Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Mail Packet - 9/28/2021 - Memorandum From Lawrence Pollack Re: Councilmember Questions And Request From The September 14 Work Session On The 2022 Budget 1 Financial Services 215 N Mason Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6795 fcgov.com/finance M E M O R A N D U M Date: September 23, 2021 To: Mayor Arndt and City Councilmembers Through: Kelly DiMartino, Interim City Manager Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer From: Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director Re: Councilmember questions and requests from the September 14 work session on the 2022 Budget City Council held their first work session to review the 2022 Budget on September 14. Questions were asked about specific budget requests (offers), as well as some more general inquiries about the budget. Staff follow-ups that were not answered during the meeting were summarized in the September 14 work session summary memo and some of those responses are included below in this memo. Other requests made during the September 14 work session, however, require additional time to adequately research and respond. The answers to those will be communicated in future memos included in upcoming Council Thursday Packets. Outcome: Environmental Health 1) Question from Kelly Ohlson: Why is Offer 1.24-Utilities: Halligan Project Additional Capital Funding for Continued Permitting and Design in the Environmental Health Outcome? Response from Lawrence Pollack (Budget): The City has created a system whereby budget requests are submitted in support of a primary strategic objective from the most recently adopted strategic plan. The reason for y. Offer 1.24 was linked to objective ENV 4.4 - Provide a reliable, high-quality water supply . This objective is within the Environmental Health Outcome. The City will be refreshing the objectives in the 2022 Strategic Plan. This guiding Feedback from the September 14 work session will be incorporated into the document, which will come 2 forward to Council on 1 st Reading in early March. That adopted plan will guide the BFO -24 Budget. Outcome: Transportation and Mobility 2) Request from Julie Pignataro and Tricia Canonico: Please break out the details of the Offer 20.6-Parking Structure Security Upgrades and the scalability for each item. Could these be funded by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)? Response from Drew Brooks (Transfort and Parking Services): Below is the breakdown per parking structure for scalability within the Old Town Parking Structure (OTPS) and Civic Center Parking Structure (CCPS). Costs shown were those numbers identified according to the 2019/2020 Independent Cost Estimate, including annual percentage increase, for each independent item per parking structure. CCPS - Security Camera Upgrade: $231,562 CCPS - Emergency Call Boxes: 59,025 CCPS - Total: $290,587 OTPS - Security Camera Upgrade: $147,721 OTPS - Emergency Call Boxes: 39,442 OTPS - Total: $187,163 Total project cost- CCPS & OTPS: $477,750 Staff is planning to submit for revenue replacement for Parking Services under ARPA. This funding can then be used to fund Offer 20.3-Parking Structure Critical and Preventative Repairs - Enhanced - ARPA Funded in its entirety at $745k and $446k of Offer 20.6-Parking Structure Security Upgrades submitted at a total cost of $478k. The remaining $32k funding gap could be closed by scaling either Offer 20.3 or 20.6 down by $32k. Alternatively, other funding sources like Parking Fund reserves could be used. Staff will bring this up for consideration at the third scheduled budget work session on October 12. 3) Questions from Kelly Ohlson: Why was there no improvement to the crosswalks and the adjacent sidewalks when the intersection of Prospect and Shields was recently redone? This intersection is considered part of Safe Routes to School. At what point is this intersection planned for comprehensive arterial intersection improvements? Response from Dean Klingner (Planning, Development and Transportation): In 2015 the City completed the West Central Area Plan (https://www.fcgov.com/planning/pdf/Adopted_WestCentralAreaPlan_with_appendices_l owres.pdf) which included a Prospect Corridor Plan and recommendations for the 3 Prospect and Shields Intersection. Numerous improvements have been made nearby on the Shields and Prospect corridors since that time including: Pedestrian/Bicycle underpasses at Centre/Prospect and Elizabeth/Shields Widening of sidewalks along Prospect in conjunction with development Bicycle and pedestrian improvements to Lake Street Implementation of the Pitkin Low Street Network Improvements to the Prospect/College intersection Future projects identified in the plan that are yet to be implemented include: Operational and pedestrian safety improvements to the Prospect/Shields intersection o The intersection was resurfaced in 2021 o A red light camera was added to this intersection in 2021 and has been effective at reducing severe accidents. o Additional improvements to this intersection are not currently funded or scheduled. Citywide intersection projects are prioritized based on multiple criteria including safety for all modes of travel and available funding. Based on current levels of funding and relative needs at this intersection, it is likely it will be programmed for improvements within the next 5 years. o Funding sources could include ¼-cent sales tax dedicated to arterial intersection improvements, grant funding, development impact fees and other sources o Timing for these improvements is dependent on prioritization and available funding. A pedestrian crossing of Prospect between Whitcomb and Shields o The City will perform an analysis of this section of Prospect to determine viability of a crossing. o $20k has been escrowed from development in this area to support pedestrian improvements o Other funding could come from dedicated ¼-cent sales tax funds for bike and pedestrian funds, future development and other sources Continued sidewalk and frontage improvements to Prospect Road between Shields and College. o These improvements will be included with re-development of the corridor Other funding sources may be available for frontages that are not anticipated to re- develop. These could include dedicated ¼-cent sales tax pedestrian funds, grants, development impact fees, and other sources. The City provides resources for determining the safest route for children biking and walking to school as a part of our Safe Routes to School program. Because of high traffic volumes, higher speeds and complexity, we often recommend routes for young children that avoid arterial intersections. We recommend reaching out to our staff (saferoutes@fcgov.com) and reviewing our Safe Routes to School map (https://gisweb.fcgov.com/HTML5Viewer/Index.html?Viewer=safe%20routes ) to identify the safest way to bike and walk to school. 4 4) Question from Shirley Peel: Is there a plan for ongoing traffic signal optimization as the community grows? Response from Nicole Hahn (Traffic): The Traffic Operations department has built and continues to maintain a signal system that allows modifications to signal timing on an intersection-by-intersection basis to account for changing traffic volumes and traffic patterns. The timing of the signals has not been comprehensively updated in more than 10 years. An optimal cadence for updating would be every 5-7 years and updating at least every 10 years is a minimal best practice. Comprehensive updates to our signal timing plans are funded through the budget process, similar to comprehensive planning efforts like City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan. The $100k for Offer 11.12-Traffic Signal Timing Optimization project that is included in would allow for a complete review of signal timings. System wide updates of national recommended best practices for clearance intervals (the calculation for yellow and all-red intervals) are changing and those need to be recalculated and updated in the controllers to be brought into alignment with current reasonable service, and traffic operations staff has adjusted plans as needed in numerous locations. After the comprehensive timing takes place traffic operations staff will continue to manage and maintain the signal timings daily. 5) Request from Tricia Canonico and Kelly Ohlson: Please describe the scalability of Offer 11.13-Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program Expansion and the amount of each component Response from Nicole Hahn (Traffic): The Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program Expansion is scalable. The existing program has an annual budget of $150,000. This level of funding provides $100,000 for device installation (20 speed bumps per year), $20,000 for radio advertisements, and $30,000 for device maintenance. This enhancement is requesting an additional $250,000 that would be used to implement measures such as medians and/or pedestrian refuge islands, sidewalk curb extensions, traffic diverters, pedestrian crossing enhancements, and bicycle facility improvements to achieve a more "complete streets" approach to traffic calming. This offer includes funding for professional (consulting) services and funding for the construction of traffic mitigation devices on neighborhood streets. If this offer is partially funded, up to $60,000 would be used to supplement the existing program traffic calming strategies and grow the impact of the program by allowing for more improvements each year. If this offer is funded at a level greater than $60,000 the funding could be used to complete small capital projects in neighborhoods including bulb outs or enhanced crossings to reduce speeding and improve safety. 5 6) Request from Kelly Ohlson: Please provide more detail on the Safe Routes to School program along with other related offers. Response from Aaron Iverson (FC Moves): The Safe Routes to School program is primarily funded through offer 13.2. This ongoing offer funds the main programming for K-12 youth. Additionally, for this budget cycle, there are two related offers, the first (offer 13.10) is an enhancement for a 0.5 FTE hourly conversion to a 0.75 FTE classified position to add staff capacity for the program. The second related offer (13.11) is an enhancement to conduct safety assessments at five schools along with funds for infrastructure projects identified in those assessments, in close coordination with PSD. Ongoing offers that also support the mission of Safe Routes to School include Offer 13.4 FC Moves Education & Engagement, which provides additional educational resources, in particular to high school age kids, Offer 13.5 CCIP Bicycle Infrastructure, which funds the construction of infrastructure such as pedestrian arterial crossings that provide safer access to schools, and Offer 13.6 School Crossing Guard Program, a partnership with the school district to fund crossing guards deployed throughout the city.