could fund
approximately $ 100 million of the City' s capital needs over the coming 10 years. ($50
million renewal 1/4-cent tax; $50 million new 1/4-cent tax)
Operations and Maintenance Cost Funding Options :
A major issue of discussion for the Council has been the cost of operating and maintaining
any new capital facilities constructed because of the tax renewal. Council generally agreed
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 5
that it wants to consider O&M costs as it decides which projects to include in the ballot
package.
City Staff has developed several O&M funding options for Council to consider as it
reviews proposals for the Building on Basics 2005 capital sales tax renewal. The cost of
O&M on newly constructed capital projects could be substantial, depending on the projects
that are included in the capital program. O&M costs for the projects currently under
consideration range from $3 ,000 per year to over $2 . 3 million per year. The projected O &
M cost of the projects on the current project list is included as Attachment D .
O&M funding options include :
Options Needing Voter Approval: Non-Tax alternatives :
1 . Companion tax for O&M 8 . Continue funding new O&M costs
through revenue growth Status Quo
2 . Include O&M as part of the 1/4 cent 9 . Transportation Maintenance Fee
3 . Mill levy increase 10 . Renegotiate natural gas franchise fee
4. Increase to General Fund sales tax rate 11 . Park Maintenance Fee
5 . Excise tax on restaurant food and liquor 12 . Library Authority
6 . Sales tax increase on the ongoing rate ;
dedicated to two categories of
operations and maintenance : Public
Safety and Capital O&M
7 . Occupational Privilege Tax
(Employment Tax)
O&M Options Needing Voter Approval :
Staff has explored several funding options that would require voter approval for
implementation. Sales tax, property tax or other tax increases all require voter approval.
• Option 1 : Companion tax for O&M (i. e . renew 1/4 cent taxes, plus a new 0 . 10
cent tax for O&M) ( 1 / 10 cent = $2 . 1 Million year)
Voters could be asked to approve an earmarked sales tax of approximately 0 . 10
cent for capital project O&M, either as an on-going measure or for a defined time
period. By asking for an additional tax for O&M, a full 1/4 cent renewal could be
used for capital construction. A vote for the 1/4 cent for capital projects could
include the 1 / 10th cent tax increase for O&M, or they could be separate votes .
Pros * Cons •
Complete package Risk that O&M could fail while capital
tax passes
True picture of actual costs Earmarked funding sources for O&M
limit future flexibility
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 6
Assures ability of the City to fund May be difficult to receive voter
O&M approval
Allows more projects to be A tax increase, rather than a renewal
constructed with the 1/4 cent tax
revenue
Portion of funding comes from
visitors and regional shoppers
Voters know exactly where
earmarked money is spent
• Option 2 : Include O&M as part of the 1/4 cent (i. e. . 15 cent for capital, . 10 cent
for O&M)
The current quarter cent sales taxes are devoted exclusively to capital design
and construction, with no funding provided for O&M costs. By splitting the
renewal between capital and O&M, fewer projects would be constructed.
There are three options for how the 1/4 cent could be split:
1 . Capital for a limited time, O&M limited time
2 . Capital for a limited time, O&M on-going
3 . Endowment for O&M (i .e. 0. 10 x 10 years equals endowment of $21
million)
Pros * Cons .•
Complete package Limits funding for needed construction;
fewer projects
True picture of actual costs Favors low O&M cost projects
regardless of voter desires
Assures ability of the City to fund Endowment very expensive
O&M
Predictable source of funding Earmarked funding sources for O&M
limit future flexibility
Not a tax increase Limited ability to shift dollars
If O&M is funded for a limited time, the
long-term problem is only postponed
• Option 3 : Mill levy increase ( 1 mill= $ 1 . 3 million per year)
The City ' s current Property Tax mill levy rate is 9 . 797 mills . This generates
approximately $ 12 . 7 million per year, with the revenue primarily committed to
operations of the Poudre Fire Authority. Voters could be asked to increase the
mill levy rate to provide additional funding for other on-going operations and
maintenance. The City Charter limits the City' s mill levy rate to 15 mills .
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 7
Pros * Cons .•
Predictable and stable revenue May be a regressive tax because it is
stream based on the current value of property,
not on income orspending
Complete package More impact on older citizens with
appreciated property values
True picture of actual costs if Impact on businesses
revenues are dedicated to O&M
Assures ability of the City to fund Doesn 't apply to visitors and regional
O&M shoppers/employees
Voters may be confused about the two
separate taxes
• Option 4 : Increase to General Fund sales tax rate
The City' s current General Fund sales tax rate is 2 .25% . This tax is on-going and
does not sunset. Revenue from the general sales tax are the primary source of
revenue for the General Fund. Voters could be asked to increase the on-going
sales and use tax for general purposes, with the expectation that new projects
could be funded through these revenues.
Pros : Cons :
Recognizes the on-going nature of May be difficult to receive voter
O&M approval
Current sales tax rate relatively Voters may be skeptical if money is not
low compared to other Colo . cities earmarked
Portion of funding comes from
visitors and regional shoppers
Flexible funding source that
wouldn' t need to be earmarked to
specific projects
• Option 5 : Excise tax on restaurant food and liquor
Voters could be asked to approve an excise tax on restaurant food and liquor
sales . The City of Boulder has a food services tax of . 15 %, which raises
approximately $375 ,000 per year.
Pros : Cons :
Portion of funding comes from May be difficult to receive voter
visitors and regional shoppers approval
Flexible funding source that Limited revenue potential
wouldn' t need to be earmarked to
specific projects
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 8
• Option 6 : Sales tax increase on the ongoing rate; dedicated to two categories of
operations and maintenance : Public Safety and Capital O&M
Voters could be asked to approve a more substantial increase to the City' s general
sales tax rate, with revenues earmarked for operations and maintenance of
programs such as Public Safety and capital improvements .
Pros : Cons :
May make sales tax increase more May be difficult to receive voter
attractive to voters approval
Assures ability of the City to fund May be confusing or look like a bait and
O&M switch
• Option 7 : Occupational Privilege Tax (Employment Tax)
Voters could be asked to approve an Occupation Privilege Tax or Employment
tax. The tax could be charged for every employee within the community, and
administered through employers . A flat dollar amount could be charged per
employee who works in Fort Collins .
The City of Denver imposes a flat tax amount for all employees within the city,
with portions paid by the employee and portions paid by the employer. The
purpose of Denver' s Employee and Business Occupational Privilege Tax is to
generate funds for City facilities and municipal services to Denver citizens and
businesses. Denver' s current tax is $ 9 . 75 per month and raises approximately $20
million per year. The Cities of Aurora and Greenwood Village have a similar
tax.
Pros : Cons :
Portion of funding comes from May be difficult to receive voter
regional employees approval
Flexible funding source that New concept that may be difficult for
wouldn' t need to be earmarked to people to understand and/or accept
specific projects
Used in other communities for Possible negative impact on employers/
many years (Denver, Aurora, businesses
Greenwood Village)
May be tax deductible to Regressive tax if charged to employees
employees and businesses directly because it is a flat tax, unrelated
to earnings
People paying have the ability to
a
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 9
Non-Tax alternatives :
Staff has explored several funding options that would not require voter approval for
implementation. By identifying options that would not require voter approval, the City
could be more assured of the feasibility of implementation of the options .
• Option 8 : Continue funding new O&M costs through revenue growth (Status Quo)
Currently, additional O&M costs for capital projects from programs such as
Building Community Choices have been funded through existing revenue sources .
The O&M cost for new facilities have been forecasted in the 10 Year Budget
Outlook, and funding has been allocated from revenue growth during the budget
year when the new facility becomes operational. Examples from BCC include the
new Fossil Creek Community Park, Gardens on Spring Creek, the future new
Northside Community Center, etc . New road project maintenance has been
funded by revenue growth in the Street Maintenance Program, funded primarily
by a BCC sales tax.
Pros * Cons .•
Does not require separate voter Limited growth in general sales tax
consideration revenues create uncertainty about
funding availability
Capital projects compete with other
operational needs
Favors projects with small annual O&M
costs
10-Year Budget Outlook already
projects revenue shortfalls in future
ears
• Option 9 : Transportation Maintenance Fee
City Council has previously discussed the option of creating a Transportation
Maintenance Fee for businesses and residences in the community. The purpose of
the fee would be to maintain the City' s transportation system, including streets,
sidewalks, bike ways, medians, etc . The fee would be calculated based on trip
generation data, and would vary based upon the use of properties .
Pros • Cons •
Already have court approval of Billing/ calculation issues
concept
Frees up General Fund revenues Impact on businesses
for other uses
Revenue source tied closely to cost Citizen resistance to other fees
of service
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 10
• Option 10 : Renegotiate natural gas franchise fee (Approximately $ 800,000/year)
The City has a flat gas franchise fee which yields approximately $445 ,000 per
year. A fee of 3 % of gross revenues would yield $ 1 .2- 1 . 5 million per year, or an
addition $ 755 ,000 — $ 1 million per year. City Council would need to approve any
change to the franchise agreement. This General Fund revenue could be allocated
to operations and maintenance needs.
Pros * Cons .•
Could be enacted by City Council Fee passed on to gas customers
Predictable revenue source
Most Colorado cities have one
Favored by natural gas industry
A 15 -20 year franchise agreement
would provide a long-term
revenue source
• Option 11 : Park Maintenance Fee
A Park Maintenance Fee, similar to the Transportation Maintenance Fee could be
established by City Council. This fee would be assessed to all residences in the
community and based on the City' s current level of service. It would be
calculated based on the actual cost of maintaining the City ' s park system,
including grounds and facility maintenance, mowing, materials, full-time and
seasonal staffing, equipment, etc.
Pros : Cons :
Revenue source closely tied to cost Citizen resistance to additional fees
of service
Predictable revenue source Billing/calculation issues
Frees up General Fund revenues
for other uses
• Option 12 a Library Authority
Voters could be asked to create a Library Authority to fund library services
regionally. Two or more local governments (cities and/or counties) would need to
mutually agree to create the authority, and ask voters to approve the Authority. The
Authority could then ask voters to tax themselves for library services, through
property and/or sales taxes . The revenue from the Authority could be used to fund
existing library facilities or to expand those services through additional facilities .
City Council Members
Building on Basics 2005 Update Study Session
September 8 , 2004
Page 11
Pros • Cons •
Ability to assess regional users for Requires cooperation with other cities
Library services
Could cover future library projects Must be voter-approved by residents
O&M throughout the district
New legislation is there — no legal
barrier
Attachment A
Public Outreach Activities
Building on Basics 2005
May — September 2004
o Building on Basics 2005 Website : www. fcgov. com/BOB
o FCGOV.com
• Spotlight on BOB : June 28-July 6
• Web poll : July
• Web "Survey" August 3 -31
o Cable 27
• Bulletin Board
• Showcase Fort Collins Mail Bag (July)
• BOB informational video
o Fort Collins Community Event Calendar
o Fort Collins City Event Calendar
o City News Articles—May - October
o Fort Shorts—City Employee Newsletter
o Thursday Night Market Booth
o Gardens on Spring Creek Grand Opening
o Foothills Fashion Mall Community Booth
o KRFC Community at Work Radio Show in July
o Fort Collins Forum article in July issue
o 2 Community Open Houses—July 28 and August 2
o Coloradoan articles
o Speaker' s Bureau:
■ Downtown Development Authority Board, September 9
■ Downtown Business Association Board, June 9
■ Sertoma: Horsetooth, June 9
■ Coloradoan Editorial Board, June 23
■ Kiwanis Club : Eye-Openers, July 6
■ Chamber of Commerce including Local Legislative Affairs and
Transportation Committee, July9
■ Sertoma: Fort Collins, July 23
■ Homebuilders Association, August 10
■ Rotary Club : Foothills, August 17
■ Northern Colorado Homebuilders Association Brown Bag, August 20
■ Rotary Club : Foothills, August 17
■ Rotary Club : Fort Collins, August 25
■ Lions Club, August 26
■ Board of Realtors including the Governmental Affairs Committee, Sep
20
■ City Staff Meetings-23 meetings with staff in a variety of departments
Attachment B
Citizen Feedback Summary and Data
Building on Basics 2005
September 8 , 2004
Bui In < uUH
onwasi S
Feedback Summary--Citizen Outreach
Building on Basics 2005
Speakers Open Houses Web Total All
Project Bureaus 28-Jul, 2-Aug Survey Methods
Libraries
1 . Library Materials 6 45 97 148
2. Library Technology 8 40 91 139
3 . New Downtown Civic Center Library 26 36 49 111
4. Southeast Branch Library 11 36 80 127
Total Libraries 51 157 317 525
Cultural Facilities
5. Fort Collins Museum Expansion 16 23 40 79
6. Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility 1 11 38 50
7. Performing Arts Center 42 44 42 128
Total Cultural Facilities 59 78 120 257
Parks and Recreation
8. Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements 15 16 73 104
9. Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion 10 37 36 83
10. Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements 12 9 89 110
11 . Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park 11 8 33 52
12. Restroom, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery 5 45 50
Total Parks & Recreation 48 75 276 399
Community Planning and Environmental Services
13. Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration 31 35 70 136
Total CPES 31 33 70 136
Police Services
14. Police Services CAD Replacement Project 13 19 81 113
15 . Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVL's) 5 18 75 98
Total Police Services 18 37 156 211
Roads/Multi-Modal
16. Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation 7 8 32 47
17. East Drake Road--Harvard to Stover 3 4 33 40
18. Harmony--Seneca to College 21 42 66 129
19. Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals 19 28 51 98
20. Intersection Improvements at College and Harmony 12 21 65 98
21 . Lemay Avenue--Lincoln to Conifer 15 21 45 81
22. North College Avenue--Vine to Conifer 7 11 49 67
23. Prospect--Poudre River to I-25; 4 Lane Arterial 22 27 73 122
24. Streets Facility Expansion 1 3 22 26
25. Timberline--Drake to Prospect 49 49 92 190
26. Timberline--Mulberry to Mountain Vista 16 7 36 59
27. Traffic Signal Replacement Project (ATMS) Enhancement 13 16 70 99
28. Mulberry Park and Ride--Mulberry and 1-25 2 1 0 3
Total Roads/Multi-Modal 187 238 634 1059
Bike/Pedestrian Enhancements
29. Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan and Implementation 14 30 46 90
30. Bike/Ped Trail - Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC) 9 23 61 93
31 . Bike/Ped Underpass at Troutman and BNSF RR (MTC) 3 18 57 78
32. Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, Continuation 4 12 42 58
Total Bike & Ped 30 83 206 319
Transit
33. Replacement Buses Transit Fleet 2 20 56 78
34. New Vehicles for Transit Fleet 2 17 53 72
Total Transit 4 37 109 150
# of survey respondents 171
Would you support an additional sales tax?
Yes 41 94 91 226
No 9 30 66 105
Maybe 6 3 9
09/10/200411 :59 AM C:\DOCUME-1 \rharris\LOCALS-1 \Temp\EXCEL 9-14- Study Session to Rita.xls
Attachment B- 2
Priority Project Results--Citizen Outreach Process
Building on Basics 2005
June-August 2004
Rated
Priority
Project Name Projects
Timberline--Drake to Prospect 190
Library Materials 148
Library Technology 139
Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration 136
Harmony--Seneca to College 129
Performing Arts Center 127
Southeast Branch Library 127
Prospect--Poudre River to I-25 ; 4 Lane Arterial 122
Police Services CAD Replacement Project 113
New Downtown Civic Center Library ill
Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements 110
Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements 104
Traffic Signal Replacement Project (ATMS) Enhancement 99
Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVL's) 98
Intersection Improvements at College and Harmony 98
Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals 98
Bike/Ped Trail - Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC) 93
Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan and Implementation 90
Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion 83
Lemay Avenue--Lincoln to Conifer 81
Fort Collins Museum Expansion 79
Replacement Buses Transit Fleet 78
Bike/Ped Underpass at Troutman and BNSF RR (MTC) 78
New Vehicles for Transit Fleet 71
North College Avenue--Vine to Conifer 67
Timberline--Mulberry to Mountain Vista 59
Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, Continuation 58
Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park 52
Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility 50
Restroom, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery 50
Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation 47
East Drake Road--Harvard to Stover 40
Streets Facility Expansion 26
Mulberry Park and Ride--Mulberry and I-25 3
09/10/200412 :01 PM
Highest Priority Projects, Citizen Outreach Process
200
180
160
140
120
100
w
80
a 60
40
20
0
GGw S~~� °� ,Nti
�054 ��° o °�� Goti vb �Qto� tiro G�4` G° G�
w4 G ¢,� �° Q fi° �fi � �fi ;5� b�
° tilA�¢ fiGG� `fi� �S�fi GGfi
A4N
o
``fi° ti ova°t °fib 4°�� °�,� �°1 G�4 °� G 0���5 0���5 °��Q,S ���ti �lv o
o°a;
Co
w
Projects Selected by Citizens, by Service Area
Bike/Pedestrian Transit
Enhancements 5 % Libraries
10% 17%
Cultural Facilities
8%
Roads/Multi-Modal Parks and Recreation
36% 13 %
Community Planning and
Environmental Services
4%
Police Services
7%
Would You Support An Additional Sales Tax ?
Maybe
3 %
No
31 %
Yes
66%
bd
cams
Attachment B
Citizen Feedback Highlights--Most Frequently Selected Projects by Service
Building on Basics 2005
September 8, 2004
Speakers Open Houses Web Total All
Project Bureaus 28 -Jul, 2-Aug Survey Methods
Libraries
Library Materials 6 45 97 148
Library Technology 8 40 91 139
Cultural Facilities
Performing Arts Center 42 44 42 128
Parks and Recreation
Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements 15 16 73 104
Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements 12 9 89 110
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration 31 35 70 136
Police Services
Police Services CAD Replacement Project 13 19 81 113
Roads/Multi-Modal
Harmony-- Seneca to College 21 42 66 129
Timberline--Drake to Prospect 49 49 92 190
Bike/Pedestrian Enhancements
Bike/Ped Trail - Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC) 9 23 61 93
Transit
Replacement Buses Transit Fleet 2 20 56 78
ca
Would you support an additional sales tax? w
Yes 41 94 91 226
No 9 30 66 105 bd
Maybe 6 3 9
Total Survey Votes = 2959
Paper Survey Respondants = 234
Online Survey Res ondants = 157
Web urvey, 1888
AU
Open Ho ses , 660
Speakers Bureau , 411
bd
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Speaker's Bureau Open Houses
Bike/Pedestrian
Transit Transit
Enhancements o Libraries 5%
0 1 /o Bike/Pedestrian
7 /� 12% Enhancements Libraries
11 % 22%
Cultural Facilities
14%
Cultural Facilities
12%
Roads/Multi-Modal Roads/Multi-Modal
44% Parks and Recreation 29%
11 %
Web Survey
Parks and Recreation
Community Planning and 11 %
Environmental Services Police Services Community Planning and
7% 5% Environmental Services
Police Services 5%
4%
Transit
Bike/Pedestrian 6% Libraries
Enhancements 1 7 %
11 %
Cultural Facilities
6%
Parks and Recreation
15%
Roads/Multi-Modal
33%
Community Planning and
Environmental Services
4%
Police Services
8%
Attachment B — 8
Page 1
Listening Log
Building on Basics 2005
May-September 8, 2004
Transportation
Open House Comments :
■ Road improvements should be prioritized starting with core needs first. Existing deficiencies
must take precedence over growth caused deficiencies toward the outside of the city. Growth
must pay its way ! Any project should include operations and maintenance costs
• Need separate funding source for transportation
■ Road projects should be a minor component of any new tax
■ I won ' t pay for new roads or improvement in NE part of town.
■ Don 't let transportation become the 500-pound gorilla ! !
• Focus on roads . Later for library and arts center.
■ Separate pedestrian and bicycle paths — don 't compromise and risk safety because of lack of
funding
■ Is it not a conflict of interest to have bicycle company — private sponsorship of a Bicycle Map that
is displaying proposed bike trails that will be under litigation for condemnation?
■ Road expansion will ultimately fail if we do not enhance alternative transportation (public
transport, walk/bike, encourage living near work place, etc) . Most of the projects are worthy —
why not put in place a long term plan to accomplish that?
• Item 23 (Poudre River 4 lane arterial) Recommend transportation staff address the Prospect
project so that voters will have the opportunity to get it voted as one complete project, using
previous funds and these requested funds . The city shouldn't be building a two lane road, with no
added improvement in traffic and then put out another contract to complete the project. Let's get it
done right the first time, even if the legal question needs to go before the voters as part of the
BOB issues .
■ The city needs to once again address a dedicated funding source to support master streets
transportation needs . It is difficult to believe a city has to go back to the voters every time a street
needs to be built/improved. Let's try again on this ballot. The last such issue was barely defeated
and the city knows it was because the expensive Mason Street Corridor project was included.
■ How many more years is it going to take you to get the traffic signal mess corrected? I don' t
think it ' s the lack of equipment, but rather the lack of the right personnel (i. e . bright personnel)
■ Also, please do not use this for roads at the expense of our cultural facilities, which get very little
funding.
■ Does ATMS mean Traffic Activated Signal Changes as opposed to timed changes? I object to
sitting at red lights when there are no vehicles in sight to cross .
■ My approach is to fund some of the badly needed street and highway improvements as a top
priority, without which the City' s economy will suffer serious erosion.
■ You need to be able to travel through town before we build new expensive "feel good" projects .
■ We need to make sure that the transportation projects are not attached to non-transportation items
on the ballot.
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ Roads and multi-modal is basic infrastructure, any thought given to making it a basic program?
1
Attachment B — 8
Page 2
■ I think the City is responsible for discussing with the community basic taxes (roads) and their
time periods . Where ' s the right place to do basic services versus special projects? Can basic
services come out of property taxes?
■ It concerns me that Council is not identifying road projects as basics. If Pavement Management
doesn' t pass, how is Council going to prioritize that? They should say "This is what we ' ll do if it
doesn' t pass" or "These are our priorities" because I think we ' re entitled to know.
■ City Council needs to be the tough guy to make sure these basics don ' t fail .
■ I would vote for an additional sales tax if basic purchases were funded properly.
■ The Pavement Management Program seems to be a basic service and not one that should be
funded from tax dollars
• Before we spend more money on traffic lights, we need to develop a plan to ensure that they are
synchronized properly in the first place (i. e. improper timing, balance of a busy street intersecting
with a far less busy street) The minute a fence along the railroad tracks on Mason between Laurel
and Cherry resurfaces, I would vote against all of this . I would also lobby within the community
for others to do the same . Keep that fence out of here and you have my support on all of this ,
110% .
■ All improvements seem to be about pavement, where is the MTC?
■ Does City Council discuss the possibility of the Street Maintenance Program coming from the
General Fund rather than other taxes?
■ The automated traffic signal system should have been completed long ago ! When I see the City
squandering dollars buying land on the Wyoming border, I really wonder whether any more funds
should be provided to the town.
• My number one concern is Timberline at the Business Park
■ Are there any long-range plans for transportation to Denver or Longmont? Or any plans for new
transportation around the city?
■ Given that the transportation tax failed twice, is it feasible to ask the community for additional
money?
■ I fail to see why the City has so many roads projects when there are so many other pressing needs
Performing Arts Center
Open House Comments :
■ Revised/cheaper design for Performing Arts Center, then I would support the project.
■ We need a 400-700 seat performance venue for music and theatre . Perhaps a serious renovation
of the Lincoln Center to add seats , stage area and improve acoustics would be more effective than
a new 2 , 500 seat theatre. We need a new way to fund transportation and we just thought to
research that and do it. A sales tax will never fund all the road projects . An arts district might
fund the library, museum and cultural facilities .
■ Maintaining essential services (Police, Fire, Transport, Parks) is more important than creating
brand new expensive services like a performing arts center.
■ A performing arts center needs to be funded primarily privately, not with taxpayers dollars
■ I disagree that we need a new performing arts center — can' t the Lincoln Center be refurbished
and expanded at lesser cost? Similar views about Downtown Library.
■ A performing arts center would bring in jobs and revenue for the City
■ The performing arts center is not needed by local groups, but an upgraded Lincoln Center
definitely is . A smaller hall for theater is also needed.
2
Attachment B — 8
Page 3
■ The performing arts center is very important for the development of the cultural aspects of FC
and downtown. Probably need another $20 million of private/DDA funds
• Performing Arts Center. Is there a way that a fund drive could provide more of the funding so this
excellent BOB candidate would not take so much funding away from other projects? If this could
be reduced to $30 - $35 million it would be much more acceptable when competing against other
listed needs .
■ Add Performing Arts Center as separate additional tax item on ballot
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ Why do we need a 2000 seat performing arts center if we have CSU and the Lincoln Center
• If a performing arts center was constructed, what would happen to business at the Lincoln Center
and the new CSU theatre?
■ I would like to choose both a new library and performing arts center, but don' t see how both
could be done .
■ Have you thought of combining with the university to pay for the Performing Arts Center?
■ We really don 't need to compete with Denver for museum and cultural center.
■ If a new performing arts center was built, what would happen to the Lincoln Center?
■ One reason that Performing Arts Center funds were rejected the first time was location. Have
they changed/found a location?
■ Is bringing big groups to a new Performing Arts Center really needed with The Ranch being so
close?
Additional 1/4 Cent Tax
Open House Comments :
■ I would possibly vote for an additional 1/4 cent tax if we are firm about city GMA.
■ Let us vote on an additional sales tax at the 1/4 or the 1/2 percent (separate items on the ballot — I ' ll
bet one of them would pass)
■ I am curious who will determine how "we" determine how the additional 1/4 cent sales tax will be
used. This seems like a back door manner to replace the ` grocery sales tax ' if defeated in Nov. I
don ' t approve of back door politics- be up front and say that it is to replace the lost revenue .
Speaker's Bureau Comments :
■ Vote on specific projects for the extra tax, such as the Performing Arts Center or the new library
Using Open Space Money for BOB Projects
Open House Comments :
■ Please do not use this money for parks and/or open space — there is already funding dedicated to
that. You have runaway with your Open Space program. Too many properties being purchased
and not enough O&M money. Program needs to be restructured.
■ Separate the commingling of Natural Resources and Parks and Recreation Trail subcommittee —
this subverts the separation of the City' s creed of not condemning for open space with
condemning for trails
■ Do not set precedence and condemn private lands with an ill will condemnation in private lands
■ I am finding it more and more difficult to vote for any new tax the City offers primarily because
of the acquisition of Soapstone .
3
Attachment B — 8
Page 4
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
• The River Habitat Restoration proposal should be able to be funded with other funds from Natural
Areas, Go Co, county open spaces etc. Doesn't belong here.
■ Why doesn ' t the definition of Natural Areas include parks?
■ Why isn 't the Poudre River Habitat Restoration project included in the Natural Areas tax
package?
■ Is there any opportunity to redirect Natural Areas tax to help fund these projects?
■ Try and find a way to use some of the Open Space money for Parks and Recreation and Poudre
River cleanup .
• I think that monies from "Open Space Now" should be used for ALL of the Parks and Recreation
needs. We should focus our resources in Fort Collins, not areas outside of the GMA, i . e.
Soapstone Ranch.
■ Are there other funds for the Poudre River Habitat Restoration from Open Space Issues?
■ No additional open space near Wyoming (3 votes)
Food Tax Initiative
Open House Comments :
■ I would be happy if the sales tax on groceries was increased to be even with sales tax on other
items .
Speaker's Bureau Comments :
■ What are the consequences of the Brophy initiative to the present capital projects?
■ Have you looked at examples from other cities in the country?
■ If the Brophy initiative passes in November, will Council consider changing the BOB tax to fund
the General Fund rather than for building more capital improvements?
■ If a future citizen initiative came to light, does it affect the ceiling for these taxes?
General Comments
Open House Comments :
■ Get back to basics and spend within your means . Police building is the only thing I want to see
built.
■ Keep building out the bike trails ! They' re great !
■ Downtown development needs to keep up to date to compete with the Lifestyle Centers south of
town. Think Pearl Street in Boulder.
■ Very important to allow voters the opportunity to support more projects than just what the
renewed tax could fund. Library materials should be a general fund priority, not dependant upon
capital funding.
■ Without affordable housing and jobs, the people couldn' t afford a large tax increase.
■ Literacy is essential !
■ The City is trying its best. It ' s hard to spend money you don 't have or is your own.
■ Other projects besides transportation projects should be funded by separate sales taxes, with each
standing on its own merits, and supported by those in the community who provide its principal
backing.
■ Let' s bring back the arts . So much has been lost to 0 funding, we ' ll never retrieve it.
4
Attachment B — 8
Page 5
■ I propose that any tax is for a maximum of 5 years. In this manner we have an option to "kill" a
tax, if renewal is attempted, if it is not beneficial to the majority of City citizens .
■ Expanding library services is a responsibility of a vital city.
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ Is there a concern about the government being a leader in this initiative? I don' t see citizen' s
being passionate about it.
■ The EPIC project got into the mix by private funding, I feel that the environment for the BOB
campaign isn ' t conducive. These projects can' t happen unless private money comes in.
■ I need to know how these projects will enhance the current situation, or why do we need a new
library, are the other ones not sufficient? People want to see what the investment to the
community will be
■ The suggestion about looking at the Mill Levy should be looked at. -
■ What happens to these projects if they don' t get implemented, do they get put on the shelf?
■ Are you bundling different types of voters for one tax? Single subject requirements?
■ I don 't think the bulk of voters have a stomach for new taxes at this time.
■ Is there a limit to how much tax the city can charge?
■ Will each proposal be a separate ballot item?
■ It is possible to have a mix of the proposals, rather than one being dedicated to Street
Maintenance?
■ How do you avoid being controlled by special interest groups?
■ What are the City' s thoughts on building these projects so that future amenities can be added,
such as landscaping, and more money can be utilized for different projects? The few hundred
dollars saved could buy more library books, which is important to some people.
■ I was disturbed by a newspaper article stating that Fort Collins has one of the highest costs of
fees, i . e . land, add-on fees .
■ The City should look at sponsors as people who want visibility and good relationships with the
community.
■ People pointed pride to DT2, BCC and the other campaigns, and there was always a figure head.
I wonder if, since our community is getting so big, it is going to be a hurdle to get citizen vote in.
How do you keep our community ' s sense of place?
■ Our community is valued by cultural enhancements and they are usually the first to get axed,
however, they sometimes are the most important aspect of the community. Does Council
consider this?
■ The proposal to build the new Downtown Civic Center Library requires almost 20% of the total
needed funds on the project list. Did City Council consider buying any existing facilities such as
the old Steele ' s Market? Wouldn 't that have saved us money?
■ Excessive allocation requested for downtown library when branch services are more desirable for
the community.
■ Don 't hide anything in the projects on the ballot. Be honest about the entire program and be
honest to the citizens .
■ Is the City using wise dollars , in terms of life cycle costing when building these projects?
■ Is there any thought to 50 years ahead, perhaps a time when the railroads don' t run through the
heart of town?
■ We should build facilities for 50 years + life and use dollars to add on and not replace
■ I don 't see the Poudre Fire Authority on this list, is it separate?
■ Are all of these projects contingent on sales tax?
5
Attachment B — 8
Page 6
■ Is the CAD replacement project really needed?
■ Do all funds have to be raised for projects before they begin?
■ Additional sales taxes are high already, yet I want to see Fort Collins keep up wisely with growth
and expansion
■ Keep the Senior Center name (5 votes)
■ Decrease time/effort/investment it takes for new companies to relocate/develop in FC and have
them share the infrastructure cost
■ Why does the City generate tax revenues and run those businesses/people out of town or to
Loveland?
■ Was there a proposal to convert the Poudre River into a boardwalk type thing?
■ The expansion of the Senior Center is inconsistent with attendance numbers .
■ Would strongly support tax to support ongoing City capital needs and staff salaries .
■ There is always waste or low priority items to be eliminated before raising taxes . When waste is
eliminated, then we may consider tax hikes .
Where is Other Funding Coming From?
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ Where is this other funding coming from?
■ I ' m inclined to complete projects that are partially funded because then we don' t have to fund
them 100% . Is there a source where we can find out where the private money is coming from?
■ Why are some of these already partially funded . . . where do these funds come from?
■ Where does other funding come from?
Narrowing Down the Proiect List
Speaker's Bureau Comments :
■ It says here that the community, boards and commissions and staff identified $229 million in
needed projects — I don 't think so. What boards and commissions did you visit and who sits on
them? How did you generate community interest? I can see that City staff probably made up a
large part of it because the projects aren't as genuine as they should be.
■ Is the process of creating the preliminary capital improvement list the same as in previous
campaigns?
■ How much does citizen input help determine project composition and priority?
■ Are there projects that staff is currently vying for?
■ Where did the list of projects originally come from?
■ How was this list developed?
O&M
Open House Comments :
■ Need to make sure that operations and maintenance are included for recreation and cultural
facilities . I won 't pay for new roads or improvement in NE part of town.
■ No projects should be put on the ballot unless the O & M is included ! ! The voters need to see the
actual costs so they can make their decisions based on real figures .
■ I would like to know O & M cost figures before voting. New development should be done at the
cost of the developer.
6
Attachment B — 8
Page 7
■ O & M costs should be included in project cost and revealed to the public.
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ O/M is a concern for us because we need to be able to support it with the tax.
■ With Soapstone as an example, I am concerned about O/M lasting for 25 years or even 8 - 10
years, for the life of the tax. What happens after that period?
■ What portion is given to O/M if you build it into the duration of the tax? Bill said that O/M is
usually a fraction of what most projects cost and although it' s a concern, it is not a huge concern.
I am concerned that you need to think about it more .
■ It puts the City in a tough bind if you add all of these facilities and don' t worry about O/M
■ Attach the extra 1/4 cent package with the initial package on the ballot so we vote for a 1/2 cent tax
package ( 1 /4 cent would cover O&M and some extra projects)
■ That extra tax (besides the three 1/4 cent taxes) should contain the estimated O&M costs, it would
probably be less than 1/4 cent anyways
Other Proiects To Consider
Open House Comments :
■ We badly need a recreation center in SE Fort Collins . Harmony is crowded; Must expand
Transfort SE too .
• I would like to see mini-neighborhood parks for those who do not want to drive to a big park.
■ Look at expanding bus service along east Harmony.
• Sidewalks on every side of every street in all of Fort Collins .
■ Acoustic renovation of Lincoln Center halls
■ Some modest improvements to the area surrounding the annual varieties trail garden — which are
such as asset to the community
■ Completing/refiguring the foothills trail system around the dams — from 38E (Harmony) to
Michaud Lane (to work around dam security zones)
■ Some upgrades to Lincoln Center (ie : storage, space, practice facilities, a 500-seat theater, etc)
■ Mason Street Transportation Corridor
■ Smaller, clean buses
■ Extend Troutman Parkway across tracks all the way to Seneca — this would give another east-west
alternative to Harmony !
■ We need a 400-700 seat performance venue for music and theatre . Perhaps a serious renovation
of the Lincoln Center to add seats, stage area, and improve acoustics would be more effective
than a new 2 , 500 seat theatre .
■ Dog park in north Fort Collins
■ More access to TV channels for local opinions (politics, legislation, etc)
■ Police : traffic enforcement increase ; specific Mason Street Corridor funding
■ More bike trails ; both extending/connecting large parts of it and more access paths (like power
trail)
■ 287 by-pass (2 votes)
■ Expanding bus service east along Harmony (2 votes)
■ Old time ball park north of downtown for a minor league team (2votes)
■ Timberline from Prospect to Mulberry (5 votes)
■ Long-term transportation plan to Denver or Longmont
■ Outdoor handball courts
7
Attachment B — 8
Page 8
■ Improved signage on one-way streets
■ Southern swimming facility
• Develop north Fort Collins and quit spending so much money on the south end
■ We urgently need a rail passenger service from FC to Denver and DIA (4 votes)
■ I would love to see the bus system expanded — more N/S routes, more access (3 votes)
■ North Aztlan Center — upgrade it because it is used constantly
■ Horsetooth — Shields to Taft
■ Extend the bike trail to Windsor
■ With the excess money why not honor the Colorado Citizen' s approval of the Homestead Act to
Fort Collins seniors? Broomfield honored their seniors ' just recently
• Swimming facility
■ Redo City Park center inside
■ Make more bus transit stops and pick-ups
■ Traffic light at Harmony and Hinsdale (2 votes)
■ Pedestrian crossing over BNSF RR at Natural Resources Research Center
■ Protection or expansion of open space and the corridor between Loveland and FC
■ MTC
■ Latino resource center
■ Health van
Speaker' s Bureau Comments :
■ I have to wait too long at the E/W light at Trilby and Lemay (2 votes)
• Create an old time ball park north of downtown for a minor league team in the old town area to
bring more sports fans downtown
■ Light rail Mason Street (2 votes)
■ Lemay and Boardwalk
■ Bookmobile
8
.Building on basics Survey Atttachment C
Building On Basics (BOB) is the renewal of the Building Community Choices sales and use taxes .
If voters decide to renew these taxes in April 2005 , the city's sales and use tax rate will stay the
same at 3 % . Results of this poll will be sent to City Council for review and to help with the
decision of which projects to put on the April 2005 ballot.
v; Take survey with $50 million to spend (continue the current 3 % sales and use tax rate)
With so many capital needs, City Council is considering asking voters for an additional
quarter-cent sales and use tax (25 cents on a $100 purchase), which would increase our tax
rate to 3.25%. This would result in an additional $50 million dollars for capital projects.
If you support an additional 1 /4 cent sales and use tax, select the option below :
Take survey with $ 100 million to spend (using funds from the renewal PLUS the additional 1 /4
cent sales and use tax)
Take the survey!
9/8/2004
Untitled Document Pagel of 2
Building on BasIcs lroject Survey
--------------- - --------- - - - .....-...................-......----.....................---.........-....
.
Create and submit your priority list by checking the box next to the project. The total cost of your
projects can't be more: than $money_formatted.
Project Name . Tax Dollars Needed (Millions)
[_ 1 Southeast Branch Library $ 1 . 5
C 2 Library Technology $ 4 . 5
L 3 New Downtown Civic Center Library $ 39 . 0
C} 4 Performing Arts Center $ 42 . 8
C 5 Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 2 . 5
C 6 Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 0. 7
[= 7 Library Materials $ 2 . 6
8 Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park $ 21 . 0
[] 9 Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion $ 8 . 5
C 10 Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility $ 2 .4
C 11 Fort Collins Museum Expansion $ 6 . 5
C 12 Restroom, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn $ 0 . 3
Cemetery
F] 13 Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration $ 5 .0
14 Police Services CAD Replacement Project $ 0 . 6
15 Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVLs) $ 0 . 5
I-' 16 Timberline - Drake to Prospect $ 3 . 2
17 Harmony - Seneca to College $ 3 . 7
EI. 18 Intersection Improvements at College and Harmony $ 4.2
C 19 Prospect - Poudre River to 1-25 : 4 Lane Arterial $ 5 . 4
C 20 Replacement Buses Transit Fleet $ 1 . 0
Ej 21 Lemay Avenue, Lincoln to Conifer $ 9 .9
C 22 Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, $ 5 . 3
Continuation
$ 8 . 3 23 North College Avenue--Vine Drive to Conifer Street
L 24 Traffic Sign al Replacement Project (ATMS) $ 2 0
Enhancement
9/8/2004
Uiltitled Document Page 2 of 2
C 25 Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals $ 16 .0
C 26 Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation $ 10.4
C 27 Timberline--Mulberry to Mountain Vista $ 4 .6
[ 28 New Vehicles for Transit Fleet $ 0. 7
29 Streets Facility Expansion $ 1 . 3
30 Bike/Pedestrian Trail, Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC) $ 3 . 5
31 East Drake Road--Harvard to Stover $ 2 . 1
Bike/Pedestrian Underpass, Troutman Pkwy. @ BN
32 Railroad Tracks (MTQ $ 1 . 5
L 33 Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan Implementation $ 7 . 1
[l 34 Mulberry St.Park and Ride--Mulbe Miry/ 125 $ 1 .0
Submit Survey
_' r E 8 2004
Attachment D
Preliminary Projects for Citizen Input--Building on Basics 2005
Including Projected Operation and Maintenance Costs
(thousands of 2004 dollars)
Unfunded Annual
Ir Operation and
Total Project Maint. Cost
Project Name Cost Funded Unfunded ($ thousands)
Libraries
Library Materials $ 2,548 $ $ 2,548 $
Library Technology $ 4,472 $ $ 4,472 $
New Downtown Civic Center Library $ 40,000 $ 1,000 $ 39,000 $ 21360
Southeast Branch Library $ 4,450 $ 3,000 $ 1 ,450 $ 705
Total Unfunded Cost $ 47,470
Cultural Facilities
Fort Collins Museum Expansion $ 69500 $ $ 69500 $ 300
Fort Collins Museum Storage Facility $ 29400 $ - $ 29400 $ 20
Performing Arts Center $ 489760 $ 6,000 $ 429760 $ 19268
Total Unfunded Cost $ 519660
Parks and Recreation
Community Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 2,500 $ - $ 2,500 $ 40
Fort Collins Senior Center Expansion $ 8,480 $ - $ 8,480 $ 255
Neighborhood Park Upgrades and Enhancements $ 700 $ - $ 700 $ 55
Recreation Center at Fossil Creek Community Park $ 20,988 $ - $ 20,988 $ 19665
Restroom, Office and Irrigation at Roselawn Cemetery $ 275 $ - $ 275 $ 15
Total Unfunded Cost $ 32,943
Community Planning and Environmental Services Projects
Cache La Poudre River Habitat Restoration S 5,000 $ S 5,000
Total Unfunded Cost $ 59000
Police Services Projects
Police Services Computer Aided Dispatch Replacement Project $ 45000 $ 3,400 $ 600 $ 219
Police Services Automated Vehicle Locators (AVLs $ 487 $ - $ 487 $ 66
Total Unfunded Cost $ 19087
Roads/Multi-Modal Transportation Projects
Drake Road--BNSF RR Grade Separation $ 10,350 $ $ 10,350 $ 3
East Drake Road--Harvard to Stover $ 2,073 $ - $ 2,073 $ 3
Harmony - Seneca to College $ 8,901 $ 5,201 $ 3,700 $ 22
Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals $ 16,000 $ - $ 16,000 $ 6
Intersection Improvements at College Ave. and Harmony Road $ 4, 140 $ - $ 4, 140 $ 3
Lemay Avenue, Lincoln to Conifer $ 23,805 $ 13,973 $ 9,832 $ 28
Mulberry St./ SH 14 Park and Ride--Mulberry/ I25 Interchange $ 19000 $ - $ 19000 $ 100
North College Avenue--Vine Drive to Conifer Street $ 89280 $ - $ 89280 $ 7
Prospect - Poudre River to I-25 : 4 Lane Arterial $ 89280 $ 29898 $ 59382 $ 19
Streets Facility Expansion $ 29000 $ 700 $ 19300 $ 60
Timberline - Drake to Prospect $ 119799 $ 89694 $ 39105 $ 18
Timberline--Mulberry to Mountain Vista $ 229770 $ 189216 $ 49554 $ 28
Traffic Signal Replacement Project (ATMS) Enhancement $ 29000 $ - $ 29000 $ 48
Total Unfunded Cost $ 71 ,716
Transit
Replacement Buses Transit Fleet $ 4,613 $ 3,690 $ 923 $ -
New Vehicles for Transit Fleet $ 3,091 $ 2,473 $ 618 $ 1 ,234
Total Unfunded Cost $ 1 ,541
Bike/Pedestrian Enhancements
Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan Implementation $ 79100 $ $ 75100 $ -
Bike/Ped Trail--Spring Creek to Laurel (MTC) $ 39450 $ - $ 39450 $ 12
Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements, Continuation $ 89560 $ 3,280 $ 59280 $ 100
Bike/Ped Underpass at Troutman and BN RR (MTC) $ 15500 $ 19500 $ 15
Total Unfunded Cost $ 17,330
Total Unfunded Cost, All Projects $ 228,747
09/10/200412: 17 PM