HomeMy WebLinkAboutAddenda - RFP - 8134 VINE LEMAY BNSF IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (2)ADDENDUM NO. 1
SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
Description of RFP 8134: Vine / Lemay / BNSF Inprovements Project
OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) July 8, 2015
To all prospective bidders under the specifications and contract documents described above,
the following changes/additions are hereby made and detailed in the following sections of this
addendum:
1. The opening date listed on Rocky Mountain E-Purchasing was incorrect. The correct
opening date is 3:00 PM (our clock) on July 8, 2015 as stated in the RFP
document.
2. Attachments
The following attachments were referenced in the RFP but were inadvertently not
included in the RFP document. Those attachments are included in this addendum and
referenced as follows:
Exhibit 1 – East Vine / Lemay Intersection Realignment Project Development Report
Exhibit 2 – 30% Design Plans for East Vine Drive Relocation (Suniga Drive)
Exhibit 3 – Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project
2015 TIGER Grant Application Narrative
2015 TIGER Grant Appendix C – Benefit / Cost Analysis
2015 TIGER Grant Appendix D – Letters of Support
Please contact John Stephen, CPPO, LEED AP, Senior Buyer at (970) 221-6777 with any
questions regarding this addendum.
RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT
ENCLOSED WITH THE BID/QUOTE STATING THAT THIS ADDENDUM HAS BEEN
RECEIVED.
Financial Services
Purchasing Division
215 N. Mason St. 2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6775
970.221.6707
fcgov.com/purchasing
EAST VINE/LEMAY INTERSECTION
REALIGNMENT
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REPORT
PREPARED FOR
PREPARED BY
EXHIBIT 1
EAST VINE/LEMAY INTERSECTION REALIGNMENT
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REPORT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2014
PREPARED FOR
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
281 NORTH COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO 80524
970-221-6376
PREPARED BY
AECOM
717 17TH STREET, SUITE 2600
DENVER, CO 80202
EAST VINE/LEMAY INTERSECTION REALIGNMENT PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. PROJECT BACKGROUND 1
1.1 Site Location 1
1.2 Project Setting and Need 1
1.3 Funding for Transportation 2
2. LEMAY REALIGNMENT 3
2.1 Overview 3
2.2 Purpose and Need 3
2.3 Alternative Descriptions 6
2.4 Interim Improvements and Phasing 14
2.5 Transportation Performance Analysis 15
2.6 Environmental Analysis: Key Impact Issues 18
2.7 Cost Opinions 23
2.8 Risk Analysis 25
2.9 Alternative Comparison 27
3. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND SCHEDULE 32
3.1 Project Development Process 32
3.2 Preliminary Design Process 32
3.3 Environmental Process 32
3.4 Final Design and Construction Process 35
4. PROJECT FUNDING STRATEGIES 36
4.1 Potential Funding Approach 36
4.2 Pros and Cons Associated with the Funding Approach Strategies 41
APPENDIX
A. Construction Cost Opinion
B. Lemay/Vine 2035 Traffic Analysis Memorandum
C. Analysis of Vehicle Delay from Train Operations
D. Cultural Resources in the Study Area
E. CDOT Standard Form 128
F. Project Funding and Finance Analysis
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
Table 1 Level of Service Conditions under No Build and At Grade Alternative
Conditions (2035 - without Consideration of Railroad Operations) 16
Table 2 System Performance at PM Peak Hour under Various Scenarios 17
Table 3 Build Alternative Total Project Cost Opinions 23
Table 4 Feasibility-Level Criteria: Selected Broad Considerations and Fatal-Flaws 29
Table 5 Concept-Level Criteria: Selected Considerations for Comparative Analysis 30
Table 6 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the At-Grade
Alternative 38
Table 7 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the Overpass
Alternative 40
Table 8 Potential TIGER Funding Strategy for the Remaining Overpass Alternative
Costs 40
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 Proposed Lemay Avenue Realignment 1
Figure 2 East Vine and Lemay (4-Lane Arterial Street) Roadway Cross Section 7
Figure 3 Realignment At-Grade Intersection Alternative – Conceptual Plan 9
Figure 4 Example Arterial At-Grade Crossing – W. Horsetooth Road 10
Figure 5 Realigned/Overpass Visualization Rendering 10
Figure 6 Realignment/Overpass Alternative – Conceptual Plan 11
Figure 7 Realigned/Underpass Example – Wadsworth Bypass Arvada, CO 12
Figure 8 Realignment/Underpass Alternative – Conceptual Plan 13
Figure 9 Key Environmental Considerations Map 19
Figure 10 Project Development Anticipated Expenditures, S-Curve 24
Figure 11 Annual Construction Expenditure Flow for the Overpass Alternative 39
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Description
The Lemay Avenue realignment and
intersection improvements would construct a
new arterial facility and intersection slightly to
the east of the existing Lemay Avenue
alignment. This realignment allows for a
number of interim and ultimate solutions that
include new at-grade intersections or
overpass/underpass of the railroad and
existing E. Vine Drive.
The realignment relieves several issues that
currently constrain the existing alignment and
intersection, which allows for the major
project improvements and benefits to be
achieved.
Project Improvements and Benefits
The project will address the following primary needs:
Safety: The project will improve safety and reduce risks for pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles and
the railroad. The existing crossing intersection has averaged thirteen crashes per year between
2010 and 2012 and does not fully comply with new safety standards for crossings with vehicles,
bicycles and pedestrians.
Neighborhood Connectivity: The project will improve multi-modal and neighborhood
connectivity by establishing safer and more connected pedestrian/cyclist options and by
providing an appropriately scaled roadway network and access points that are less impacted by
heavier arterial traffic.
Traffic Congestion: The project will reduce traffic delays that significantly impacts mobility when
trains are operating at the existing crossing.
Previous Planning Efforts that Provide Basis for Project
ü Plan Fort Collins (2011)
ü City Plan (2011)
ü City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (2011)
ü City of Fort Collins Capital Improvement Plan (2011)
ü Mountain Vista Sub-Area Plan (2010)
ü Northside Neighborhoods Plan (2005)
ü I-25 Corridor Plan (2001)
ü Larimer County Master Plan (1997)
Project Planning
The intersection improvements and
realignment of Lemay Avenue at East
Vine Drive is a vital capital
improvement project resulting from a
series of planning efforts that provide
the basis for directing and guiding
growth in the community.
Project Alternatives
Three alternatives have been identified through a scoping process with an initial overview of alternative
characteristics and screening. Preliminary scoping includes constructability, costs, potential
environmental impacts, and improving neighborhood connectivity.
Preliminary Alternatives Scoping Summary
Realigned Lemay - At Grade Realigned Lemay - Overpass Realigned Lemay - Underpass
Primary Elements Creates Realigned Lemay and a segment of proposed New Vine to current Arterial Standards,
relocating intersection away from BNSF Crossing.
Removes existing at-grade
crossing, constructing New
Lemay crossing to current
safety standards
Removes existing at-grade
crossing, constructing a New
Lemay overpass bridge over
BNSF and existing E. Vine.
Removes existing at-grade
crossing, constructing a New
Lemay underpass with bridges
for BNSF and existing E. Vine.
Permitting and
Approval Risks
PUC approvals for new at-
grade crossing uncertain.
BNSF approvals required and
will likely require relocation
of switching yard.
General PUC and BNSF
approvals required.
Removes at-grade crossing
risk.
General PUC and BNSF
approvals required. Removes
at-grade crossing risk, but
may be disruptive to BNSF
operations.
Environmental
Considerations
General noise and
construction impacts
Noise and visual impacts to
the historic neighborhoods
High ground water table due
Developer
Local
Street
Portion ,
$1.45*
City Street
Oversizing
Portion ,
$5.16 M**
Additional
Funding
Required,
$17.99 M
Scenario Example: At-Grade Funding
* Timing of funds/cash flow issue if project precedes
development.
** Timing of funds/cash flow issue due to size of contribution
required from this source.
Funding
The project could use a combination of local and federal funding sources:
• Local: Sources include the potential future City sales tax for capital projects, developer street
frontage obligations and street oversizing.
• Federal: Sources include the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or Surface
Transportation Program (STP), TIGER Discretionary Grant Program, and/or EDA Public Works
and Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs.
Funding Scenario Example: The Realigned Lemay At-Grade Alternative Cost and Funding:
• Cost between $24 to $25 million.
• Funding approach could rely
entirely on City funds as federal
funds may be unreliable.
• The project could advance prior to
full funding by advancing project
design and development while
other financing options for
construction could be explored,
such as bonds backed by sales tax
revenues or federal program
applications.
Project Development Next Steps
The next step in the process is to begin a
more thorough data collection, preliminary design and funding evaluations that will address the
following key questions:
• Is the added long-term cost/benefit of realignment and grade separation necessary to address
anticipated 2035 congestion and delay, or could a realignment and at-grade intersection be
sufficient as a near-term solution that could then transition at a later date? Will a new at-grade
crossing be allowed by the PUC and BNSF, and would BNSF consider switching yard relocation?
• Is the added cost of an underpass to address visual and noise impact issues appropriate when a
lower cost overpass would result in similar traffic performance without the higher cost and risk
concerns, such as drainage issues, caused by the underpass?
• Does the currently unknown cost of relocation of the railroad switching yard and its ability to
reduce railroad crossing/switching-related system congestion justify the expenditure?
• Can the existing at-grade crossing of existing E. Vine and existing Lemay remain in a limited
configuration for pedestrians/cyclists.
1
1. PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 Site Location
The existing East Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue intersection is located one-mile north east of downtown
Fort Collins. Figure 1 presents a map showing the Lemay Avenue realignment (green) and associated
roadway network improvements. Chapter 2 provides Lemay realignment details.
Figure 1 Proposed Lemay Avenue Realignment
1.2 Project Setting and Need
The realignment of Lemay at its intersection with East Vine has emerged as a vital component of a series
of Fort Collins’ planning processes and outcomes dating back to 1997, including:
Plan Fort Collins (2011)
City Plan (2011)
City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (2011)
City of Fort Collins Capital Improvement Plan (2011)
Mountain Vista Sub-Area Plan (2010)
30% Design for Realigned Vine Drive
Northside Neighborhoods Plan (2005)
I-25 Corridor Plan (2001)
Larimer County Master Plan (1997)
East Vine Drive is a two lane road running parallel to the BNSF railroad tracks and Lemay Avenue is a two
lane road serving as a north-south arterial one mile east of College Avenue. The intersection is
controlled by a signal with an outdated at-grade crossing immediately south of the intersection.
Significant delays to traffic and disruption to local connectivity when trains operated during the morning
and evening commutes. The delays are compounded when BNSF is using the switching yard located just
1. Grade
Separation and
Realignment of the
Vine/Lemay
Intersection
2. East Vine Drive
Realignment from
College to Lemay
3. East Vine Drive
Realignment from
Lemay to
Timberline
2
east of Lemay Avenue where trains travel back and forth across the crossing for switching operations.
Switching yard activities result in an average of 6 minutes of delay at the existing intersection. Without
action/ improvements, delays will continue and the delay associated with the at-grade crossing will
continue to rise. In 2035, traffic will operate at Level of Service (LOS) of F and train movements will
cause traffic delays of up to 30 minutes at the intersection.
The intersection has averaged thirteen crashes per year between 2010 and 2012 and does not fully
comply with new safety standards for crossing with vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. There are no
sidewalks on East Vine. East Vine has little to no shoulder with no sidewalk. Lemay has dedicated bike
lanes and a detached sidewalk south of the crossing, there is a narrow shoulder and no sidewalks to the
north.
Additional details about the project’s purpose and need are provided in Section 2.2.
1.3 Funding for Transportation
Fort Collins has roadway construction standards and facility performance requirements that link
additional vehicle trips generated from new development to completion of necessary roadway
construction, including identification of funding commitments. This impact fee system requires private
sector improvements including street oversizing requirements. The City’s funding process also includes
traditional municipal tax base mechanisms supplemented by a dedicated local “Building on Basics”
(BOB) ¼ cent sales tax.
In order to appropriately allocate the City’s financial resources, Fort Collins prioritizes planning
improvements and uses a well-established Asset Management system to evaluate transportation
infrastructure conditions to efficiently plan and maximize maintenance investments. At this time, the
proposed improvements are too costly for immediate or short-term funding by the City or State of
Colorado.
City of Fort Collins’ policies create four primary challenges:
1. Careful management and expenditure of available local funding over time
2. Prioritization of local funding expenditures to optimize value and benefits under existing and
future scenarios
3. Application of appropriate funding burdens on the City and land developers
4. Development of compelling arguments necessary to obtain other sources of funding when
development needs and community benefits are beyond the means of local funding sources,
and when development benefits have regional or statewide values and benefits.
Individual land development proposals, whether small, moderate, or large in scale, often face
considerable road capacity development costs to comply with Fort Collins policies. In most instances,
these costs are part of doing business in Fort Collins and necessary for new development to maintain the
quality of life in Fort Collins and to pay their own way for added impacts to the street network.
However, impact fee funds alone cannot always pay for the needed improvements and are not intended
to be used to “fix” city-wide capacity and safety issues.
The City has standard metrics used in determining both the Developer Local Street and City Street
Oversizing Portion. The costs for the Lemay Avenue portion of these improvements are presented in
Section 2.7 of this report and details are provided in Appendix A.
3
Additional local funding could be provided based on the outcome of future elections, but additional
local/federal funding mixes would be needed to get the project built. This may include the use of
bonding since the improvements will likely occur before some local sources would be available (i.e.
development fees, or property tax revenues associated with a TIF). Details are provided in Chapter 4
Project Funding and Finance Analysis.
2. LEMAY REALIGNMENT
2.1 Overview
The realignment of Lemay has been studied for many years as a way to address a variety of issues at the
existing East Vine/Lemay intersection. Chapter 1 characterized the regional and local issues. Chapter 2
further defines the purpose and need for the realignment and describes potential alternatives, phasing
considerations, environmental factors, costs and criteria for comparative evaluation of the alternatives.
2.2 Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed action is to improve existing and future safety, provide additional roadway
capacity, increase property accessibility, address degraded facility conditions and make improvements
to comply with new design standards to facilitate sustainable smart-growth and economic development
objectives at the local, regional and state-wide level. The individual needs for the proposed action are
described and supported in the following discussions. These discussions clarify why the improvement is
needed, and why these improvements are needed now.
Safety
At-grade roadway/railroad crossings create a host of safety issues addressed by a variety of engineering
solutions. The at-grade East Vine/Lemay/Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad intersection has
been in place for many years and does not fully comply with new safety standards involving interaction
with vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians. The physical layout of the intersection, surrounding constraints
and proximity to the Railroad Crossing results in an outdated and substandard design that results in
safety risks.
The safety benefits resulting from the proposed action were evaluated using two methods:
1. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Web Accident Prediction System (WBAPS).
2. Methodology in the Highway Safety Manual, 1st Edition, described in section 4.4.2.13 “Excess
Expected Average Crash Frequency with EB Adjustment.”
The FRA Web Accident Prediction System estimates the number of train-motor vehicle crashes that can
be expected with the current at-grade configuration. The Highway Safety Manual methodology
estimates the number of expected multi-vehicle, single-vehicle, and pedestrian crashes at an
intersection. The two results were summed to identify safety risks and to obtain benefit estimates.
4
The Federal Highway Administration has established crash cost estimates based on crash severity. Those
values are published in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) in 2001 dollars. Using the methodology
described in the HSM to convert to current values the following cost values were used:
Fatal Crash = $5,377,400
Injury Crash = $84,100
Property Damage Only Crash = $9,700
From 2010 through 2012 there was an average of thirteen crashes per year at the Lemay/Vine
intersection.
Capacity
The existing roadway network at and near the existing East Vine/Lemay intersection is constrained by
rail operations at grade crossings operations, and as a result is failing to meet current travel demands
when trains cross Lemay and other north south routes in the area. The existing East Vine/Lemay
intersection Level of Service (LOS) is rated B based on traffic volumes alone, but when freight rail
operations occur, the intersection LOS falls to F.
The Highway Capacity Manual defines LOS for signalized and unsignalized intersections in
relation to overall travel time delay, or delay associated with a particular movement through an
intersection, as follows:
LOS Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
A ≤10 seconds ≤10 seconds
B 10-20 seconds 10-15 seconds
C 20-35 seconds 15-25 seconds
D 35-55 seconds 25-35 seconds
E 55-80 seconds 35-50 seconds
F ≥80 seconds ≥50 seconds
LOS A through D is typically considered acceptable. LOS E and F are typically considered
unacceptable.
The duration of the train movements is based on train lengths, speeds and local operations (switching).
The train speeds are often relatively slow because many trains are switching tracks to access the BNSF
yard where a switching station is located. The switching site is located just east of the intersection.
Switching movements involve slow train speeds, and often require trains to change direction more than
once. The result is blocked north/south roadway travel for extended periods.
The following problems occur when trains block the intersection:
· Local travel behavior and patterns change becoming inefficient adversely impacting other roads
and intersections.
· North/south backups prevent neighborhood accessibility for extended periods.
5
· The street network is slow to recover. Long queues and delays linger for nearly a half hour after
the train departs. This shows up as a near doubling of delay with a train compared to existing
conditions on days when there isn’t a train.
In the future, depending on the pace of the Mountain Vista Area development, congestion at the
existing intersection will reach LOS F within 5 to 10 years based on traffic volumes alone
Further discussion regarding the recurring effects of the freight rail operations on the existing
intersection LOS is described in the Lemay/Vine 235 Traffic Analysis Memorandum (See Appendix B).
Accessibility and Mobility
The traditional grid network in the established areas of Fort Collins does not extend into the project
area. The only north/south roadways connecting completely through this area are US 287 (College
Avenue), Timberline Road, Lemay Avenue and I-25. US Highway 287 is located one mile to the west of
Lemay. Timberline is located over one mile to the east of Lemay. I-25 is almost three miles east of Lemay
Avenue. More specifically, the roadway network and the lack of capacity along Vine Drive and Lemay
Avenue and through the Vine/Lemay/BNSF intersection create long-term gaps in the regional roadway
network.
Accessibility and mobility are important at the East Vine/Lemay intersection because the intersection
provides an important freight rail operation into and out of Fort Collins and distinct opportunities for
future bus transit operations that could connect this growing area to the City’s emerging rapid transit
network. In addition, the intersection provides a primary link for local neighborhood linkage and
regional motorists and dedicated routes for cyclists in all directions. BNSF, bus transit, vehicle, bicycle
and pedestrian accessibility and mobility are currently limited by intersection safety, capacity and
existing roadway configuration and conditions.
An important BNSF railroad storage and switching yard is located approximately 2,000 feet east of the
intersection. Facilities for pedestrians include formal cross walks at the intersection, but informal and
substandard facilities to connect a recently constructed pedestrian pathway located on the west side of
Lemay south of East Vine. No transit operations are in place in the area and no room is available for
stops or stations without improvements.
Two neighborhoods are located immediately adjacent to the Lemay/BNSF intersection. The primary
access to both of these neighborhoods is from Lemay and Vine. Access to both neighborhoods is
frequently constrained by traffic congestion. The desire to keep some level of neighborhood
connectivity through the existing at-grade crossing is acknowledged as being important and should be
considered as the project develops.
Dedicated marked bicycle lanes exist along East Vine and Lemay, but terminate prior to the intersection
in all directions.
Roadway Maintenance, Design Standards and Sustainability
Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue are in a poor state of repair characterized by deficient bridges,
substandard conditions and accelerating deterioration caused by increasing truck and automobile
volumes. Structures along Vine Drive are over 60 years old and the structures along Lemay Avenue are
6
over 45 years old. Two bridges along these roads are functionally obsolete due to inadequate width and
are in a state of rapid deterioration. Neither roadway meets current City standards for their roadway
designations or their existing and projected traffic volumes.
Pavement and bridge management systems are used by the City to determine the optimal time for
surface treatment repairs and reconstruction based on minimizing life cycle costs. The Proposed Action
has been prioritized through an infrastructure assessment and would be managed by the City’s
established system performance management tools. The infrastructure assessment characterizes
investments that will reduce life cycle costs.
The existing at grade Vine/Lemay intersection fails to meet current design or performance standards.
Existing intersection design deficiencies include:
· Level of Service F traffic operations
· Lack of auxiliary lanes
· Small turning radii requiring Jersey barriers for protection
· Lack of adequate facilities for pedestrians
· Inadequate drainage facilities
· Discontinuous bicycle lanes for cyclists
Fort Collins has a strong commitment to sustainable smart growth. The Proposed Action meets Fort
Collins’ sustainability program goals by providing convenient, healthy and sustainable multimodal
transportation options for residents, workers and economically disadvantaged populations (non-drivers,
senior citizens and persons with disabilities), in a manner that coordinates transportation and land use
planning decisions that have been developed with public participation.
If no improvements are made in the near future, the existing sub-standard roadway network will
continue to deteriorate and unmanageable congestion will increase. This delay and the related impacts
will deter private sector investment and the expansion of existing economic enterprises and activity
under both short-term and long-term scenarios. These conditions will make it difficult for the City to
attract new enterprises, and may cause some enterprises to relocate entirely, fueling a cycle of
economic downturn.
2.3 Alternative Descriptions
Five Proposed Action Alternatives are presented in the following discussions.
a. No Action Alternative
The No Action, or No Build, Alternative would maintain existing conditions at the East Vine/Lemay
intersection. Other planned and funded improvements in the roadway network would be completed,
but no changes to the intersection would be made. The No Action Alternative would not achieve the
project’s purpose or address any of the identified needs. The No Action Alternative is often used as a
baseline condition for the other alternatives through the forecast year of 2035. The Project
Development Report simply identifies this possibility, but does not analyze this alternative.
7
b. At-Grade Crossing Alternatives
Existing Intersection Location Upgrades
The Existing Intersection Location Alternative involves making a broad range of improvements at the
existing intersection of East Vine and Lemay. The primary improvements would involve
· Widening East Vine to the north to provide for two lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks in both
directions. The minimum improved cross section would be 115 feet wide (four 12’ lanes, two 8’
bike lanes and two 6’ sidewalks with 10’ landscape buffer and a 19’ center median) per the
Larimer County Urban Street Standards.
· Widening Lemay to the east, west or east and west to provide for two lanes, bike lanes and
sidewalks in both directions. The minimum improved cross section would be the same as Vine.
· The intersection would be increased in size to provide four 12’ right turn lanes and four 12’ left
turn lanes that integrate into the median.
· Railroad crossing safety requirements set by the Colorado Public Utility Commission (PUC)
would include safety gates across all lanes of Lemay on the north and south sides of Lemay and
related improvements for cyclists and pedestrians.
The East Vine and Lemay (4-Lane Arterial Street) roadway cross section are the same (See Figure 2).
Figure 2 East Vine and Lemay (4-Lane Arterial Street) Roadway Cross Section
The footprint of these improvements creates substantial impacts primarily due to the following site
development constraints:
· The proximity of private property and residences on the west side of Lemay north of East Vine
and the proximity of private property and residences on the east of Lemay south of East Vine
requires unavoidable Right of Way (ROW) acquisition and residential displacement in one or
both of the locations. If the residences south of East Vine are protected, then the power lines
8
on the west side of Lemay south of East Vine and the landscape area with the path would be
displaced. If the residences to the north of East Vine are protected, virtually all of the large
trees and natural areas associated with Dry Creek (riparian and wetlands habitat) would be
displaced. A skewed intersection to avoid residential displacement is not feasible given the
presence and proximity of the railroad tracks.
· The proximity of private property and residences on the north side of East Vine and the fixed
location of the railroad and its associated safety buffer on the south side of East Vine requires
displacement of the residences on the north side of East Vine.
· If the required intersection improvements were made, traffic queues would block access points
to the northern or southern neighborhood under normal traffic signal operations. The
frequency and magnitude of this unavoidable effect would be increased when trains are
present.
Based on these substantial and unavoidable impacts, the Existing Intersection Location was not
advanced for further consideration.
Realigned At-Grade Intersection
The Realigned At-Grade Intersection Alternative is presented in Figure 3 on the following page with an
example of an existing Arterial At-Grade Crossing shown in Figure 4. In summary, this alternative:
· Reroutes Lemay east around Andersonville, ties back in to old Lemay south of Conifer Street
upgrades Lemay to 4-Lane Arterial per Master Plan and downgrading Old Vine and Old Lemay to
Local Streets. The final disposition on the ultimate configuration of the existing crossing is not
considered in this analysis and will be determined at a later stage. This applies to all of the build
alternatives.
· Creates the new Vine Road from Old to Lemay through the realigned Lemay to a connector road
south the Old Vine to a 4-lane Arterial Standard (per Transportation Master Plan).
· Closure of Old Vine east of Old Lemay to east of Dry Creek Crossing
· Installs new signalized intersection at New Vine and Lemay intersection.
· Creates collector access road from Old Vine Road to New Vine Road east of Dry Creek Crossing.
· Constructs access to Lemay realignment from Old Lemay and Buckingham Street.
· Constructs access from Alta Vista to New Vine Street at Old Lemay.
· Bike lanes and sidewalks will be installed on Both Vine Street and Lemay Avenue with sidewalks
on the collector access road. The existing Old Vine road can be utilized as a trail access on either
side of the crossing.
· Creates new at-grade crossing to current PUC Standards without having an intersection or
pedestrian crossing of Lemay; however, a lack of PUC approval would prove to be fatal for this
alternative
· Constructs a new box culvert for New Lemay at Dry Creek
Old Lemay Ave
Conifer St
Main St
Buckingham St
E Lincoln Ave
Alta Vista
Andersonville/
San Cristo
DRY CREEK
RAILROAD
CROSSING
PROPOSED
DRY CREEK
BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED AT-GRADE
RAILROAD YARD SWITCH
New Lemay Ave
New Vine Dr
VINE BYPASS
EXISTING
AT-GRADE
CROSSING
PROPOSED
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
*SEE NOTE 1
POSSIBLE PEDESTRIAN/
BIKE CROSSING
10th St
9th St
11th St
Old Vine Dr
Projection:
Data Sources:
NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13
ESRI, City of Ft. Collins, AECOM, US Census
REALIGNMENTALTERNATIVE REALIGNMENT AT GRADE INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE
I
Date Modified:
Image Date:
July 2, 2014
April 2011
717 17th Street Suite 2600
Denver, CO 80202
PROPOSEDALIGNMENT PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
MAPGRADE EXTENT AT-GRADEAT-
Fort Collins
Windsor
Loveland
¦¨§25
«¬14
¤£287
«¬14
0 200 400
Feet
Legend
At-Grade Alignment
Proposed Sidewalk
Limits of Temporary
Improvements
10
Figure 4 Example Arterial At-Grade Crossing – W. Horsetooth Road
c. Grade Separated Alternatives
Realignment/Overpass
The Realigned/Overpass Alternative is presented in Figure 6, on the following page, with a contextual
visualization shown in Figure 5 below. In summary, this alternative:
· Reroutes Lemay east around Andersonville, ties back in to old Lemay south of Conifer Street
upgrading Lemay to 4-Lane Arterial per Master Plan and downgrading Old Vine and Old Lemay
to Local Streets.
· Creates new Vine Road from Old Lemay to realigned Lemay, upgrading New Vine to 4-Lane
Arterial per Transportation Master Plan.
· Installs a new signalized intersection at New Vine and Lemay intersection.
· Constructs access to Lemay realignment from Old Lemay and Buckingham Street.
· Constructs access from Alta Vista to New Vine Street at Old Lemay.
· Creates an overpass structure and fill walls that carry Lemay over the BNSF Tracks and Old Vine
Road.
· Bike Lanes and sidewalks will be installed on Both Vine Street and Lemay Avenue.
· Constructs a new box culvert for New Lemay at Dry Creek.
Figure 5 Realigned/Overpass Visualization Rendering
(
(
(((((((
(
(
(((((((
(
(
Old Lemay Ave
Conifer St
Main St
Buckingham St
E Lincoln Ave
Alta Vista
Andersonville/
San Cristo
EXISTING
AT-GRADE
CROSSING
AIRPORT RUNWAY
DRY CREEK
PROPOSED OVERPASS
PROPOSED
DRY CREEK
BOX CULVERT
New Lemay Ave
New Vine Dr
PROPOSED
FILL WALLS
PROPOSED
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
POTENTIAL FOR OLD VINE DR
TO REMAIN OPEN
(TEMPORARY CONDITION)
*SEE NOTE 1
*SEE NOTE 2
10th St
9th St
11th St
Old Vine Dr
Projection:
Data Sources:
NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13
ESRI, City of Ft. Collins, AECOM, US Census
REALIGNMENTALTERNATIVE REALIGNMENT OVERPASS INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE
I
Date Modified:
Image Date:
July 2, 2014
April 2011
717 17th Street Suite 2600
Denver, CO 80202
PROPOSEDALIGNMENT PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
MAP EXTENT OVERPASS
Fort Collins
Windsor
Loveland
¦¨§25
«¬14
12
Realignment/Underpass
The Realigned/Underpass Alternative is presented in Figure 8 on the following page with an example
underpass project shown in Figure 7 below. In summary, this alternative:
· Reroutes Lemay east around Andersonville, ties back in to old Lemay south of Conifer Street
upgrading Lemay to 4-Lane Arterial per Master Plan and downgrading Old Vine and Old Lemay
to Local Streets.
· Creates new Vine Road from Old Lemay to the realigned Lemay, upgrading New Vine to 4-Lane
Arterial per Transportation Master Plan.
· Install new signalized intersection at New Vine and Lemay intersection.
· Construct access to Lemay realignment from Old Lemay and Buckingham Street
· Construct access from Alta Vista to New Vine Street at Old Lemay.
· Bike Lanes and sidewalks will be installed on Both Vine Street and Lemay Avenue with sidewalks.
· Construct water-tight walls on either side of Lemay due to the high groundwater table. The
underpass cannot gravity drain, so a pump station would also be needed.
· Construction of a siphon to convey the dry creek flows under the Lemay underpass.
· Construct a BNSF bridge and Old Vine bridge over relocated Lemay.
Figure 7 Realigned/Underpass Example – Wadsworth Bypass Arvada, CO
(
(
(
(
(((((((
(
(
((
(((
(
(
((((((((
(
(
(
Old Lemay Ave
Conifer St
Main St
Buckingham St
E Lincoln Ave
Alta Vista
Andersonville/
San Cristo
PROPOSED
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
EXISTING
AT-GRADE
CROSSING
DRY CREEK
PROPOSED
RAILROAD
PROPOSED SIPHON
FOR DRY CREEK
New Lemay Ave
New Vine Dr
PROPOSED
CUT WALLS
POTENTIAL OLD
VINE BRIDGE
(TEMPORARY CONDITION)
*SEE NOTE 1
*SEE NOTE 2
10th St
9th St
11th St
Old Vine Dr
Projection:
Data Sources:
NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13
ESRI, City of Ft. Collins, AECOM, US Census
REALIGNMENTALTERNATIVE REALIGNMENT UNDERPASS INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE
I
Date Modified:
Image Date:
July 1, 2014
April 2011
717 17th Street Suite 2600
Denver, CO 80202
PROPOSEDALIGNMENT PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
14
2.4 Interim Improvements and Phasing
The following discussion addresses how the Build Alternatives could be constructed in phases. Each
discussion describes feasible interim improvement sequences and characterizes the basic benefits of
phased implementation.
Each Build Alternative could benefit from reduced freight rail operations or reduced delay from slow
moving trains where the speeds are limited by the nearby location and operations of the BNSF railroad
switching yard. Alternatives that would entirely relocate the Rail Alignment are not considered feasible
and/or would be well beyond the scope of this analysis. However, alternatives that would reduce the
effects of the train crossings by reducing travel delays and safety concerns for motorists, cyclists and
pedestrians may be feasible. The primary possibility would be to work with BNSF to relocate the
switching yard to a location beyond the Mountain Vista subarea plan boundaries. This phasing option is
discussed first.
Switching Yard Relocation: Reduced Delay from Slow Moving Trains
Relocation of the BNSF switching yard to another location well away from the Vine/Lemay intersection
would allow trains to pass through the area without speed reductions associated with switching yard
operations. This change would substantially reduce traffic delays along Lemay north and south of East
Vine. The public cost to relocate the switching station relocation would be substantial and could cost
from between $10 million to $15 million dollars depending on the availability of land and yard
development costs.
Realigned At-Grade Intersection
The Realigned At-Grade Intersection in itself could be an interim phase prior to Grade Separation. The
construction activities for the Realigned At-Grade Intersection would require specific coordination
activities with the railroad operations. The coordination activities primarily involve limiting impacts to
railroad operations and construction of the at-grade crossing near the railroad tracks. Installation of
track panels will be accomplished during limited windows, allowing train operations to continue. A
shoe-fly is not likely a feasible or needed approach as the switch to the yard is immediately east of the
crossing. Phasing and constructability is feasible for the at-grade intersection.
Realigned/Overpass
The Realigned/Overpass design could be accomplished in phases that involve construction of the
Realigned At-Grade Intersection with our without relocation of the railroad switching station. These
interim improvements could defer construction of the overpass.
When this alternative is constructed, the work will occur in phases to address site constraints. The
constraints primarily involve railroad operations and construction of the overpass. Construction of the
sub structure and piers will be out of BNSF ROW, but placing of the girders will need to be coordinated
and conducted to limit impacts to railroad operations. Full closure of the line is not expected. Phasing
and constructability is feasible for the Realigned/Overpass.
15
Realigned/Underpass
The Realigned/Underpass design could be accomplished in phases that involve construction of the
Realigned At-Grade Intersection with our without relocation of the railroad switching station. These
interim improvements could defer construction of the underpass.
When this alternative is constructed, the phasing of the underpass bridges will present substantial
challenges. Construction of the roadway bridge will require full closure of Old Vine. Construction of the
BNSF bridge may be cost prohibitive as the line will need to stay in operation. A shoe-fly will require
nearly 1500 feet of length on either side of the crossing. This would shut down the existing at-grade
crossing of Lemay and impact use of the storage yard. Additionally the shoe fly would need to be 25
feet from the mainline and there is not enough room without impacting Old Vine or the residents of
Andersonville. Alternative approaches to build the bridge in-situ are costly and time intensive given the
high water table. Phasing and constructability could be a fatal flaw for the Realigned/Underpass.
2.5 Transportation Performance Analysis
Safety
The Realigned at-Grade Intersection alternative would provide better at grade pedestrian and bicycle
crossings at the new intersection. The new intersection would improve vehicle safety by meeting
railroad/road intersection design requirements. By separating the Vine/Lemay intersection from the
railroad crossing, the effects of overlapping conflicts and complexity that exists at the existing
intersection and railroad crossing would be significantly reduced/eliminated. Maintaining an existing at-
grade crossing in any configuration, regardless of mode, will still introduce conflicts that may not be
deemed acceptable by regulatory agencies or the railroad.
The Realigned/Overpass Alternative would provide a safer grade separated route for pedestrians and
cyclists crossing the railroad. The Realigned/Overpass Alternative is estimated to reduce the number of
crashes by 52 percent on an annual basis resulting in an overall safety savings of $174,572 per year or
4.35 million 2013 present value dollars.
The Realigned/Underpass Alternative would have the same safety benefits as the Realigned/Overpass
Alternative, but would add the potential flood risk to access and safety if measures to pump water from
the low point of the underpass were inoperable or ineffective during a flood event.
Capacity
As described in the Lemay/Vine 2035 Traffic Analysis Memorandum dated March 4, 2014 (Appendix B)
and summarized in Table 1, the capacity benefits of the At Grade Alternative, without consideration of
railroad operations, is substantial.
16
Table 1 Level of Service Conditions under No Build and At Grade Alternative Conditions (2035 -
without Consideration of Railroad Operations)
PRIMARY
INTERSECTION
MOVEMENT
2035
NO BUILD
ALTERNATIVE
2035
AT GRADE BUILD
ALTERNATIVE
Northbound F A
Southbound F A
Eastbound F D
Westbound D D
OVERALL F B
Note:
· The year when LOS E is reached is dependent on when development occurs. With committed (approved but not
built) developments, this threshold may be reached within 5 to 10 years.
The benefits of introducing the overpass and underpass alternatives are not as easily measured by the
same intersection level-of-service metrics. Therefore, a brief analysis was conducted to measure the
system effects that are caused by train crossing movements. Two train crossing scenarios were
considered as follows:
Scenario 1-Thru Train Movement: This represents delays associated with a train crossing without using
the switching yard resulting in a 3-minute train crossing time. This time is based on observations at
other train crossing locations in the City including the Drake railroad crossing.
Scenario 2- Switching Train Movements: This represents delays associated with a train crossing that
uses the switching yard resulting in a 6-minute train crossing time. This time was observed at the
existing Vine/Lemay intersection.
Table 2 illustrates changes in system total delay, the number of vehicle trips disrupted and the system
delay involved per vehicle using these scenarios. For additional details, refer to Appendix C.
17
Table 2 System Performance at PM Peak Hour under Various Scenarios
Existing
Conditions
No Trains
Existing
Conditions
Switching
Train
Movement
(Scenario 2)
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
No Trains
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
Thru Train
Movement
(Scenario 1)
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
Switching Train
Movement
(Scenario 2)
Total Delay
(Hours)
84.9 153.2 200.4 203.4 233.3
Vehicle-
Trips
6,560 6,489 9,539 9,541 9,537
Seconds
Per Vehicle
Trip
46.6 85.0 75.6 76.7 88.1
Notes:
· Train blockage times were based on recent data from traffic signal preemption logs.
· 55 records were reviewed presenting an average duration train blockage of 6.1 minutes. This duration was used to
represent the average time of a blockage associated with switching station impacts.
· 39 records were reviewed for locations away from the switching station. These records presented an average train
blockage of 3.2 minutes. This duration was used to represent average time of blockage associated with crossings away
from the switching station.
· Results are based on 30 runs of each scenario using the CORSIM model
· Roadway network impacts elsewhere were not identified.
· Existing conditions include the intersections of Lemay/Mulberry, Lemay/Magnolia, Lemay/Lincoln and Lemay/Vine
(including RR delay). 2035 scenarios include the same intersections plus the delay at the railroad crossing which is no
longer adjacent to the Lemay/Vine intersection.
· At Grade Alternative effects from the train are reduced as a result of added storage capacity i.e. 4-lanes on Lemay rather
than just two lanes at the tracks and at adjacent intersections.
· A total delay cost from the trains would require converting the data from the p.m. peak hour to a daily estimate.
In summary:
· The new Vine/Lemay at-grade intersection that would be constructed north of the railroad
crossing provides adequate capacity in the year 2035 and beyond, however the effects of train
crossing at old Vine Avenue would remain a concern.
· The existing street network system is slow to recover from a train crossing event where the train
18
Accessibility and Mobility
The benefits of moving the intersection to the east with the Realigned At-Grade Intersection Alternative
would shift queues to locations that would eliminate neighborhood accessibility and mobility issues
The Realigned/Overpass and Realigned/Underpass Alternatives:
· Substantially enhance system interconnectivity and substantially reduce road and railroad delay.
· Improve access and mobility for all travel modes, local residents and motorists providing long-
term, efficient access and mobility connecting Downtown Fort Collins, other community
commercial districts, employment centers and other community resources while removing a
constraint to future transit in the planning area.
· Create local streets and pedestrian conditions near the access points to the two nearby
neighborhoods by relocating two major arterials providing the opportunity to maintain the local
connectivity. Grade separation would improve congestion and provide better mobility for
cyclists.
Roadway Maintenance and Design Standards
All of the Build alternatives would be designed and constructed to meet applicable roadway
maintenance and design standards. The Build Alternatives would replace existing pavements with 30-
year design life pavement. The inadequate bridges would be replaced with structures with a design life
of 75 years. The new infrastructure will allow safe travel for automobiles, trucks, buses, cyclists and
pedestrians while meeting estimated traffic demands through 2035.
2.6 Environmental Analysis: Key Impact Issues
The study area presents various environmental issues for consideration in relation to the three Build
Alternatives. The following discussion characterizes these issues and potential effects. Figure 9
presents a map of the key environmental considerations.
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
!
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! !
!
!
! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! !
! !
! !
!
! ! !
! ! !
! !
! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! !
N Lemay Ave
Conifer St
Main St
Buckingham St
E Lincoln Ave
Alta Vista
Andersonville/
San Cristo
CULTURAL SITE
5LR10638
PARK
ROMERO HOUSE & PARK
(MUSEO DE LAS COLONIAS)
AIRPORT RUNWAY
DRY CREEK
CITY OF GREELEY BURIED PIPELINE
10th St
9th St
11th St
E Vine Dr
BIKE LANE ENDS
Projection:
Data Sources:
NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13
ESRI, City of Ft. Collins, AECOM, US Census, USFWS, NRHP,
FEMA
LEMAYREALIGNMENT LEMAY AVENUE REALIGNMENT
I
Date Modified:
Image Date:
May 8, 2014
April 2011
717 17th Street Suite 2600
Denver, CO 80202
EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL
20
Private Property Acquisition for Public Right of Way, Land Use Compatibility, Environmental Justice
The study area is composed of private property and City owned right of way for the local public street
network. Agricultural, residential, and industrial land uses are present the study area. A church is
located along Lemay at San Cristo Street. Residences include single family homes and some mobile
homes.
The two neighborhoods in the study area are occupied primarily by Hispanic people and people with
lower than average household incomes relative to other neighborhoods within the City of Fort Collins.
The percentage of Hispanics in these neighborhoods exceeds 50 percent.
The existing right of way with along East Vine and Lemay (9th Street and Lindenmeier Road) is
approximately 60 feet and 70 feet, respectively, in the vicinity of the East Vine/Lemay intersection.
Additional right of way would be needed to widen or realign either road. Realigning East Vine and
Lemay would require acquisition of active farmland. A formal analysis of the loss of agricultural land
would be needed. The overpass could present the potential for privacy effects by creating views of
gardens and residential windows from the elevated roadway.
Aviation clear zone issues should be considered in relation to the private airport located southeast of
the Andersonville/San Cristo neighborhood. Small airplanes and helicopters use or have used this
airfield. Airplane takeoffs and/or landings would occur over the Lemay realignment. The height of the
anticipated overpass and related lighting fixtures should be considered if potential aviation issues arise.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths and Lanes
A landscaped pedestrian path is located along the west side of Lemay south of East Vine. This path was
created with development of an industrial property located west of San Cristo Street. Signed bicycle
lanes are provided in all four directions from the East Vine/Lemay intersection. However, lane markings
providing adequate room for cyclists end near the intersection. Widening of East Vine and Lemay along
their existing alignments would require a future cross section of each roadway that provides for striped
bicycle lanes.
Parks and Recreation Areas
Two parks are present in the study area. Alta Vista Park is centrally located within the Alta Vista
neighborhood. Dry Creek flows though this park. Romero Park is centrally located in the
Andersonville/San Cristo neighborhood near the Romero/10th Street intersection. Direct effects on
these parks are not anticipated.
Air Pollutant Emissions, Dust and Odor
Existing motor vehicle emissions along East Vine and Lemay likely do not and probably would not in the
future create pollutant concentrations in excess of the one-hour and eight-hour limits for carbon
monoxide.
Construction period particulate matter (windblown dust) and construction equipment and vehicle
exhaust emissions and odors could create nuisances at residences located within close proximity to
21
earthmoving, paving and other construction operations. These effects would be more pronounced for
construction along East Vine and Lemay, but would occur with the Lemay realignment despite larger
distances between the sources and receptors.
Noise
Noise levels at existing residential receptors at the existing intersection are relatively high due to motor
vehicle volumes and railroad operations. Increasing vehicle volumes and speeds at peak hour in the
future will increase noise levels.
Construction and post-construction activity would create higher noise levels at existing residential
receptors along East Vine and Lemay. Based on future traffic volumes and vehicle speeds approaching
and departing from the controlled intersection, the overall noise levels may approach applicable
standards and reach levels that require mitigation analysis at immediately adjacent residences.
Mitigation such as noise walls may be ineffective due to frequent breaks in the walls allowing for private
property access.
Noise from the realignment options for Lemay would be similar during the construction period. Long-
term motor vehicle noise at residences from the underpass design would less than those associated
with the at-grade and overpass option.
A noise analysis will be needed.
Visual Quality/Aesthetics
Visual quality and aesthetics is an important issue for the alternatives. A wider cross section along East
Vine and Lemay would further urbanize the rural setting of the two existing neighborhoods by adding
more pavement, reducing setbacks, and by displacing native trees and natural landscapes.
The underpass and overpass would also urbanize the setting. The overpass would add a new and
substantial visual element to the landscape. The underpass would be less visible from nearby vantage
points.
Water Resources and Wetlands
Dry Creek, a small surface water channel, is located in the study area. This channel provides habitat
values for invasive Russian olive trees and other plant species. A small portion of this channel provides
riparian habitat and may include wetlands and/or waters of the U.S. that are regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Shallow groundwater is likely present in the study area, but the details within the study area are not
fully defined.
Improvements to East Vine would not impact water resources, but widening of Lemay north of East Vine
would impact the portion of the existing drainage channel associated with riparian habitat and possibly
wetlands.
The overpass would likely disrupt the portion of the channel that does not provide much habitat value.
22
The underpass would likely encounter shallow groundwater and would require special facilities to
address drainage and flooding standards.
Biological Resources
Most of the study area is currently developed. Agricultural, residential and industrial activities and
facilities limit habitat values. Small undeveloped areas, fallow agricultural land and large trees provide
some habitat value. The presence and absence of state and federally protected species and critical
habitat values have not been checked, but substantial roadway improvement limitations of this type are
not anticipated. However, Prairie dogs have established themselves in the open land on the west side
of Lemay south of East Vine.
Chapter 6 of the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Wildlife Management Guidelines provides prairie dog
management guidelines. Widening of Lemay south of East Vine would have an incidental displacement
effect on the existing colony in this location. Formal procedures outlined in the prairie dog
management guidelines would be implemented to address this effect. The other alternatives are not
expected to impact prairie dogs. All prairie dog findings would need to be checked prior to actual
construction.
Migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Surveys would be needed prior to
construction to protect migratory birds, especially in potential nesting areas.
Geology and Soils
The geology and soil conditions within the study area do not present substantial design or construction
constraints. Typical geotechnical analysis and engineering design requirements for the overpass and
underpass designs would be expected to resolve any limitations presented by existing geology and soil
conditions.
Cultural Resources
The Andersonville/San Cristo and Alta Vista neighborhoods and individual properties within them have
historical significance relative to City of Fort Collins and National Register of Historic Places criteria.
Although neither neighborhood is a designated historic district, numerous properties within them
contribute toward that status, and two properties are eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places.
5LR10638 741 Lindenmeier Road
5LR10122 425 Tenth Street, Romero House, Museo del las Tres Colonias
See Figure 9, Refer to Appendix D for additional information.
No direct effects on either of the two properties eligible for listing would be expected. Fewer and less
involved indirect effects from the realignment of Lemay would be expected due to the buffer distance
between the new alignment and the neighborhoods. Additional consultation and coordination with the
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) will be needed.
23
Hazardous Materials
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has not been prepared. Based on basic site reconnaissance,
the potential for hazardous materials to be present in soils and groundwater in the study area exists, but
the probability of substantial issues that constrain the design or construction of alternatives due to
health and safety risks or remediation costs is low. Septic tank leach field issues may be present where
excavation is needed near residences.
Public Utilities and Services
A network of public utilities is present in the study area See Figure 9). High voltage overhead power
lines are present along a portion of Lemay south of East Vine. Lower voltage overhead lines service
both neighborhoods. Water lines are present within the rights of way for East Vine and Lemay to serve
both neighborhoods. A pipeline alignment constructed about 2009 is present in the study area. The
alignment is shown in the base aerial used for Figure 9.
2.7 Cost Opinions
Probable cost opinions were developed for the alternatives and are shown in Appendix A. The total
project costs include all of the construction costs, including mobilization and force accounts, Right-of-
way acquisition, Project development, formalizing downgraded segments of Vine and Lemay to local
Streets, and construction management and inspection fees.
Table 3 identifies the overall costs and the primary items that determine the project costs.
Table 3 Build Alternative Total Project Cost Opinions
Relocated Build
Alternative
Full Development
Costs (2014 Dollars)
Primary Drivers of Cost
At-Grade $24 to $25 Million* · Likely Relocation of BNSF Yard $10M **
· Roadway Improvements
· Dry Creek Box Culvert
· Railroad Crossing Equipment
· Uncertainty in PUC process
Overpass $27 to $28 Million · Roadway Improvements
· Dry Creek Box Culvert
· Approach Fill and Walls
· Bridge over BNSF and Old Vine
Underpass $41 to $42 Million · Roadway Improvement
· Dry Creek Siphon Structure
· Water-tight Cut Walls for Underpass
· Railroad Bridge Construction on Active Line
· Old Vine Bridge
· Pump Station for Underpass Drainage
*(Approximately $1.6 Million would involve temporary construction –to be removed if a grade
separation was constructed as a later phase)
** Costs are planning level value, additional detail analysis is needed
Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs
24
Right of Way acquisition costs were based on recent property transfers in the project vicinity. The
estimate for this project area included consideration of a variety of factors. Key issues for cost
estimating included existing development dedications, likelihood of future development along the new
alignments and current condition of the property.
Project Development Costs
Project development costs were estimated at 12.5% of the estimate construction cost. These costs
include additional early project planning, environmental processes and permits, and preliminary and
final design
Project Expenditures over Time
The project expenditures would occur in three phases over what would likely be a five year period with
planning and right of way acquisition occurring in the first year, final design in the second year, and two
to three years of construction beginning in the third year. The graph presented in Figure 10 illustrates
anticipated expenditures for the overpass alternative as an example for the five year period. This
assumes a traditional design, bid, build delivery method and assuming no fiscal escalation. Alternative
delivery methods, such as design-build, are not being considered at this time.
Figure 10 Project Development Anticipated Expenditures, S-Curve
25
2.8 Risk Analysis
The Proposed Action presents a variety of design, construction and regulatory risks. The follow
discussion clarifies those risks at this point in the project development process.
Design and Construction Risks
Design risks include the possibility that early, conceptual layouts have flaws that necessitate costly or
time consuming resolution efforts. One example of a design risk that may be problematic for the
underpass alternative is the need for stormwater management under normal conditions and flood
conditions. Normal conditions may necessitate costly equipment to keep the underpass dry, passable
and safe, especially in winter. Flood conditions, likely to drive design considerations, may generate
water conveyance and disposal problems that add to project construction and long-term operation and
maintenance costs.
Construction risks include labor and material rate increases tied to market demand as the national and
regional economies recovery, placing higher demands on both. This could escalate project budget
estimates and result in project completion delays. Additional risks during construction could also
involve encountering site issues such as high groundwater. This risk would be greatest for the
underpass alternative.
Standard measures can be applied to address the anticipated design and construction risks.
Public Utility Commission Risks
The Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, Public Utility Commission (PUC) mission is to “serve
the public interest by effectively regulating utilities and facilities so that the people of Colorado receive
safe, reliable, and reasonably-priced services consistent with the economic, environmental and social
values of our state.” One of the PUC’s responsibilities is to regulate railroad safety. State jurisdiction
over railroad safety is extremely broad, however most areas have been preempted by the federal
government. The PUC retains primary jurisdiction over all public highway-rail crossings, including
opening, closing, upgrading, overpasses or underpasses, and the allocation of costs. All economic
jurisdiction over railroads that are part of the national railroad system come under the jurisdiction of the
Surface Transportation Board.
In accordance with 49 CFR Part 659 and CRS 40-18, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission has
responsibility for the oversight of the safety and security of rail fixed guideway (RFG) systems within the
state. While the authority of the Federal Regulations extends to RFG systems which have received or are
receiving federal, the Colorado Statute grants this authority to any RFG system operating within the
state, whether receiving federal funds or not.
26
The project development risks of the alternatives include potential time, delays and costs associated
with:
· Design that complies applicable requirements
· Details needed to be developed for submittal the PUC
· Negotiations and supplements necessary to obtain all of the necessary PUC approvals
· Conditions associated with PUC approvals
· The possibility that the PUC will deny approval to a desired alternative, especially creating a
new at-grade crossing given vehicle, pedestrian and cycling conditions expected in year 2035.
These risks can be managed through the use of experienced designers familiar with PUC requirements
and demonstrating a successful record of approvals. However, recent actions by the PUC have shown a
desire to grade separate train and arterial road crossings.
Railroad Risks
Roadway projects that relate to the interests of railroads experience various risks in addition to those
associated with PUC risks. Railroads are private sector entities unlike public agencies and utilities.
Railroads are not motivated to improve roadway operations and can solely focus on their own
operational requirements.
Roadway projects that require physical changes to railroad tracks such as modifications at road/railroad
crossings must obtain approval from railroad owner/operators. In addition, any work that occurs within
or near their right of way having any direct or indirect effect on safety or operations requires railroad
owner/operator approval. Each of the alternatives involves negotiations with BNSF and their final
approval before the City can proceed, including discussions on options for keeping the existing at-grade
crossing open to limited access.
These risks can be managed through the use of experienced designers familiar with BNSF safety and
operation needs, and demonstrating a successful record of negotiations with BNSF.
Environmental Risks
The environmental evaluation, impact documentation and permitting processes for the Proposed Action
present budget and schedule risks linked to known and unknown considerations. The environmental
issues are described in Section 2.6. The environmental screening process for the alternatives is
described in Section 2.9. The environmental impact documentation process is described along with
other project development issues in Chapter 3.
The key environmental issues that present risks are manageable, but include:
· Noise impacts including a formal noise analysis and the potential for mitigation.
· Aesthetics and views into backyards and windows (privacy and visual quality issues).
· Flooding, stormwater management and drainage facilities
· Wetlands and migratory birds
27
· Cultural resources, indirect effects on two neighborhoods with historic elements
· Public controversy over potential effects and differences between the alternatives
The alternative screening, NEPA compliance and permitting processes each present risks. The screening
process may be able to reduce the number of alternatives that need to be considered, but it may also
introduce new alternatives or options that require evaluation. Various permits will be required. These
permits, sensitive issues and seasonal restrictions (migratory bird nesting) may generate delays and/or
added project costs.
These risks can be managed through the use of experienced NEPA consultants familiar with applicable
NEPA process management strategies, including the use of upfront commitments to avoid, minimize and
mitigate effects with the design that are subject to review under NEPA.
2.9 Alternative Comparison
Comparison of the Alternatives requires the development and use of evaluation criteria based on the
project’s purpose and need statements and the City of Fort Collins’ “Triple Bottom Line” considerations.
The purpose and need for the Proposed Action are described in Section 2.2. The Triple Bottom Line
considerations involve sustainability principles and the need to balance social, economic and
environmental impacts and outcomes.
A screening process typically involves different levels of comparison. Two levels of comparison are
recommended for this project.
1. Feasibility-Level Criteria: Broad considerations and fatal-flaws
2. Concept-Level Criteria: Key considerations for comparative analysis
The following criteria provide a framework for future evaluation of the alternatives. At this stage, the
criteria are presented as a set of primary qualitative and quantitative questions.
Feasibility-Level Criteria: Broad Considerations and Fatal-Flaws
The following Yes/No questions establish whether an alternative should be considered fatally flawed by
not meeting fundamental project requirements. If an alternative subjected to these questions
generates a yes answer to all of these questions, it should move forward for evaluation under the
Concept-Level Criteria.
1. Does the alternative fully address motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian safety concerns?
2. Does the alternative meet applicable safety requirements for railroad operations?
3. Does the alternative provide adequate safety for residences in close proximity to adjacent
roadways and the railroad?
4. Does the alternative address future capacity needs for an extended period (interim to 2035)?
5. Does the alternative address future community and local area accessibility and mobility needs?
6. Does the alternative adequately address existing neighborhood accessibility problems caused by
traffic queues?
7. Does the alternative cause significant unavoidable environmental effects?
- Require residential displacement that would substantially alter the character of existing
neighborhoods?
28
- Adversely impact cultural resources (historic buildings or historic districts)?
- Adversely impact community facilities and/or neighborhood cohesion?
- Other?
Concept-Level Criteria: Key Considerations for Comparative Analysis
The following Good/Fair/Poor questions allow for a qualitative assessment of the relative merits of an
alternative such that especially good alternatives are advanced and especially poor alternatives are
eliminated from further, more detailed evaluation.
1. How well does the alternative address:
- Motor vehicle and railroad conflicts?
- Bicycle routes and cyclists needs for safe travel through the intersection?
- Pedestrian routes and their need for safe travel through the intersection?
- Railroad travel speeds?
- Motor vehicle Level of Service in 2035?
- Community mobility?
- Neighborhood access?
2. How effectively are environmental effects of the alternatives avoided or minimized:
- Private Property Acquisition for Public Right of Way?
- Land Use Compatibility?
- Environmental Justice?
- Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths and Lanes?
- Parks and Recreation Areas?
- Noise?
- Visual Quality/Aesthetics?
- Water Resources, Flooding and Drainage?
- Biological Resources and Wetlands?
- Geology and Soils?
- Cultural Resources?
- Hazardous Materials?
- Public Utilities and Services?
- Other?
3. How effective is the project:
- Constructability?
- Cost?
- Intersection Performance (Delay) 2035?
The next phase of the project development process will include refining the alternatives and a full
evaluation of them using the defined criteria. Table 4 and Table 5 present an initial evaluation of
selected evaluation criteria.
29
Table 4 Feasibility-Level Criteria: Selected Broad Considerations and Fatal-Flaws (Yes/No)
SCREENING QUESTION/ ALTERNATIVE Railroad
Switching
Station
Relocation
Realignment
At-Grade Intersection
Realignment
Overpass
Realignment
Underpass
Does the alternative fully address
motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian
safety concerns?
No Yes Yes Yes
Does the alternative meet applicable
safety requirements for railroad
operations?
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Does the alternative provide adequate
safety for residences in close proximity
to adjacent roadways and the railroad?
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Does the alternative address future
capacity needs for an extended period
(interim to 2035)?
No No Yes Yes
Does the alternative address future
community and local area accessibility
and mobility needs?
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Does the alternative adequately
address existing neighborhood
accessibility problems caused by traffic
queues?
No Yes Yes Yes
Does the alternative avoid significant
unavoidable environmental effects?
Require residential displacement that
would substantially alter the character of
existing neighborhoods?
Adversely impact cultural resources
(historic buildings or historic districts)?
Adversely impact community facilities
and/or neighborhood cohesion?
Other?
Yes Yes Yes Yes
The key issues are:
· The switching yard relocation and the at grade alternative do not provide adequate capacity in
2035.
· The switching yard relocation does not address safety or neighborhood access
· The underpass has drainage, high water table, cost, constructability and risk issues relative to
the overpass alternative.
30
Table 5 Concept-Level Criteria: Selected Considerations for Comparative Analysis (Good/Fair/Poor)
SCREENING QUESTION/ ALTERNATIVE Railroad
Switching Station
Relocation
Realignment
At-Grade Intersection
Realignment
Overpass
Realignment
Underpass
How well does the alternative address:
Motor vehicle and railroad conflicts? Fair Fair Good Good
Bicycle routes and cyclists needs for safe
travel through the intersection?
Fair Fair Good Good
Pedestrian routes and their need for safe
travel through the intersection?
Fair Fair Good Good
Railroad travel speeds? Fair Fair Good Good
Motor vehicle Level of Service in 2035? Poor Fair Good Good
Community mobility? Fair Good Good Good
Neighborhood access? Fair Good Good Good
How effectively are environmental
effects of the alternatives avoided
or minimized:
Private Property Acquisition for Public
Right of Way
Good Fair Fair Fair
Land Use Compatibility Fair Good Fair Good
Environmental Justice? Fair Good Fair Good
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths and
Lanes?
Poor Good Good Good
Parks and Recreation Areas? Good Good Good Good
Noise? Fair Fair Fair Good
Visual Quality/Aesthetics? Good Good Fair Good
Water Resources, Flooding, Drainage Good Good Good Poor
Biological Resources/Wetlands? Good Fair Fair Fair
Geology and Soils? Good Good Good Fair
Cultural Resources? Fair Good Fair Good
Hazardous Materials? Good Good Good Fair
Public Utilities and Services? Good Good Good Good
How effective is the project:
Cost? TBD Good Fair Poor
Constructability and Risks? Fair Poor Good Poor
Intersection Performance (Delay)
2035?
Poor Fair Good Good
31
Key Alternatives Benefits, Risks and Decision Drivers
The Realigned At-Grade Alternative:
• Will likely face higher PUC and Railroad approval risks as compared to the grade separated
alternatives due to Lemay Avenue’s designation as an Arterial roadway.
• Can manage train crossing delays to a comparable level as the grade separated options;
however, to achieve this, delays must get down to a three-minute train crossing. The only way
to achieve this is to relocate of the BNSF Yard, at a significant cost to the City of Fort Collins,
nearly doubling the cost of constructing the At-Grade Alternative improvements.
The Realigned/Overpass and Realigned/Underpass Alternatives:
• Fully removes the conflicts and delays associated with the train crossing. Both the PUC and
BNSF would find these alternatives safer and a low risk once completed
• Improves mobility for all travel modes by providing efficient access from northeast Fort Collins
to Downtowns, other commercial districts, employment centers, and community resources
while also removing a known constraint to future bus transit in the region.
• Improves local street and pedestrian conditions near the access points to the two nearby
neighborhoods by relocating two major arterials and devolving the existing roads to local
streets.
• The underpass alternative has a high ground water table due to the close proximity to Dry
Creek; resulting in complex construction. Additionally, constructing the new BNSF bridge will be
challenging while keeping the tracks operational (there is no viable shoe-fly option). These
conditions result in high risk and expensive costs for construction, but do not create approval
risks.
• The overpass option can be constructed over the existing tracks with limited impacts to BNSF
operations using conventional construction techniques. These conditions result in low risk yet
moderate costs for construct; however the bridge would be nearly 30 feet in the air and would
require walls in some locations creating visual impacts for the adjacent neighborhood.
32
3. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND SCHEDULE
3.1 Project Development Process
The City of Fort Collins project development process typically involves the following steps:
• Infrastructure Needs Assessment
Existing Conditions
Streetscape Requirements
Bicycle and Transit Mobility Needs
Traffic
Safety
Traffic Operations
Parking
• Public Input
• Development and Evaluation of Alternatives (Environmental Analysis, Compliance & Permitting)
• Selection of Preferred Alternative
• Preliminary Design: Evaluation of Design Options and Phasing/Prioritization, 30% Complete
Plans
• Recommended Implementation Strategy
• Final Design/Construction
This Project Development Report is associated with the Infrastructure Needs Assessment step.
3.2 Preliminary Design Process
The Preliminary Design process involves refinement of conceptual designs, evaluation of alternatives
and design options, and the development of initial phasing and prioritization plans. The preliminary
design process is completed with delivery of 30% Complete Plans. The evaluation of alternatives
frequently involves environmental clearance, compliance and documentation steps, including some
environment permitting steps.
Some environmental permits and follow-up compliance occurs during the Final Design process. When
federal facilities, resources, and/or decisions are required for project implementation, the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) applies. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administers
NEPA with support from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and local governments.
The applicable NEPA, environmental clearance and permit processes are described in Section 3.3.
Details about the NEPA process are available in CDOT’s NEPA Manual:
http://www.coloradodot.info/programs/environmental/nepa-program/nepa-manual
3.3 Environmental Process
NEPA Requirements and Documentation
As a result of the interagency partnerships forged during the project planning process and context-
sensitive planning and design efforts, the City anticipates the applicable environmental compliance
processes for the alternative will be straight forward. If the project obtains federal funding, the City
33
anticipates that a NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CatEx) process will be appropriate.
A CatEx may be possible after defining efforts to avoid, minimize and mitigate potential effects with
design solutions and applicant commitments and coordinating with FHWA, CDOT Region 4
environmental staff and regulatory agencies.
A CatEx requires that the proposed action:
· Does not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area
· Does not require the relocation of significant numbers of people
· Does not have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other
resource
· Does not involve significant air, noise or water quality impacts
· Does not have significant impacts on travel patterns
· Does not otherwise, either individually or cumulatively, have any significant environmental
impacts, and are, therefore, excluded from the requirement to prepare an EA or EIS
In additional to these requirements, the proposed action should be well understood and not present
substantial public controversy.
Based on the CDOT NEPA Manual, the overpass and underpass options may qualify for a “Non-
Programmatic” Cat Ex as follows:
D3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade
separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings
A Non-Programmatic CatEx requires CDOT and FHWA approval. CDOT and FHWA have agreed on
certain actions that are typically appropriate for this approach. These project types must meet the
criteria for a CatEx in the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (CEQ, 40 CFR § 1508.4) and
the evaluation criteria specified in Part A of the regulation (FHWA, 23 CFR § 771.117).
Prior to initiating a Non-Programmatic CatEx project, the FHWA Non-Programmatic Categorical
Exclusion Environmental Review Summary form must be reviewed. If any of the following questions,
which are included on page one of the form, can be answered in the positive, further investigation will
be required in order to determine if a Non-Programmatic CatEx is appropriate for the project:
· If an Individual Clean Water Act Section 404 permit is required, does the USACE object to a
CatEx class of environmental document?
· If the project adversely affects endangered or threatened species and/or their critical habitat,
does the US Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) object to the CatEx class
of environmental document?
Neither of these issues presents a process constraint for the overpass of underpass alternatives.
However, the three items in bold text below should be evaluated carefully. The other issues should not
present a process constraint.
34
· If a DOT letter of consent is required for easement, does the federal land management agency
have unresolved issues with the environmental analysis?
· Is there any substantial controversy on environmental grounds?
· In addition, if any of the following questions, which are also included on page one of the FHWA
Non-Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Environmental Review Summary form, can be
answered in the positive and cannot be other resolved by amending the planned action, the
project should not be approved as a Non-Programmatic CatEx:
· Are significant environmental impacts expected?
· Are there any inconsistencies with the federal, state, or local law, requirement or administration
determination relating to the environmental aspects of the action expected?
· Does this project add additional capacity, as defined by NFRMPO as regionally significant?
· Is there substantial construction on a new alignment?
· Will the project significantly change traffic patterns?
· Are there significant impacts expected to properties protected by Section 4(f) of the US DOT Act
or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act?
· Is the right-of-way required significant because of its: size, location, use, or relationship to
remaining property and abutting properties?
· Is there a substantial noise increase (greater than 10 A-weighted decibels [dBA]) or noise levels
greater than allowable by CDOT guidelines and mitigation is not reasonable and feasible?
The additional capacity and its regional significance can be addressed by citing the purpose of the
improvements as one means of facilitating planned growth. The nature of the construction on the new
alignment and the purpose of the project to improve traffic safety and circulation patterns can be
explained the same way and can be supported by safety improvements from the railroad grade
separation.
The CatEx process would be documented through the use of CDOT Standard Form 128 and supplement
technical documentation (See Appendix D). CDOT Form 128 requires two signatures, one for the top
portion and one for the bottom portion. Top portion (Parts A and B) involve investigating whether there
are environmental areas of concern with regard to the project. The Top portion (Parts A and B) are
usually needed for right-of-way plan authorization and obligation of funds for right-of-way acquisition
unless these areas do not have important environmental impacts and if the right-of-way is being
purchased with non-federal funds. The Bottom portion (Parts C, D, and E) are used for applicable
environmental permits and for ensuring environmental commitments are in the final plans and
specifications. The Bottom portion (Parts C, D, and E) needed for project advertisement and obligation
of funds. The entire step by step process is described in Chapter 5 of CDOT’s NEPA Manual.
Environmental Clearances and Permits
The following list identifies anticipated environmental clearances and permits for the overpass and
underpass alternatives.
Top Half of 128
Air Quality Hot Spot Analysis Not Required
Noise Required
Hazardous Materials Required (Initial Site Assessment)
35
Threatened and Endangered Species Clearance Letter Required
Wetland Delineation Required
Paleontology Required
Archaeology* Required
History* ** Required
Historic Bridge Required
4(f) Not Required
6(f) Not Required
*Consultation and Coordination Literature Review)
** De minimis documentation
Bottom Half of 128
404 Permit TBD
401 Certification TBD
402 Certification TBD
Construction Dewatering Certification Required
Floodplains Development Permit TBD
SB 40 Not Required
Wetland Finding TBD
APCD Bridge/Structure Demo Permit Not Required
Hazardous Materials (Phase II) TBD
6(f) Completion Not Required
Completion of the environmental process allows the City to proceed with Right of Way acquisition and
the Final Design and Construction process.
3.4 Final Design and Construction Process
The Final Design process typically involves development of the final plans, specifications and cost
estimates, along with the necessary final permitting, right-of-way clearances, and utility relocation
coordination. Project construction can be accomplished through a variety of delivery methods. The
methods that could be considered include Design-Bid-Build, Design-Build, and CM/GC (Construction
Manager at Risk). The construction delivery method for this project has not been identified. Each
delivery method has trade-off advantages and disadvantages depending on the project characteristics.
Determining the construction delivery method that is best suited for a project involves a number of
project characteristics, including but not limited to:
· Construction Schedule
· Funding Availability Schedule
· Project Complexity
· Risks
36
4. Project Funding Strategies
This section discusses combinations of potential local and federal funding sources that could be pursued
to advance the Vine/Lemay project and the potential issues associated with each strategy. Two project
alternatives are considered in the funding approach analysis: 1) at-grade improvements and 2) a grade
separated overpass. The analysis begins by summarizing the costs, funding gaps and timing issues, and
potential sources to fill these gaps. Lastly, the pros and cons associated with the funding approach
strategies are highlighted.
Given the extent of the Vine/Lemay project costs, it will require a combination of sources to advance the
project. As a result, a political champion for the project will be needed in order to garner support at the
local and regional levels to get the project funded. The strength of the support largely will be based on
the project’s potential benefits and impacts to the City as well as the larger region, which will need to be
considered and shared with the public and potential funding partners. The competition for public funds
(both local and federal) is significant, because there are many important projects out there but
increasingly limited funds. As a result, the benefits and impacts associated with the Vine/Lemay project
need to be effectively communicated with all potential funding partners, including City residents, which
often requires a political champion.
Details of the various local funding sources and federal funding partners can be found in Appendix F.
4.1 Potential Funding Approach
This section summarizes potential funding approaches for the at-grade and overpass alternatives. These
alternatives represent the range of potential funding that would be needed to construct improvements
to the Vine/Lemay intersection, and as a result the range of potential funding sources that would be
needed.
The focus in this section is on identifying potential sources and combinations of sources that could be
used to fund the project. The issues associated with receiving funds in time to meet construction
expenditures is a concern for the project; however, once the funding sources have been secured, these
funds could be leveraged through TIFIA, Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEEs), or other
bonding mechanisms to get the funds needed up front for construction. These financing vehicles would
allow the project to be constructed in a timely manner, while repaying the loan and/or bond issue over a
specified time with future, committed revenue streams. As a result, the primary focus is on identifying
sources of these revenue streams for the project.
Most Applicable Project Funding Sources
The local and federal sources of funds discussed in this chapter that are most applicable and realistic for
the Vine/Lemay project include the following:
· Local: City Sales Tax (BOB or KFCG) - If the 0.25% BOB sales tax is extended, it would provide a
source of potential funds for the Vine/Lemay project. In addition, approximately $3.4 million in
KFCG sales tax revenues (17%) are potentially available for other street and transportation
needs. As a result, the funds would not be able to pay for the entirety of the project, but may
be a viable source for the local match to federal funds.
37
· Federal: Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or Surface Transportation Program
(STP) – These programs are part of the Federal-aid highway program annual appropriations.
HSIP funding is specifically available for grade crossing improvements and removal of high-risk
at-grade crossings under the Railway-Highway Crossing Program. In addition, the program funds
projects that remove hazardous road locations or any project on a public road that is consistent
with the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). STP provides flexible funding that may be
used by states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and
performance of any federal-aid highway, bridge, or tunnel project on any public road,
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. The use of these funds will
require gaining support at the regional MPO level to get the project included in the region’s
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), as well the State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP). CDOT and the MPO are responsible for allocating federal-aid highway program
funds to projects through the local TIP and state TIP. As a result, having a political champion to
sell the benefits of the project will be particularly helpful in trying to secure these funds. Due to
the competition for these funds, it is estimated that the at-grade alternative would have
trouble securing these funds, while the overpass alternative likely would not receive more
than $5 million; however, through continued project development and communication of
project benefits, the overpass alternative could warrant the consideration of a larger funding
share.
· Federal: TIGER Discretionary Grant Program - The TIGER program is highly applicable to roads
and rail, since its eligible categories include, among others, freight rail projects and any
federally-eligible highway or bridge project. TIGER has been continued for six rounds to date
and through the annual appropriations process. Future rounds depend either on year-to-year
appropriations or the program’s permanent authorization in the successor to MAP-21; the
President’s budget recommendation includes $1.25 billion annually for four more years. The
safety and economic development components of the overpass alternative fit nicely with
TIGER’s evaluation criteria due to the grade separation and removal of rail-highway conflicts;
however, the competition for these funds is quite extensive. With additional local, committed
funding sources, partnerships, and engineering, it would be worthwhile for the City to consider
applying during future TIGER rounds. In urban areas, the minimum TIGER award is $10 million
dollars, and the most competitive TIGER projects tend to keep the local match at 50%;
therefore, the overpass alternative potentially could receive between $10 million and $14
million with a successful TIGER application. It is not recommended that the at-grade
alternative pursue TIGER funds, because it does not remove or reduce to opportunity for rail-
highway conflicts as it is currently defined.
· Federal: EDA Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs – These EDA
Programs provide assistance to distressed communities to help them attract or expand
businesses and generate long-term jobs. The project would be eligible under the programs
because it proposes to improve an access road to a future commercial business center, thereby
supporting employment growth in the region. Recent average grant awards have been
approximately $1 million. As a result, the grant program could provide supplemental revenues
for the project but would not be able to provide a significant contribution. Applications are
competitively evaluated in quarterly funding cycles (deadlines on March 14, June 13, and
October 17) and decisions generally are made within 20 business days of the funding cycle
deadline. An applicant may submit an application at any time to receive feedback on the
application’s competitive and technical merits. If this is an opportunity that the City would like
to consider further, it is recommended that they take advantage of this ability to receive
38
feedback on their application to determine its likelihood of success as well as if there are
additional components that would better position the project for an award.
In addition to these funding programs, the TIFIA program could be a mechanism for the overpass
alternative to leverage future revenue streams from the City sales tax and/or future federal-aid highway
program funds (HSIP or STIP). A TIFIA project must be reasonably anticipated to cost at least $25 million
for rural projects, and the definition of rural for TIFIA purposes includes cities of less than 250,000
population.1 Therefore, only the overpass project would be eligible for the TIFIA program. While TIFIA’s
normal interest rate for secured loans can be as low as the rate on 30-year US Treasuries, 10% of TIFIA’s
budget authority is set aside for rural projects at reduced interest rates to as low as one-half the
Treasury rate—offering the City a competitive opportunity to leverage any secured funding streams.
The potential mix of funding strategies for each alternative is discussed below.
At-Grade Alternative
The cost of the realignment of the at-grade Vine/Lemay intersection is estimated to be $13.6 million
from planning through construction. It is assumed that the time required to complete the project
(including planning and engineering) would be approximately four to five years, with most of the costs
associated with construction occurring during the last two years.
There are some vacant parcels north of Vine Drive on Lemay Avenue that, upon development, would be
required to build portions of Lemay Avenue in conjunction with the Street Oversizing Program. The City
has estimated the portion of the alternative’s costs that could be funded by the City’s Street Oversizing
Program as well as the Developer’s Local Street Portion (associated with access to several currently
undeveloped sites), which are summarized in Table 6. While the Local Street Portion is directly tied to
the development of the adjacent parcels, if the capital project came before the development of these
parcels the money would have to come from another source. However, future receipt of the Local
Street Portion could be used to pay back these funds over time.
Table 6 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the At-Grade Alternative ($M)
Total Project Cost $ 24.60
Developer Local Street Portion $ 1.45
City Street Oversizing Portion $ 5.16
Amount Remaining to be Funded $ 17.99
Source: AECOM Cost Estimate (May 2014) and City Estimates of Street Portions
After the application of these local street portion/oversizing funds, nearly $18 million in funding would
still be required for the at-grade alternative. The funding approach analysis estimates that the
remaining costs would have to be funded primarily through the City’s sales tax, which could be feasible
based on the current assumption that the City would only be able to provide $5 million to $10 million in
sales tax revenues towards the project.
The options for funding the at-grade alternative with sources other than City funds are rather limited
due to the current definition of this alternative. In order for the alternative to be competitive for other
1 Fort Collins population is 144,000 according to Census 2010. See:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/08/0827425.html
39
federal-aid highway funds or federal discretionary grants like HSIP, STP, and TIGER, train blockages must
be reduced to create travel time savings, safety improvements, and emissions reduction benefits in the
region. As this alternative is currently defined, it excludes relocating the rail yard that is the source of
these blockages and provides limited opportunity to reduce the likelihood of rail-highway conflicts. As a
result, the potential benefits associated with improved traffic flow during non-blocked time periods are
not likely to be significant enough to gain the support of larger funding programs such as HSIP, STP, or
TIGER.
In order to improve the competitiveness of the at-grade project, it is recommended that the City
consider making the alternative a joint project with BNSF to move the rail yard and look for
opportunities to improve BNSF operations with the implementation of the combined project. This could
potentially reduce the number of trains blocking the grade crossing and improve the movement of
freight in the region—generating significant community benefits in travel time savings, vehicle operating
cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions and making the project more attractive to
the local voters, regional economic developers, and funding partners.
Overpass Alternative
The cost of the Lemay Avenue overpass alternative is estimated to be $26.6 million from planning
through construction. It is assumed that the time required to complete the project (including planning
and engineering) would be five years, with most of the costs associated with construction occurring
during the last two years, as shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11 Annual Construction Expenditure Flow for the Overpass Alternative
Source: AECOM
There are some vacant parcels north of Vine Drive on Lemay Avenue that, upon development, would be
required to build portions of Lemay Avenue in conjunction with the Street Oversizing Program. The City
has estimated the portion of the alternative’s costs that could be funded by the City’s Street Oversizing
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
40
Program as well as the Developer’s Local Street Portion (associated with access to several currently
undeveloped sites), which are summarized in Table 7. While the Local Street Portion is directly tied to
the development of the adjacent parcels, if the capital project came before the development of these
parcels, the money would have to come from another source. However, future receipt of the Local
Street Portion could be used to pay back these funds over time.
Table 7 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the Overpass Alternative ($M)
Total Project Cost $ 27.60
Developer Local Street Portion $ 1.29
City Street Oversizing Portion $ 4.46
Amount Remaining to be Funded $ 21.85
Source: AECOM Cost Estimate (May 2014) and City Estimates of Street Portions
After the application of these local street portion/oversizing funds, an additional $20.85 million in
funding would still be required for the overpass alternative. The funding approach analysis estimates
that the remaining costs potentially could be funded through a combination of the City’s sales tax,
Federal HSIP/STP, TIGER, and EDA funds, due to the types of benefits and economic development
impacts that could accrue to the City and larger region by removing the rail-vehicle conflicts through
grade separation. While there is an opportunity for a greater variety of funding source for the overpass
alternative, it is not recommended that the City pursue a wide variety of sources initially due to the
complications associated with timing and getting commitments from multiple funding partners. If one
funding partner backs out, the margin is tight enough that it is possible the City and remaining funding
partners may not be able to make up the difference. As a result, it is recommended that the City pursue
one additional federal funding source to fund a larger share of the project costs, such as TIGER.
A sample funding approach strategy is summarized in Table 8, assuming a TIGER award equal to 50% of
the project’s costs. Given what is known about the proposed overpass alternative, the project has the
potential to be competitive in the TIGER evaluation process due to its potential for significant travel time
savings, vehicle operating cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions associated with
the grade separation, as well as the potential of the project to facilitate economic development and
provide “ladders of opportunity” for regional job growth. If the TIGER award would be closer to $10
million, the approach would still be viable given low contributions assumed from other federal funds.
Table 8 Potential TIGER Funding Strategy for the Remaining Overpass Alternative Costs ($M)
Federal: TIGER $ 13.80
Local: City Sales Tax Cash (new BOB/KCFG) $ 7.00
Federal: HSIP/STP/EDA $ 1.05
Total $ 21.85
Even though it appears that the project would be competitive in the TIGER evaluation process, the
success rate of applications is low due to the volume of competitive projects and the limited funding
available. A political champion could help improve the project’s standing in the evaluation process, but
there is never a guarantee of success. If the project is not successful in winning a TIGER grant, or if it is
not available to the project, then another similarly large federal funding program will have to be
aggressively pursued—potentially a combination of HSIP and STP funds. If the City can contribute
between $5 to $10 million towards the project from BOB/KFCG sales tax, then at least $1185 to $16.85
41
million in other funds would still need to be secured. This is not a small amount; however, if the project
is marketed correctly and the benefits fully explored and communicated, it is not impossible.
4.2 Pros and Cons Associated with the Funding Approach Strategies
The funding approaches considered for both alternatives highlight the major concern for the
Vine/Lemay project: a large funding source is not readily or currently available to the City. The best
source of local funds is the local option sales tax, which will need to be extended with a new voter
referendum. Even with the passage of a new BOB sales tax, it is not likely to provide more than $5-$10
million towards the project, which means that between $3 million and $12 million in additional funds
would still be needed to construct the project alternatives. These local funds would need to be secured
before additional funding partners could be pursued to demonstrate local commitment to the project.
At-Grade Alternative
The at-grade alternative funding approach is relatively straightforward, as it would likely have to be
funded entirely with City funds. The simplicity of the approach adds to the ease of getting it constructed
due to limited project partners and requirements; however, there is also the greatest financial risk
associated with this approach as it would be difficult for the City to fund it entirely from sales tax
revenues. Any cost overruns or revenue shortfalls would need to be funded by the City.
This project also has greater timing issues in terms of the funds being available when construction costs
occur. With the City as the primary source of funding (particularly as the Developer Local Street Portion
is likely to occur at the end or after construction), the project may have to wait until all the sales tax
revenues are available, which could take several years. If the City would like to advance the
construction of the project before all funds are in hand, they will have to issue bonds backed by the BOB
sales tax because Federal financing programs such as TIFIA would not be available to the at-grade
alternative due to the lower cost and lower competitiveness of the project benefits. The City has not
issued bonds backed by the BOB sales tax to date, but it has been discussed internally with City staff.
The City would have to weigh the implications of leveraging future revenues for current projects, which
may impact the City’s ability to fund future projects.
Overpass Alternative
The overpass alternative has a higher cost, however, it also offers a more varied funding approach due
to the opportunity to competitively pursue non-City funding, including Federal HSIP/STP, TIGER, and
EDA funds. The alternative more closely aligns with regional goals for reduced rail-highway conflicts and
improved access to economic development sites, which are attractive to regional and federal funding
partners. The removal of rail-highway conflicts with the overpass alternative would result in significant
travel time savings, vehicle operating cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions
associated with grade separation. While additional funding sources are available to the overpass
alternative, it would still need to rely heavily on City sales tax revenues to construct the project due to
the scale of the investment and the local match requirements associated with federal funds.
While there are several federal funding sources that the overpass alternative could pursue, it is
recommended that the City begin by trying to attract funding from one larger federal program such as
HSIP, STP, or TIGER. Initially pursuing one larger program would allow the City to minimize the
difficulties associated with managing and getting firm commitments from numerous funding partners.
42
As the project moves through the planning and development process, additional beneficiaries and
funding partners could be identified and pursed to fill in any remaining gaps in project funding. A
political champion for the project also could help identify these additional beneficiaries and garner the
necessary support at the local, regional, and federal levels. The benefits and impacts associated with
the Vine/Lemay project will need to be effectively communicated with all potential funding partners,
including City residents, and a strong political champion can help deliver this essential message.
The issues associated with receiving funds in time to meet construction expenditures is a concern for the
alternative; however, it is not as great of a concern as the at-grade alternative. Once the funding
sources have been secured, these local and federal funds could be leveraged through TIFIA, Grant
Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEEs), or other bonding mechanisms to get the funds needed up
front for construction. These financing vehicles would allow the project to be constructed in a timely
manner, while repaying the low interest loan and/or bond issue over a specified time with future,
committed revenue streams.
5. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT NEXT STEPS
The next step in the process is to begin a more thorough data collection, preliminary design and funding
evaluations that will address the following key questions:
· Is the added long-term cost/benefit of realignment and grade separation necessary to address
anticipated 2035 congestion and delay, or could a realignment and at-grade intersection be
sufficient as a near-term solution that could then transition at a later date? Will a new at-grade
crossing be allowed by the PUC and BNSF, and would BNSF consider switching yard relocation?
· Is the added cost of an underpass to address visual and noise impact issues appropriate when a
lower cost overpass would result in similar traffic performance without the higher cost and risk
concerns, such as drainage issues, caused by the underpass?
· Does the currently unknown cost of relocation of the railroad switching yard and its ability to
reduce railroad crossing/switching-related system congestion justify the expenditure?
· Can the existing at-grade crossing of existing E. Vine and existing Lemay remain in a limited
configuration for pedestrians/cyclists.
43
APPENDIX
A. Construction Cost Opinions
B. Lemay/Vine 2035 Traffic Analysis Memorandum
C. Analysis of Vehicle Delay from Train Operations
D. Cultural Resources in the Study Area
E. CDOT Standard Form 128
F. Project Funding and Finance Analysis
44
Intentionally Left Blank
1
APPENDIX A CONSTRUCTION COST OPINIONS
2
Intentionally Left Blank
9/2/2014 16:24 UNITS QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Removals General SY 100,195 $4 $400,780
Railroad Apertenunces - Temporary EA 8 $20,000 $160,000
Track Panels - Temporary LF 120 $1,000 $120,000
Track Signalling - Temporary LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
Intersection Signals EA 1 $240,000 $240,000
ABC (Class VI) CY 10,060 $25 $251,500
ABC (Class VI) - Temporary CY 4,535 $25 $113,375
Pavement Ton 22,305 $75 $1,672,875
Pavement - Temporary Ton 10,055 $75 $754,125
Sidewalk SF 65,550 $6 $393,300
Sidewalk - Temporary SF 22,845 $6 $137,070
Curb and Gutter LF 19,985 $20 $399,700
Curb and Gutter - Temporary LF 10,044 $20 $200,880
Culvert LF 160 $2,500 $400,000
Project Construction Bid Items $5,393,605
% USED COST
Project Construction Bid Items Project Dependent N/A $5,393,605 (A)
Contingencies
(BNSF Complications) (15% - 30%) of (A) 20.00% $1,078,721 (B)
ITS/Lighting (6-10%) of (A+B) 6.00% $388,339.56 (C)
Default = 6%
Drainage/Utilities (3-10% )of (A+B) 10.00% $647,232.60 (D)
Default = 6%
Signing and Striping (1-5%) of (A+B) 4.00% $258,893.04 (E)
Default = 5%
Construction Signing & Traffic Control 5 to 25% of (A+B) 15.00% $970,849 (F)
Default = 20%
Mobilization (4 to 10%) of (A+B+C+D+E+F) 7.00% $611,635 (G)
Default = 7%
Total of Construction Bid Items (A+B+C+D+E+F+G) $9,349,275 (H)
Force Account - Utilities (1 to 2%) of (H) 2.00% $186,985 (I)
Default = 2%
Force Account - Misc. (10 to 15%) of (H) 10.00% $934,927 (J)
Default = 12%
Subtotal of Construction Cost (H+I+J) $10,471,188 (K)
Right of Way Acquisition and Easements % of (H) 2.50% $261,780 (L)
Planning and NEPA % of (H) 2.50% $261,780 (M)
Preliminary and Final Engineering % of (H) 10.00% $1,047,119 (N)
Construction Management/Inspection % of (H) 15.00% $1,570,678 (O)
Local Street Construction LF 3600 $300 $1,080,000 (P)
Relocate Freight Switching Yard LS $10,000,000 (Q)
Total Project Cost (K+L+M+N+O+P+Q) $24,692,544 (R)
Comparative Cost Opinion
Realingment At-Grade Intersection Alternative
Modified by AECOM
% RANGE
Vine and Lemay Opinion of Probable Cost_Rev 6 .xlsx
9/2/2014 16:24 UNITS QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Removals General SY 84,470 $4 $337,880
Intersection Signals EA 1 $240,000 $240,000
Embankment CY 124,636 $10 $1,246,360
ABC (Class VI) CY 11,360 $25 $284,000
Pavement Ton 25,190 $75 $1,889,250
Sidewalk SF 85,065 $6 $510,390
Curb and Gutter LF 23,025 $20 $460,500
Bridge SF 25,245 $175 $4,417,875
Culvert LF 230 $2,500 $575,000
Retaining Walls (DH <= 10-FT) SF 6,480 $50 $324,000
Retaining Walls (DH >= 10-FT) SF 10,145 $100 $1,014,500
Project Construction Bid Items $11,299,755
% USED COST
Project Construction Bid Items Project Dependent N/A $11,299,755 (A)
Contingencies (15% - 30%) of (A) 20.00% $2,259,951 (B)
ITS/Lighting (6-10%) of (A+B) 3.50% $474,590 (C)
Default = 6%
Drainage/Utilities (3-10% )of (A+B) 15.00% $2,033,956 (D)
(High groundwater complications) Default = 6%
Signing and Striping (1-5%) of (A+B) 2.33% $315,941 (E)
Default = 5%
Construction Signing & Traffic Control 5 to 25% of (A+B) 11.50% $1,559,366 (F)
Default = 20%
Mobilization (4 to 10%) of (A+B+C+D+E+F) 7.00% $1,256,049 (G)
Default = 7%
Total of Construction Bid Items (A+B+C+D+E+F+G) $19,199,608 (H)
Force Account - Utilities (1 to 2%) of (H) 1.25% $239,995 (I)
Default = 2%
Force Account - Misc. (10 to 15%) of (H) 6.25% $1,199,976 (J)
Default = 12%
Subtotal of Construction Cost (H+I+J) $20,639,579 (K)
Right of Way Acquisition and Easements % of (H) 1.25% $257,995 (L)
Planning and NEPA % of (H) 2.50% $515,989 (M)
Preliminary and Final Engineering % of (H) 10.00% $2,063,958 (N)
Construction Management/Inspection % of (H) 15.00% $3,095,937 (O)
Local Street Construction LF 3600 $300 $1,080,000 (P)
Total Project Cost (K+L+M+N+O+P) $27,653,458 (Q)
Comparative Cost Opinion
Realingment Overpass Intersection Alternative
Modified by AECOM
% RANGE
Vine and Lemay Opinion of Probable Cost_Rev 6 .xlsx
9/2/2014 16:24 UNITS QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
Removals General SY 113,403 $4 $453,612
Intersection Signals EA 1 $240,000 $240,000
Excavation CY 88,025 $15 $1,320,375
ABC (Class VI) CY 11,780 $25 $294,500
Pavement Ton 26,120 $75 $1,959,000
Sidewalk SF 72,635 $6 $435,810
Curb and Gutter LF 24,330 $20 $486,600
Bridge SF 9,240 $200 $1,848,000
Retaining Walls (DH <= 10-FT) SF 6,235 $150 $935,250
Retaining Walls (DH >= 10-FT) SF 34,320 $250 $8,580,000
Project Construction Bid Items $16,553,147
% USED COST
Project Construction Bid Items Project Dependent N/A $16,553,147 (A)
Contingencies
(BNSF Complexities) (15% - 30%) of (A) 30.00% $4,965,944 (B)
ITS/Lighting (6-10%) of (A+B) 2.15% $462,660 (C)
Default = 6%
Drainage/Utilities (3-10% )of (A+B) 25.00% $5,379,773 (D)
(+Sump pump and Siphon) Default = 6%
Signing and Striping (1-5%) of (A+B) 1.50% $322,786 (E)
Default = 5%
Construction Signing & Traffic Control 5 to 25% of (A+B) 7.00% $1,506,336 (F)
Default = 20%
Mobilization (4 to 10%) of (A+B+C+D+E+F) 7.00% $2,043,345 (G)
Default = 7%
Total of Construction Bid Items (A+B+C+D+E+F+G) $31,233,992 (H)
Force Account - Utilities (1 to 2%) of (H) 0.80% $249,872 (I)
Default = 2%
Force Account - Misc. (10 to 15%) of (H) 4.00% $1,249,360 (J)
Default = 12%
Subtotal of Construction Cost (H+I+J) $32,733,224 (K)
Right of Way Acquisition and Easements % of (H) 0.75% $245,499 (L)
Planning and NEPA % of (H) 1.55% $507,365 (M)
Preliminary and Final Engineering % of (H) 10.00% $3,273,322 (N)
Construction Management/Inspection % of (H) 12.00% $3,927,987 (O)
Local Street Construction LF 3600 $300 $1,080,000 (P)
Total Project Cost (K+L+M+N+O+P) $41,767,397 (Q)
Comparative Cost Opinion
Realingment Underpass Intersection Alternative
Modified by AECOM
% RANGE
Vine and Lemay Opinion of Probable Cost_Rev 6 .xlsx
Intentionally Left Blank
1
APPENDIX B LEMAY/VINE 2035 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM
2
Intentionally Left Blank
1
APPENDIX C ANALYSIS OF VEHICLE DELAY FROM TRAIN OPERATIONS
2
Intentionally Left Blank
APPENDIX C ANALYSIS OF VEHICLE DELAY FROM TRAIN OPERATIONS
The following analysis of delay along Lemay from Mulberry to Vine characterizes the impacts from train
operations under existing conditions and anticipated conditions in 2035 (forecast volumes, geometry,
and at grade intersection relocation).
Scenarios
The following p.m. peak hour scenarios were considered.
1) Existing conditions without a train.
2) Existing conditions with a 6-minute train blockage.
3) 2035 conditions without a train.
4) 2035 conditions with a 6-minute train blockage.
5) 2035 conditions with a 3-minute train blockage.
Train Operations with and without Switching
The train blockage times were based on recent data from City of Fort Collins traffic signal preemption
logs. One week of preemption records (i.e. trains) at Lemay/Vine were evaluated. A total of 55 records,
with an average duration train blockage of 6.1 minutes, were identified. Consequently, 6.1 minutes was
used to represent the average time of a blockage that accounts for switching yard impacts.
To estimate blockage time if the switching yard were relocated, preemption logs for the same mainline
track were evaluated where it crosses Drake Road in Fort Collins. Trains do not routinely stop or
perform switching activities near Drake. Again, one week of preemption records at the Drake crossing
were evaluated. A total of 39 records, with an average train blockage of 3.2 minutes, were identified.
Consequently, 3.2 minutes was used to represent the average blockage time where there is no switching
activity. The data was collected for different weeks so there is some uncertainty that the number of
trains is indicative of increased activity due to switching.
Modeling
CORSIM traffic simulation software was used to analyze traffic delay from train operations. Since
CORSIM is a stochastic model, a total of 30 runs were performed for each scenario. The reported results
are the average of the 30 runs for each scenario.
Train operations have an effect network-wide rather than at just one location, so the results report the
total delay for the entire modeled network for each scenario in order to see the net difference
comparing with a train versus without a train.
Results
The results, presented in Table 1, represent the total delay during the p.m. peak hour experienced by
vehicles throughout the model network. For existing conditions, the intersections of Lemay/Mulberry,
Lemay/Magnolia, Lemay/Lincoln and Lemay/Vine (including RR delay) are included. For the 2035
scenarios, these intersections, plus the delay at the railroad crossing which is no longer adjacent to the
Lemay/Vine intersection, are included.
Table 1 Total Delay during the P.M. Peak Hour Experienced by Vehicles Throughout
the Model Network.
Existing
Conditions
Without a
Train
Existing
Conditions
with a 6-Minute
Train Blockage
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
without a
Train
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
with a 3-Minute
Train Blockage
2035
Conditions
At Grade
Alternative
with a 6-minute
Train Blockage
Total Delay
(Hours)
84.9 153.2 200.4 203.4 233.3
Vehicle-Trips 6,560 6,489 9,539 9,541 9,537
Seconds Per
Vehicle Trip
46.6 85.0 75.6 76.7 88.1
Discussion
Currently, the street network is slow to recover from a 6-minute train event. Watching the simulation
reveals that long queues and delays linger for nearly a half hour after the train departs. This shows up
as a near doubling of delay with a train compared to existing conditions on days when there isn’t a train.
In 2035, overall traffic volume and delays are projected to be higher (mostly at Lemay/Mulberry in the
simulation), but the effects from the train are reduced as a result of added storage capacity i.e. 4-lanes
on Lemay rather than just two at the tracks and at adjacent intersections. There is also a noticeable
difference (30 hours of delay) between the 6-minute and 3-minute train event.
There are two questions that should be answered:
1. Is the cost of delay due to trains enough to justify the cost of a grade separation? and
2. Is the cost of the added delay due to switching enough to justify the cost of moving the
switching yard?
To get a total delay cost from the trains, the data from the p.m. peak hour would need to be converted
into a daily estimate. This task has not been performed and may not be necessary because if the “grade
separation option”, i.e. no trains, is compared to the “no switching yard option”, i.e. 3-minute train,
there is only about a 1.5% increase in delay. Assuming the cost of relocating the switching yard is
significantly less than the grade separation, it can be concluded that moving the switching yard is a
better option in terms of delay reduction than a grade separation.
This finding prompts the question of whether or not relocating the switching yard is cost effective. This
answer requires additional analysis.
1
APPENDIX D CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA
The Andersonville/San Cristo and Alta Vista neighborhoods, along with the Buckingham neighborhood
located outside of the study area, share a common heritage. Each is a product of the sugar beet
industry, a Colorado economic empire that emerged after the turn of the twentieth century. These
neighborhoods supplied laborers to the sprawling and towering sugar beet factory complex they
encircled and to the beet fields that surrounded it.
In 2004, a Survey Report entitled “The Sugar Factory Neighborhoods: Buckingham, Andersonville, Alta
Vista was prepared. The survey inventoried 175 properties in the three Sugar Factory Neighborhoods.
The following discussion summarizes the findings of the Survey Report.
Buckingham contained the most properties – 88. Andersonville had the smallest number at 38, and Alta
Vista had 49. Only a few properties in Buckingham, Andersonville, and Alta Vista retain high enough
levels of historical significance and physical integrity to be considered individually eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places or the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. Slightly more
were found individually eligible as Fort Collins Landmarks. Moreover, just under half (48%) could be
considered contributing to a potential district, but the percentage varies from neighborhood to
neighborhood. The 1983 survey had determined that Buckingham and Andersonville lacked enough
integrity to be considered National Register districts. However, this current survey determined that
more than half of the properties in Buckingham and Andersonville contribute to their respective,
potential districts. In 1983 the Alta Vista neighborhood was officially determined to be eligible for the
National Register. But urban renewal programs in the mid and late 1980s significantly undermined the
integrity of Alta Vista, leaving it with only 38.7% of properties contributing to a district.
Andersonville, when considered as a whole, retains sufficient integrity to be considered a National
Register and a Fort Collins Landmark district; slightly more than half (52.6%) of the properties contribute
to a district.
The Alta Vista neighborhood contains the northernmost collection of historic adobe structures in North
America. This culturally and historically important neighborhood is one of the original groups of
residences associated with the former sugar beet industry in Fort Collins, which was prosperous from
the turn of the century through World War II. The neighborhood is eligible for designation as Fort Collins
Landmark, and is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and the Colorado State
Register of Historic Places.
Alta Vista, when considered as a whole, does not retain sufficient integrity to be considered a National
Register and a Fort Collins Landmark district; only 38.7% of developed parcels contribute to a potential
district. However, the original core of Great Western-constructed adobe houses remains relatively
intact. Given the historical and architectural significance of this group of adobe houses, this report
recommends the creation of a National Register and Fort Collins Landmark district of the 35 properties
roughly bound by Main Street to the north, Martinez Street on the east, Lindenmeier Road to the west,
and East Vine Drive to the south. This area contains 18 contributing properties (51.4%), including one,
741 Lindenmeier Road (5LR10635), found to be eligible for individual listing on the National Register.
2
Andersonville (District 5LR989)
Properties surveyed: 38
Contributing to a potential district: 20 (52.6%)
Eligible for listing on the National Register: 1
Eligible for listing as a Fort Collins Landmark: 1 (including NR property)
Not eligible / not contributing: 18 (47.4%)
Alta Vista (District 5LR990)
Properties surveyed: 49
Contributing to a potential district: 19 (38.7%)
Eligible for listing on the National Register: 1
Eligible for listing as a Fort Collins Landmark: 10 (including NR property)
Not eligible / not contributing: 30 (61.2%)
The following resources were identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places:
5LR10638 741 Lindenmeier Road 741 Lindenmeier Road
5LR10122 425 Tenth Street, Romero House
The Lindenmeier Road property is significant under Criterion A for its association with the early
development of the Alta Vista area and the sugar beet industry. Moreover, it is important for its
relationship to German-Russian and Hispanics laborers, both of whom resided at this address. The
property is also significant under Criterion C because it is an intact sugar beet workers’ shanty with an
accompanying and intact German-Russian outbuilding complex. Despite numerous additions and
remodeling, the house still embodies the spirit of working-class vernacular architecture, growing
organically with need and financial ability. Properties such as this one were commonplace in the
Buckingham, Andersonville, and Alta Vista neighborhoods prior to massive urban renewal projects in
the late 1970s and ‘80s. This is the only remaining property of this level of physical integrity in the Sugar
Factory Neighborhoods. It should be considered individually eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Colorado Register of Historic Properties, and as a Fort Collins Landmark.
3
The Romero House provides the setting for the Museo del las Tres Colonias. This resource is located
next to Romero Park.
Museo de las Tres Colonias
4
There are four defined purposes of the Museo:
1. The adobe historic house museum helps interpret family life in the tres colonias between 1927
and 1940.
2. The Museo offers education programs about contributions made by the His-panic community.
3. Volunteers explain to visitors the significance of the sugar-beet industry to the Fort Collins
community.
4. The Museo is the focal point for continuous celebration of Hispanic culture, and promotes
acceptance, understanding, and social justice for all.
The Romero House property is significant under Criterion A for its association with the development of
the Andersonville Neighborhoods, especially early Hispanic settlement. It is also significant under
Criterion B for its association with John Romero, an early leader of the Hispanic Community in Fort
Collins and an advocate of migrant workers’ rights. The house is significant under Criterion C because it
is the only adobe residence in Andersonville and one of the few remaining in the Fort Collins. It is
particularly important because of the vivid archival records that explain its construction. This property is
already listed as a City of Fort Collins Landmark and should be considered individually eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places, and the Colorado Register of Historic Places.
Additional baseline information is available from the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Committee and
at the following websites:
http://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/pdf/sugar-factory-doc.pdf
http://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/pdf/top20list.pdf
http://museodelastrescolonias.org/Museo/Museo.html
1
APPENDIX E CDOT STANDARD FORM 128
2
Intentionally Left Blank
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
DETERMINATION
Date: Revision Date: Project Code #:
Project #:
Project Name:
Project Description:
A. Categorical Exclusion Project Determination
1. This project fits Categorical Exclusion or Programmatic CE number
2. CDOT Form #463 dated (Revised ) is attached.
B. Clearance Actions
REQUIRED DATE COMPLETED REQUIRED DATE COMPLETED
If not checked is Not Applicable If not checked is Not Applicable
Air Quality (hot spot analysis) Paleontology
Noise Archaeology
Hazardous Materials History
- ISA Checklist Historic Bridge
- MESA (or Phase I) 4(f)
Threatened or Endangered Species 6(f) Agreements
Wetland Delineation (survey) Other
All required clearance actions indicated have been completed for the work described in the CDOT Form #463 referenced above. No
significant environmental impacts will result from this project. All Permits and Additional Requirements indicated in Part C below will
be obtained before project advertisement/construction. Implementation of project shall include required mitigation commitments.
RPEM Signature Date Region #
I concur in the above category designation and the scope of environmental clearance/permits indicated.
FHWA Division Administrator Signature (when required) (Please return form to RPEM) Date
C. Permits and Additional Requirements
REQUIRED DATE COMPLETED REQUIRED DATE COMPLETED
If not checked is Not Applicable If not checked is Not Applicable
404 Permit Division of Wildlife SB 40
401 Certification Wetland Finding
402 Certification APCD Bridge/Structure Demo Permit
- Const Dewatering Certification Hazardous Materials (Phase II)
Const Stormwater Cert CDPS 6(f) Completion
Floodplains Development Permit Other
D. Comments
E. Environmental Project Certification
All clearance and permit requirements for this project have been completed and mitigation included in the
set of plans and specifications dated . The appropriate documentation is on file in the Region office.
RPEM Signature Date
Note to Project Manager: Any changes to the plans and specifications after the date of the RPEM signature in Part B that affect
environmental impacts or mitigation must be approved by the RPEM.
Distribution: Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used CDOT Form #128a 5/06
RPEM (original); copies to: Project Manager, Region Right of Way (if ROW required), Central Files
Instructions for CDOT Form #128,
Categorical Exclusion Determination
1. Completion of CDOT Form #128 is required for all Categorical Exclusion (CE) projects. Parts A and B must be
completed for right of way authorization and obligation of federal funds. Parts A, B, C, and E must be completed prior to
project advertisement.
2. FHWA signature is required for all federally funded CEs unless programmatic approval has been granted. Following
signature, the FHWA will retain a copy of the 128 and return the original to the RPEM. The RPEM will be responsible
for distributing copies within CDOT and maintaining the original within the Region. (Programmatic means the types of
projects determined by FHWA that may be automatically excluded from FHWA category designation approval because
of their type and actions and based on an evaluation using agreed upon criteria.)
3. FHWA approval may be requested for federally funded projects that are programmatically granted CE status if a 404
permit is required. The purpose for the request shall be stated in Part D, Comments.
4. If FHWA signature is not required, the RPEM will enter "N/A" on the FHWA concurrence line of Part B.
5. The project actions which qualify a project for CE designation must be entered in Part A, #1 of the 128. The designation
must be taken from 23 CFR 771.117 (a) - (d) or from the current list of additional programmatic CEs approved by the
FHWA. The CE designation comes from the June 24, 1998 CDOT/FHWA expanded CE list. Paragraph (a) CEs require
a transmittal letter of explanation to FHWA.
6. If it is necessary for the Environmental Programs Branch to prepare a 128 for Statewide projects, the EPB manager will
be responsible for clearances, certification, and appropriate distribution.
7. If project revisions change the clearance/permit requirements, revised CDOT Forms #128 and #463 are required.
8. In Part E the RPEM must indicate the set of plans and specifications (Final Office Review, advertisement, award, etc.)
which were reviewed prior to certification. The date of these plans must be provided.
1
APPENDIX F PROJECT FUNDING AND FINANCE ANALYSIS
The following discussion identifies potential funding and financing strategies to complete the
Vine/Lemay project in the short-term and that might be expanded as a program to address the larger
City-wide Railroad grade crossing projects. The identified strategies do not provide a specific financial
plan, but offer a framework for developing a future financial plan as the project continues to develop.
F.1 Local Funding and Financing Options
This section documents local funding and financing programs and identifies those most likely to be
applicable to the Vine/Lemay project and any associated development resulting from the project. Each
source is briefly discussed, the revenue levels and timing are outlined, and the programs are evaluated
with respect to their ability to support the Vine/Lemay project.
The discussion first addresses traditional City transportation infrastructure funding sources and their
current capacity to support the Vine/Lemay project, including:
· Street Oversizing Program
· City Sales Tax Revenues
In addition to the sources listed above, local financing opportunities for the Vine/Lemay project are
considered, including:
· Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
· Leveraging Future Local Sales Tax Revenues
· Colorado State Infrastructure Bank (CO SIB)
The section concludes with a matrix that describes the most likely local funding or financing sources.
a. Overview of Traditional Local Sources
Traditionally, the City of Fort Collins has used development impact fees and the City’s dedicated 0.25%
sales tax revenues to fund infrastructure investments. This section provides an overview of these
sources, their current capacity, and any issues associated with their use to fund a portion of the
Vine/Lemay project.
Street Oversizing Program
The City’s Street Oversizing Program helps ensure that funds for street widening projects are collected
and distributed where and when they are needed. As part of the program, the City requires that
developers pay impact fees for street costs associated with the traffic growth the development is
expected to generate. The fees are collected Citywide and placed in the Street Oversizing Fund to be
used Citywide and are not dedicated to specific projects.
The Street Oversizing Program only pays for the “oversized” portion of the street. Developers are
required to dedicate right-of-way and construct their local access portion of arterials and collectors.
Using broad percentages, the Street Oversizing Fund pays for 60% of arterial roadway costs, and
2
developers are required to construct and finance the remaining 40% (20% from either side) of the
arterial abutting their property.
Fee Schedule and Revenues
The impact fee schedule is established each year and assessed based on the type of development and its
size. For residential development, the fee is a fixed fee per dwelling unit by type of residence (single
family, duplex, apartment, etc.) For commercial development, the fee is a per square foot cost based on
the type of commercial use (shopping center, movie theater, day care, office, etc.) Since the City
considers the benefits of street oversizing to be communitywide, the Transportation Impact Fee
structure is uniform for all areas of the City. Residential building permits pay the established fee
schedule; while 90% of the commercial and industrial developments use the independent fee calculation
process based on the Traffic Impact Study submitted by the development.
Annual impact fee revenue depends on the number and size of projects that are issued building permits
each year. For FY 2012, approximately $3.2 million in transportation impact fee revenues were
collected, and the average annual revenues for the last five years have been approximately $2 million as
shown in Table F1.
Table F1 Historic Transportation Impact Fee Revenues (FY 2008-FY2012)
Annual
Transportation
Impact Fee
Revenues
FY 2012 $3,294,063
FY 2011 $1,441,107
FY 2010 $2,121,165
FY 2009 $641,491
FY 2008 $2,910,656
Average $2,081,696
Source: City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, FY 2008 through FY 2012
Timing
The impact fee is paid by developers when they receive a City of Fort Collins building permit. For
transportation projects involving Street Oversizing funding, the development property contributes funds
and right-of-way dedication prior to construction, so funding is received up front. City projects are
required to have all funding in place prior to bidding, so funding for the developers local access portion
must be received. Developers typically complete their infrastructure and are reimbursed prior to the
issuance of building permits. This is a cash flow management issue for the fund. Reimbursement
agreements would exaggerate the cash flow issue that the Street Oversizing Fund normally has when
reimbursing for improvements prior to issuing building permits by significantly delaying revenues.
3
Potential Issues for Vine/Lemay
There are state and local legislative limits on how impact fees may be used. Impact fees may not be
used to correct existing deficiencies. The majority of the cost for the Vine/Lemay project would not be
related to development impacts. Rather, the improvements are due to the following:
· Shortage in capacity and substandard infrastructure that existed prior to 1980; and
· Congestion due to current residents’ increased VMT and regional (county) growth.
Additionally, the Street Oversizing Fee calculation did not include the Vine/Lemay grade separation. As
a result, the use of the Street Oversizing Fund is not a viable option to pay for a portion of the
Vine/Lemay project. However, there are some vacant parcels north of Vine Drive on Lemay Avenue
that, upon development, would be required to build portions of Lemay Avenue in conjunction with the
Street Oversizing Program.
City Sales Tax
The current local sales tax rate for the City of Fort Collins is 3.85%. Voters have dedicated portions of
the local sales tax to funds that could be used to help pay for the Vine/Lemay capital project, including
the 0.25% Building on Basics (BOB) program and the 0.85% Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) program.
The 0.25% BOB tax was passed by voters in 2005, to fund projects that improve the quality of life in Fort
Collins, including projects such as the Museum/Discovery Science Center, Lincoln Center Renovation,
Harmony Road, Intersection Improvements/Signals, North College Avenue, and Timberline Road. The
BOB tax revenues have provided more than $36 million toward total project costs of $65 million, and
provide operations and maintenance funds for the projects for seven years. The BOB tax expires on
December 31, 2015, and an extension is proposed on the April 15, 2015 ballot.
The 0.85% KFCG tax was passed by voters in November 2010, and provides funding for projects through
December 31, 2020. The KFCG tax revenues are allocated towards projects as follows:
· 33% for street maintenance and repair;
· 17% for other street and transportation needs;
· 17% for police services;
· 11% for fire protection and other emergency services;
· 11% for parks maintenance and recreation services; and
· 11% for community priorities other than those listed above, as determined by the city council.
Revenues
Sales tax revenue receipts depend on the volume of retail sales and the general economic condition of
the City. For FY 2012, approximately $6.6 million in BOB revenues were collected, while $21.7 million in
KFCG revenues were collected. The average annual BOB revenues for the last five years have been
approximately $5.8 million as shown in Table F2 below; however, the KFCG revenues have only been in
place since FY 2011. The City Finance Department anticipates that future sales tax revenues will
increase by approximately 2% per year.
4
Table F2 Historic Sales Tax Revenues for BOB and KFCG (FY 2008 through FY 2012)
Annual 0.25%
BOB
Revenues
(expires
12/31/2015)
Annual 0.85%
KFCG
Revenues
(expires
12/31/2021)
FY 2012 $6,638,228 $21,752,164
FY 2011 $5,816,587 $19,818,263
FY 2010 $5,611,156 na
FY 2009 $5,191,310 na
FY 2008 $5,567,128 na
Average $5,764,882 $20,785,214
Source: City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, FY 2008 through FY 2012
Timing
The selection of the BOB and KFCG projects generally starts about 18 months before the election. The
selection process includes internal staff research and analysis along with input from the City Council.
The City Council makes the final decision on which projects make the list. The larger projects generally
are identified on the ballot; however, there are some cases where more flexible programs, such as
arterial intersection improvements, pedestrian plan funds, bike plan funds, etc., are included. Similarly,
the language of the KFCG tax allocates 17% to other street and transportation needs. To be included in
these more flexible programs, the Vine/Lemay project would need to be involved in the two-year
budget cycle, which will be underway in April for FYs 2015-2016.
Potential Issues for Vine/Lemay
The current BOB tax is 100% committed to current projects. There is a possibility that funds allocated in
2015 for “arterial intersection improvements” could be used for Vine/Lemay; however, these funds have
been informally committed to other projects. In addition, the funds available for these arterial
improvements are significantly less than the costs associated with the Vine/Lemay project. If the BOB
tax is extended, it would provide a source of potential funds for the Vine/Lemay project.
Similarly, the KFCG tax allocates some funding for capital transportation projects. The funding from this
tax is approximately $20 million per year; however, it is dedicated to certain types of investments,
including 17% for other street and transportation needs (or approximately $3.4 million per year). As a
result, the funds would not be able to pay for the entirety of the project, but may be a viable source for
the local match to federal funds.
b. Overview of Additional Local Financing Sources
It is clear that the cost of the Vine/Lemay project is too great for the project to be entirely funded by the
City and State in the short-term. As a result, this section will explore potential local financing options
available to fund the project, including but not limited to Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Colorado State
Infrastructure Bank (CO SIB), and revenue bonds (backed by sales tax revenues).
5
Tax Increment Financing
The City of Fort Collins has established an Urban Renewal Authority (URA) to identify and revitalize areas
of the City and to provide a funding mechanism to encourage redevelopment of these areas. The main
funding tool is TIF generated through property taxes. TIF is a funding mechanism that takes advantage
of anticipated increases in property values. The tax rates on property owners within the tax increment
district are not raised, but rather the existing tax revenues remain dedicated to the jurisdiction and the
tax revenues off of the property value increase are dedicated to a fund for the public improvements. TIF
is a value capture mechanism in that it charges a fee on the incremental increase in value that results
from the transportation investment.
Potential Issues for Vine/Lemay
The Vine/Lemay intersection is currently not within the boundaries of the City’s North College URA.
Given the current political environment surrounding the URA, as well as the fact that the surrounding
lands are predominately agricultural and not redevelopment sites, the City has indicated that it is
unlikely the area would be included within the URA boundaries. As a result, TIF is not considered a
viable funding source for the Vine/Lemay project.
Leveraging Future Sales Tax Revenues
Bonds backed by future BOB or KFCG revenues could be issued to help advance the construction of the
Vine/Lemay project, particularly given that the costs and funding needs are greater than the annual
sales tax revenues available. The City has not issued bonds backed by the BOB sales tax to date, but it
has been discussed internally with City staff.
Given the size of the annual BOB and KFCG tax revenues and the City’s continued and committed capital
project needs, it is unlikely that the bonding capacity would add enough revenue to get the project
funded at the local level without additional revenues from other local or federal sources. In addition,
when considering bonding, it is important for the City to weigh the implications of leveraging future
revenues for current projects, which may potentially impact the City’s ability to fund future projects.
Another opportunity for leveraging sales tax revenues includes the use of these revenues to repay low-
interest loans from programs such as the Colorado State Infrastructure Bank, Transportation
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), or the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement
Financing (RRIF) Program, which are described in greater detail in the sections that follow.
6
Colorado State Infrastructure Bank
State Infrastructure Banks (SIBs) were created in the 1990s as a mechanism for states to finance
transportation projects. SIBs are similar to any other bank in that they can offer funds in the form of
loans and credit assistance to public and private project sponsors. The banks are capitalized with federal
funds and state matching funds from sources like local tax options and dedicated funds from local, state,
and federal budgets. They also provide an opportunity to leverage private funds for public goods and
create partnerships. In addition, multi-state banks have been created, typically for projects that cross
state borders. The SIB, unlike a standard bank, is not-for-profit, and offers loans at low interest rates.
To continue offering capital assistance, the SIBs rely on bonds, principal repayments, and interest and
fees to generate additional funds for new projects.2
The Colorado SIB is a program that provides interest bearing loans, for a period of no longer than 10
years, to either private or public sponsors of public transit projects in the State of Colorado. It is a
program designed to complement traditional Federal-aid transportation grants, thus providing projects
in the State with greater flexibility in financing infrastructure projects.
In order for a project to qualify for a loan from the CO SIB, it must be one of the following:3
· Commission-authorized project: includes, but is not limited to, “planning, environmental impact
studies, feasibility studies, engineering, construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoring,
rehabilitation, or replacement of a public or private transportation facility within the state”
· Right of way acquisition: includes “the acquisition of real or personal property, or interests
therein, for a public or private transportation facility within the state”
· Federal-aid project: includes “any highway, transit, aviation, rail, or other transportation project
within the state that is eligible for financing or financial assistance under state or federal law”
· Maintenance project: includes any project that involves “maintenance, repair, improvement, or
construction of any public or private highway, road, street, parkway, transit, aviation, or rail
project within the state”
· Safety project: any project that involves “the acquisition, improvement, or construction of
rights-of-way, bridges, tunnels, railroad-highway crossings, drainage structures, signs, guardrails,
or protective structures within this state”
For a project to be eligible to receive a loan from the CO SIB, it is imperative that it does not include a
facility or other transportation project that is limited to private use only. Additionally, the CO SIB has
only set aside $3.8 million in its highway account, which is the maximum loan amount available for a
project.4
2 Puentes, Robert, and Jennifer Thompson. "Banking on Infrastructure: Enhancing State Revolving Funds." The
Brookings Institute, Sept. 2012.
3 Code of Colorado Regulations, 2 CCR 605-1 Rules and Regulation by the Colorado Department of Transportation
for the Colorado State Infrastructure Bank, Rule III: Eligibility Requirements for Financial Assistance.
4 Based on a conversation with Will Ware at OFMB on March 19, 2014.
7
Potential Issues for Vine/Lemay
The projected costs of the Vine/Lemay project are significantly greater than the funding currently
available in the CO SIB for highway projects. However, the source could help the City leverage existing
local dedicated sales tax revenues at a low interest rate as the local match to federal funds. A CO SIB
loan would allow the City to help finance the local portion of the project cost without the additional
expenses associated with issuing bonds. Given the limited funding currently available in the CO SIB, the
application would have to clearly meet all of the committee’s criteria and objectives for highway
projects.
c. Summary of Local Sources (Matrix)
Given the extent of the Vine/Lemay project costs, the City and State cannot fund the project in the
immediate or short-term. However, in order to secure federal funding to advance the project, local
funds will be required as match. Table F3 highlights the key components of the most viable local
funding sources for the Vine/Lemay project. For each source it provides a description, discusses the
eligibility criteria, average or typical funding levels/awards, and timing for application/receipt of funds.
Table F3 is not a financial plan, but rather a menu of potential sources that could help provide a local
match for the Vine/Lemay project in the short-term.
8
Intentionally Left Blank
9
Table F3 Summary of Local Funding and Financing Sources
Program Description of Program Eligibility Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Funding Levels and Typical
Award
Timeframe/Deadlines Links to Materials
Dedicated Local
Sales Tax Revenues
The 0.25% Building on Basics (BOB) was
passed by voters in 2005 and expires
December 31, 2015. An extension is
proposed for the April 14th ballot.
The 0.85% Keep Fort Collins Great
(KFCG) was passed by voters in
November 2010 and expires December
31, 2020.
The BOB funds projects that improve the quality of life in Fort Collins,
including roadway improvements.
The KFCG allocates 17% of its revenues towards other street and
transportation needs.
The selection of the BOB and
KFCG projects generally starts
about 18 months before the
election. The larger projects
generally are identified in
the ballot; however, there
are some cases where there
is flexibility for types of
projects such as arterial
intersection improvements,
pedestrian plan funds, bike
plan funds, etc.
For FY 2012, approximately
$6.6 million in BOB
revenues were collected,
while $21.7 million in KFCG
revenues were collected.
The average annual BOB
revenues for the last five
years have been
approximately $5.8 million
To be included in
these more flexible
programs, the
Vine/Lemay project
would need to be
involved in the 2-year
budget cycle, which
will be underway in
April for 2015-16.
http://www.fcgov.com/bob/
http://www.fcgov.com/kfcg/
Leveraging Future
Local Sales Tax
Revenues
The City could potential issue bonds
backed by future BOB (its potential
extension) or KFCG sales taxes to fund
projects in excess of annual revenues
in the near-term.
10
Intentionally Left Blank
11
F.2 Federal Funding and Financing Options
This section documents federal funding and financing programs and identifies those most likely to be
applicable to the Vine/Lemay project and any associated development resulting from the project. Each
program and its enabling legislation are briefly discussed, the funding levels are outlined, and the
programs are evaluated with respect to their status and applicability.
The discussion first addresses the federal programs that are most applicable to the Vine/Lemay project.
These are divided into United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) programs involving capital
grants and those involving loans and other forms of financing assistance as well as a potential program
from the Economic Development Administration’s (EDA), including:
· USDOT Grant Programs (MAP-21)
o Railway-Highway Crossings Program
o Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
o Surface Transportation Program (STP)
o Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER)
· USDOT Financing Programs (MAP-21)
o Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA)
o Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing (RRIF)
· EDA Public works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs
Table F4 highlights the key components of the most viable federal funding and financing sources for the
Vine/Lemay project. For each source it provides a description, discusses the eligibility criteria, average
or typical funding levels/awards, and timing for application/receipt of funds. Table F4 is not a financial
plan, but rather a menu of potential federal sources that could be used to help fund a portion of the
Vine/Lemay project.
12
Intentionally Left Blank
13
Table F4 Matrix of Federal Funding and Financing Sources
Program
Federal
Agency
Description of Program Eligibility Criteria
Qualifying
Aspects of
Project
Funding Levels and Typical
Award
Matching Requirements Timeframe/Deadlines Links to Materials
Railway-Highway
Crossings Program
FHWA/FRA
The program funds safety
improvements to reduce the number
of fatalities, injuries, and crashes at
public grade crossings. (1)
The Section 130 program funds are eligible for projects at
all public crossings including roadways, bike trails and
pedestrian paths. Fifty percent of a State's
apportionment is dedicated for the installation of
protective devices at crossings. The remainder of the
funds apportionment can be used for any hazard
elimination project, including protective devices. In
accordance with 23 USC 130(i), the funds can be used as
incentive payments for local agencies to close public
crossings provided there are matching funds from the
railroad. Also, in accordance with 23 USC 130(h), the
funds can be used for local agencies to provide matching
funds for State-funded projects. Typically Section 130
projects are funded at a 90% federal share, however
certain projects under 23 USC 120(c)(1) allow for up to a
100% federal share. (1)
Project removes
an at-grade rail
crossing.
FY 2013: $220M ($3.16M
apportioned to Colorado)
FY 2014: $220M ($3.17M
apportioned to Colorado)
Each state's funding level is
determined based on the
following:
50% is based on the formula
factors for the Surface
Transportation Program (STP)
as in effect the day before the
enactment of MAP-21, and
50% based on the number of
public railway-highway
crossings
The Federal share is 90%
Not Described
A State may use up to 2% of its railway-
highway crossings funds for compilation and
analysis of data for the required annual
report to the Secretary on the progress that is
being made implementing the program.
14
Program
Federal
Agency
Description of Program Eligibility Criteria
Qualifying
Aspects of
Project
Funding Levels and Typical
Award
Matching Requirements Timeframe/Deadlines Links to Materials
Transportation
Investment
Generating Economic
Recovery (TIGER)
USDOT
The program provides grants to
surface transportation projects that
will have a significant impact on the
nation, a metropolitan area, or a
region. Projects are awarded on a
competitive basis based on the
"primary" and "secondary" selection
criteria outlined on the program's
website.
Applicants should be prepared to
obligate grant funds by September
30, 2016.
Eligible projects include: highway or bridge projects
under Title 23, U.S.C.; public transportation projects under
Chapter 53 of Title 49, U.S.C.; freight rail projects; high
speed and intercity passenger rail projects; and port
infrastructure investments.
Applicants must detail the benefits their project would
deliver for five long-term outcomes: safety, economic
competitiveness, state of good repair, livability and
environmental sustainability. DOT also evaluates projects
on their expected contributions to economic recovery, as
well as their ability to facilitate innovation and new
partnerships.
Eligible applicants are State, local, and tribal governments
including U.S. territories, transit agencies, port
authorities, MPOs, and other political subdivisions of
State or local governments.
Surface
transportation
improvements
include grade-
separating rail
and road.
Project provides
user benefits by
improving safety
and removing
congestion,
thereby
reducing
emissions and
travel times for
users.
15
Program
Federal
Agency
Description of Program Eligibility Criteria
Qualifying
Aspects of
Project
Funding Levels and Typical
Award
Matching Requirements Timeframe/Deadlines Links to Materials
Railroad
Rehabilitation &
Improvement
Financing (RRIF)
FRA
Under RRIF, loans and loan
guarantees were issued to finance
development of railroad
infrastructure. (1)
Funds could be used to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate
intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, including track,
components of track, bridges, yards, buildings, and shops;
refinance outstanding debt incurred for the purposes
already listed; and develop or establish new intermodal
or railroad facilities.
Eligible borrowers included: railroads, states and local
governments, government sponsored authorities and
corporations, joint ventures that include at least one
railroad, and limited option freight shippers who intend
to construct a new rail connection. (1)
The
infrastructure
project proposes
to grade-
separate the
railroad from the
road, and the
RRIF financing
can be used for
infrastructure
projects.
The program is authorized to
provide loans guarantees up to
$35 billion, with up to $7
billion for projects benefiting
railroads other than Class 1.
33 loans have been executed
at over $1.7 billion, with loan
agreements totaling nearly
$980 million.
Colorado received a $155
million loan in 2010 under the
Denver Union Station Project
Authority.
Direct loans could finance up to
100% of the project with repayment
over 35 years and interest rates
equal to the cost of borrowing to
the government.
16
Intentionally Left Blank
17
F.3 Recommended Funding Approach Strategies
This section discusses combinations of potential local and federal funding sources that could be pursued
to advance the Vine/Lemay project and the potential issues associated with each strategy. Two project
alternatives are considered in the funding approach analysis: 1) at-grade improvements and 2) a grade
separated overpass. The analysis begins by summarizing the costs, funding gaps and timing issues, and
potential sources to fill these gaps. Lastly, the pros and cons associated with the funding approach
strategies are highlighted.
Given the extent of the Vine/Lemay project costs, it will require a combination of sources to advance the
project. As a result, a political champion for the project will be needed in order to garner support at the
local and regional levels to get the project funded. The strength of the support largely will be based on
the project’s potential benefits and impacts to the City as well as the larger region, which will need to be
considered and shared with the public and potential funding partners. The competition for public funds
(both local and federal) is significant, because there are many important projects out there but
increasingly limited funds. As a result, the benefits and impacts associated with the Vine/Lemay project
need to be effectively communicated with all potential funding partners, including City residents, which
often requires a political champion.
a. High Level Range of Potential Funding Approach Strategies
This section summarizes potential funding approaches for the at-grade and overpass alternatives. These
alternatives represent the range of potential funding that would be needed to construct improvements
to the Vine/Lemay intersection, and as a result the range of potential funding sources that would be
needed.
The focus in this section is on identifying potential sources and combinations of sources that could be
used to fund the project. The issues associated with receiving funds in time to meet construction
expenditures is a concern for the project; however, once the funding sources have been secured, these
funds could be leveraged through TIFIA, Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEEs), or other
bonding mechanisms to get the funds needed up front for construction. These financing vehicles would
allow the project to be constructed in a timely manner, while repaying the loan and/or bond issue over a
specified time with future, committed revenue streams. As a result, the primary focus is on identifying
sources of these revenue streams for the project.
Most Applicable Project Funding Sources
The local and federal sources of funds discussed in this chapter that are most applicable and realistic for
the Vine/Lemay project include the following:
· Local: City Sales Tax (BOB or KFCG) - If the 0.25% BOB sales tax is extended, it would provide a
source of potential funds for the Vine/Lemay project. In addition, approximately $3.4 million in
KFCG sales tax revenues (17%) are potentially available for other street and transportation
needs. As a result, the funds would not be able to pay for the entirety of the project, but may
be a viable source for the local match to federal funds.
· Federal: Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or Surface Transportation Program
(STP) – These programs are part of the Federal-aid highway program annual appropriations.
HSIP funding is specifically available for grade crossing improvements and removal of high-risk
18
at-grade crossings under the Railway-Highway Crossing Program. In addition, the program funds
projects that remove hazardous road locations or any project on a public road that is consistent
with the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). STP provides flexible funding that may be
used by states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and
performance of any federal-aid highway, bridge, or tunnel project on any public road,
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. The use of these funds will
require gaining support at the regional MPO level to get the project included in the region’s
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), as well the State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP). CDOT and the MPO are responsible for allocating federal-aid highway program
funds to projects through the local TIP and state TIP. As a result, having a political champion to
sell the benefits of the project will be particularly helpful in trying to secure these funds. Due to
the competition for these funds, it is estimated that the at-grade alternative would have
trouble securing these funds, while the overpass alternative likely would not receive more
than $5 million; however, through continued project development and communication of
project benefits, the overpass alternative could warrant the consideration of a larger funding
share.
· Federal: TIGER Discretionary Grant Program - The TIGER program is highly applicable to roads
and rail, since its eligible categories include, among others, freight rail projects and any
federally-eligible highway or bridge project. TIGER has been continued for six rounds to date
and through the annual appropriations process. Future rounds depend either on year-to-year
appropriations or the program’s permanent authorization in the successor to MAP-21; the
President’s budget recommendation includes $1.25 billion annually for four more years. The
safety and economic development components of the overpass alternative fit nicely with
TIGER’s evaluation criteria due to the grade separation and removal of rail-highway conflicts;
however, the competition for these funds is quite extensive. With additional local, committed
funding sources, partnerships, and engineering, it would be worthwhile for the City to consider
applying during future TIGER rounds. In urban areas, the minimum TIGER award is $10 million
dollars, and the most competitive TIGER projects tend to keep the local match at 50%;
therefore, the overpass alternative potentially could receive between $10 million and $14
million with a successful TIGER application. It is not recommended that the at-grade
alternative pursue TIGER funds, because it does not remove or reduce to opportunity for rail-
highway conflicts as it is currently defined.
· Federal: EDA Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs – These EDA
Programs provide assistance to distressed communities to help them attract or expand
businesses and generate long-term jobs. The project would be eligible under the programs
because it proposes to improve an access road to a future commercial business center, thereby
supporting employment growth in the region. Recent average grant awards have been
approximately $1 million. As a result, the grant program could provide supplemental revenues
for the project but would not be able to provide a significant contribution. Applications are
competitively evaluated in quarterly funding cycles (deadlines on March 14, June 13, and
October 17) and decisions generally are made within 20 business days of the funding cycle
deadline. An applicant may submit an application at any time to receive feedback on the
application’s competitive and technical merits. If this is an opportunity that the City would like
to consider further, it is recommended that they take advantage of this ability to receive
feedback on their application to determine its likelihood of success as well as if there are
additional components that would better position the project for an award.
19
In addition to these funding programs, the TIFIA program could be a mechanism for the overpass
alternative to leverage future revenue streams from the City sales tax and/or future federal-aid highway
program funds (HSIP or STIP). A TIFIA project must be reasonably anticipated to cost at least $25 million
for rural projects, and the definition of rural for TIFIA purposes includes cities of less than 250,000
population.5 Therefore, only the overpass project would be eligible for the TIFIA program. While TIFIA’s
normal interest rate for secured loans can be as low as the rate on 30-year US Treasuries, 10% of TIFIA’s
budget authority is set aside for rural projects at reduced interest rates to as low as one-half the
Treasury rate—offering the City a competitive opportunity to leverage any secured funding streams.
The potential mix of funding strategies for each alternative is discussed below.
At-Grade Alternative
The cost of the realignment of the at-grade Vine/Lemay intersection is estimated to be $13.6 million
from planning through construction. It is assumed that the time required to complete the project
(including planning and engineering) would be approximately four to five years, with most of the costs
associated with construction occurring during the last two years.
There are some vacant parcels north of Vine Drive on Lemay Avenue that, upon development, would be
required to build portions of Lemay Avenue in conjunction with the Street Oversizing Program. The City
has estimated the portion of the alternative’s costs that could be funded by the City’s Street Oversizing
Program as well as the Developer’s Local Street Portion (associated with access to several currently
undeveloped sites), which are summarized in Table F5. While the Local Street Portion is directly tied to
the development of the adjacent parcels, if the capital project came before the development of these
parcels the money would have to come from another source. However, future receipt of the Local
Street Portion could be used to pay back these funds over time.
Table F5 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the At-Grade Alternative ($M)
Total Project Cost $ 24.60
Developer Local Street Portion $ 1.45
City Street Oversizing Portion $ 5.16
Amount Remaining to be Funded $ 17.99
Source: AECOM Cost Estimate (May 2014) and City Estimates of Street Portions
After the application of these local street portion/oversizing funds, nearly $18 million in funding would
still be required for the at-grade alternative. The funding approach analysis estimates that the
remaining costs would have to be funded primarily through the City’s sales tax, which could be feasible
based on the current assumption that the City would only be able to provide $5 million to $10 million in
sales tax revenues towards the project.
The options for funding the at-grade alternative with sources other than City funds are rather limited
due to the current definition of this alternative. In order for the alternative to be competitive for other
federal-aid highway funds or federal discretionary grants like HSIP, STP, and TIGER, train blockages must
be reduced to create travel time savings, safety improvements, and emissions reduction benefits in the
region. As this alternative is currently defined, it excludes relocating the rail yard that is the source of
5 Fort Collins population is 144,000 according to Census 2010. See:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/08/0827425.html
20
these blockages and provides limited opportunity to reduce the likelihood of rail-highway conflicts. As a
result, the potential benefits associated with improved traffic flow during non-blocked time periods are
not likely to be significant enough to gain the support of larger funding programs such as HSIP, STP, or
TIGER.
In order to improve the competitiveness of the at-grade project, it is recommended that the City
consider making the alternative a joint project with BNSF to move the rail yard and look for
opportunities to improve BNSF operations with the implementation of the combined project. This could
potentially reduce the number of trains blocking the grade crossing and improve the movement of
freight in the region—generating significant community benefits in travel time savings, vehicle operating
cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions and making the project more attractive to
the local voters, regional economic developers, and funding partners.
Overpass Alternative
The cost of the Lemay Avenue overpass alternative is estimated to be $26.6 million from planning
through construction. It is assumed that the time required to complete the project (including planning
and engineering) would be five years, with most of the costs associated with construction occurring
during the last two years, as shown in Figure F1.
Figure F1 Annual Construction Expenditure Flow for the Overpass Alternative
Source: AECOM
There are some vacant parcels north of Vine Drive on Lemay Avenue that, upon development, would be
required to build portions of Lemay Avenue in conjunction with the Street Oversizing Program. The City
has estimated the portion of the alternative’s costs that could be funded by the City’s Street Oversizing
Program as well as the Developer’s Local Street Portion (associated with access to several currently
undeveloped sites), which are summarized in Table F6. While the Local Street Portion is directly tied to
the development of the adjacent parcels, if the capital project came before the development of these
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
21
parcels, the money would have to come from another source. However, future receipt of the Local
Street Portion could be used to pay back these funds over time.
Table F6 Estimated Local Developer and Street Oversizing Funds for the Overpass Alternative ($M)
Total Project Cost $ 27.60
Developer Local Street Portion $ 1.29
City Street Oversizing Portion $ 4.46
Amount Remaining to be Funded $ 21.85
Source: AECOM Cost Estimate (May 2014) and City Estimates of Street Portions
After the application of these local street portion/oversizing funds, an additional $20.85 million in
funding would still be required for the overpass alternative. The funding approach analysis estimates
that the remaining costs potentially could be funded through a combination of the City’s sales tax,
Federal HSIP/STP, TIGER, and EDA funds, due to the types of benefits and economic development
impacts that could accrue to the City and larger region by removing the rail-vehicle conflicts through
grade separation. While there is an opportunity for a greater variety of funding source for the overpass
alternative, it is not recommended that the City pursue a wide variety of sources initially due to the
complications associated with timing and getting commitments from multiple funding partners. If one
funding partner backs out, the margin is tight enough that it is possible the City and remaining funding
partners may not be able to make up the difference. As a result, it is recommended that the City pursue
one additional federal funding source to fund a larger share of the project costs, such as TIGER.
A sample funding approach strategy is summarized in Table F7, assuming a TIGER award equal to 50% of
the project’s costs. Given what is known about the proposed overpass alternative, the project has the
potential to be competitive in the TIGER evaluation process due to its potential for significant travel time
savings, vehicle operating cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions associated with
the grade separation, as well as the potential of the project to facilitate economic development and
provide “ladders of opportunity” for regional job growth. If the TIGER award would be closer to $10
million, the approach would still be viable given low contributions assumed from other federal funds.
Table F7 Potential TIGER Funding Strategy for the Remaining Overpass Alternative Costs ($M)
Federal: TIGER $ 13.80
Local: City Sales Tax Cash (new BOB/KCFG) $ 7.00
Federal: HSIP/STP/EDA $ 1.05
Total $ 21.85
Even though it appears that the project would be competitive in the TIGER evaluation process, the
success rate of applications is low due to the volume of competitive projects and the limited funding
available. A political champion could help improve the project’s standing in the evaluation process, but
there is never a guarantee of success. If the project is not successful in winning a TIGER grant, or if it is
not available to the project, then another similarly large federal funding program will have to be
aggressively pursued—potentially a combination of HSIP and STP funds. If the City can contribute
between $5 to $10 million towards the project from BOB/KFCG sales tax, then at least $1185 to $16.85
million in other funds would still need to be secured. This is not a small amount; however, if the project
is marketed correctly and the benefits fully explored and communicated, it is not impossible.
22
b. Pros and Cons Associated with the Funding Approach Strategies
The funding approaches considered for both alternatives highlight the major concern for the
Vine/Lemay project: a large funding source is not readily or currently available to the City. The best
source of local funds is the local option sales tax, which will need to be extended with a new voter
referendum. Even with the passage of a new BOB sales tax, it is not likely to provide more than $5-$10
million towards the project, which means that between $3 million and $12 million in additional funds
would still be needed to construct the project alternatives. These local funds would need to be secured
before additional funding partners could be pursued to demonstrate local commitment to the project.
At-Grade Alternative
The at-grade alternative funding approach is relatively straightforward, as it would likely have to be
funded entirely with City funds. The simplicity of the approach adds to the ease of getting it constructed
due to limited project partners and requirements; however, there is also the greatest financial risk
associated with this approach as it would be difficult for the City to fund it entirely from sales tax
revenues. Any cost overruns or revenue shortfalls would need to be funded by the City.
This project also has greater timing issues in terms of the funds being available when construction costs
occur. With the City as the primary source of funding (particularly as the Developer Local Street Portion
is likely to occur at the end or after construction), the project may have to wait until all the sales tax
revenues are available, which could take several years. If the City would like to advance the
construction of the project before all funds are in hand, they will have to issue bonds backed by the BOB
sales tax because Federal financing programs such as TIFIA would not be available to the at-grade
alternative due to the lower cost and lower competitiveness of the project benefits. The City has not
issued bonds backed by the BOB sales tax to date, but it has been discussed internally with City staff.
The City would have to weigh the implications of leveraging future revenues for current projects, which
may impact the City’s ability to fund future projects.
Overpass Alternative
The overpass alternative has a higher cost, however, it also offers a more varied funding approach due
to the opportunity to competitively pursue non-City funding, including Federal HSIP/STP, TIGER, and
EDA funds. The alternative more closely aligns with regional goals for reduced rail-highway conflicts and
improved access to economic development sites, which are attractive to regional and federal funding
partners. The removal of rail-highway conflicts with the overpass alternative would result in significant
travel time savings, vehicle operating cost savings, safety improvements, and emissions reductions
associated with grade separation. While additional funding sources are available to the overpass
alternative, it would still need to rely heavily on City sales tax revenues to construct the project due to
the scale of the investment and the local match requirements associated with federal funds.
While there are several federal funding sources that the overpass alternative could pursue, it is
recommended that the City begin by trying to attract funding from one larger federal program such as
HSIP, STP, or TIGER. Initially pursuing one larger program would allow the City to minimize the
difficulties associated with managing and getting firm commitments from numerous funding partners.
As the project moves through the planning and development process, additional beneficiaries and
funding partners could be identified and pursed to fill in any remaining gaps in project funding. A
political champion for the project also could help identify these additional beneficiaries and garner the
23
necessary support at the local, regional, and federal levels. The benefits and impacts associated with
the Vine/Lemay project will need to be effectively communicated with all potential funding partners,
including City residents, and a strong political champion can help deliver this essential message.
The issues associated with receiving funds in time to meet construction expenditures is a concern for the
alternative; however, it is not as great of a concern as the at-grade alternative. Once the funding
sources have been secured, these local and federal funds could be leveraged through TIFIA, Grant
Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEEs), or other bonding mechanisms to get the funds needed up
front for construction. These financing vehicles would allow the project to be constructed in a timely
manner, while repaying the low interest loan and/or bond issue over a specified time with future,
committed revenue streams.
ÄÄÄ
EXHIBIT 2 - 30% DESIGN PLANS FOR EAST VINE DRIVE RELOCATION (SUNIGA DRIVE)
G1
6 26
G2
7 26
I1
22 26
I2
23 26
I3
24 26
I4
25 26
I5
26 26
26
PP1
8
26
PP2
9
PRELIMINARY
PLANS
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
26
PP3
10
26
PP4
11
26
PP5
12
26
PP6
13
26
PP7
14
26
PP8
15
26
PP9
16
26
PP10
17
26
PP11
18
26
PP12
19
26
PP13
20
26
PP14
21
26
T1
2
U1
3 26
U2
4 26
U3
5 26
Improved Condition
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
June 4, 2015
Existing Condition
EXHIBIT 3
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Table of Contents
APPLICATION LETTER ........................................................................................i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................1
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................4
B. PROJECT LOCATION .......................................................................................6
C. PROJECT PARTIES ...........................................................................................9
D. GRANT FUNDS & SOURCES ...........................................................................9
E. SELECTION CRITERIA .....................................................................................11
I. PRIMARY SELECTION CRITERIA ...........................................................11
a. STATE OF GOOD REPAIR ............................................................11
b. ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS ................................................14
c. QUALITY OF LIFE ........................................................................14
d. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY ..........................................19
e. SAFETY ........................................................................................19
II. SECONDARY SELECTION CRITERIA ......................................................21
a. INNOVATION .............................................................................21
b. PARTNERSHIP ............................................................................23
F. RESULTS OF BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS ...........................................................24
G. PROJECT READINESS AND APPROVALS ........................................................25
H. FEDERAL WAGE RATE CERTIFICATION ..........................................................29
I. SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES FROM PRE-APPLICATION.......................................30
APPENDIX (ATTACHED SEPARATELY)
A. Mountain Vista SubArea Plan
B. Project Development Report
C. Benefit/Cost Analysis
D. Letters of Support
-Senator Michael F. Bennet, Colorado
-Senator Cory Gardner, Colorado
-Congressman Jared Polis, 2nd District Colorado
-Gregory E. Dunaway, AVP Engineering Services, BNSF Railway
-Darin Atteberry, Fort Collins City Manager
-Terri Blackmore, Executive Director, North Front Range MPO
-Marc Engemoen, Public Works Director, Larimer County
-David May, President & CEO, Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce
-Matt Robenalt, Executive Director, Downtown Development Authority
-Julie Brewen, CEO/Executive Director, Fort Collins Housing Authority
-Olga Duvall, Chair, Fort Collins Transportation Board
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | i
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
June 4, 2015
Secretary Anthony Foxx
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Subject: TIGER Grant Application for the Fort Collins, CO - Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and
Freight Connectivity Project
Dear Secretary Foxx:
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado is pleased to submit this application for the Department
of Transportation’s National Infrastructure Investments under the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015.
The Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project is the end product of
collaboration and partnerships between the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Downtown
Development Authority, the Poudre School District, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Railway, the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, major landowners, major
existing and future employers in Fort Collins, project site neighbors, and the general public.
The City’s planning process leadership manifests itself in strong support for the proposed
improvements and clear and consistent support for the long-term vision supported by the
proposed improvements.
This application requests funding to support a grade separation of the BNSF Railway and Lemay
Avenue intersection located northeast of Downtown Fort Collins. The full project cost is $27
Million, of which $17 Million, or 63%, is requested of the TIGER program. The remaining $10M
(37%) would be funded through a combination of public and private sources.
The proposed improvements have been identified as a result of 30 years of community
planning. This project plays a critical role in providing vital and urgent transportation
infrastructure necessary to address current and anticipated needs. It embodies TIGER’s
emphasis on Ladders of Opportunity through building infrastructure that will increase
connectivity to employment, education and other services, contribute to community
revitalization and enhance the quality of life of existing and future residents. TIGER funding
for the proposed improvements makes possible subsequent local government and private
sector land development investments that will guide community revitalization and economic
opportunity in the region over the next 25 years.
The proposed improvements are vital early components linked to the City’s Mountain Vista
SubArea Plan. Together, the Mountain Vista SubArea Plan and more recent Project Development
Report provide the catalyst for:
• Community Revitalization: One of the fundamental aims of this project is to complete critical
transportation improvements that will enhance connectivity for underserved neighborhoods.
Residents of both the Alta Vista and Andersonville neighborhoods (located at the Vine/Lemay
intersection) suffer from the constraints of severe congestion on a daily basis. This limits
connectivity to employment, schools, goods and services.
• Diverse Housing and Employment Opportunities: This project will help facilitate the development
of new housing and employment opportunity in a priority infill area near downtown Fort Collins.
In recent years, this area has become the focus of increased economic activity, including the
recent construction of the Woodward, Inc. Corporate Headquarters (1,700 employees) along
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | ii
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Lemay Drive. Safe and efficient transportation connections are necessary to sustain this new
growth.
• Multi-modal Connectivity and Safety: A primary emphasis of this project is to foster a safe,
connected, resilient and accessible system for all modes of travel. This project is a critical part of
the City’s Enhanced Travel Corridor network, which is intended to provide a system of multi-modal
corridor connections between key activity centers, access to high frequency transit service and
bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
• Commerce and Accessibility Improvements: The existing Vine/Lemay intersection, which includes
the BNSF Railway crossing, is severely congested, with limited options to expand through or
turn capacity due to land use constraints. Construction of a grade separated configuration will
help alleviate congestion along existing roadways and the BNSF rail corridor, which in turn helps
improve rail operations and the overall ability to move goods and services efficiently.
The transportation improvements identified in this application were part of an application
submitted in the 2013 TIGER funding cycle under the title “Vine/Lemay Project.” Since that
time, the City has taken a number of proactive steps to advance the environmental, design
and funding processes for the project, and has narrowed the project scope. The new project,
Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project, focuses on the grade separation
of Lemay at the BNSF (the City renamed the new Vine Drive to “Suniga Drive” in early 2015).
Recent project advancements over the past two years include the following:
• The City published a detailed Project Development Report including an alternatives screening and
environmental analysis process in September 2014.
• The City appropriated 1 Million dollars in 2015 funds to advance final design of the project
• The City and the BNSF have a long-standing partnership and have constructed numerous
safety and freight reliability improvements throughout Fort Collins. The BNSF will
contribute 5% of the theoretical cost of the grade separation as specified in 23 CFR 646.210.
This demonstrates their commitment to address the City’s #1 transportation capital
improvement project.
• The City has secured half of the right-of-way along the Lemay Avenue realignment and is in active
negotiations for the remainder of the right-of-way, which will help streamline future construction.
• The City is securing developer local street obligation funds to contribute to this project.
The project schedule focuses on the primary goal of having all pre-construction activities
completed to allow for obligation of construction funds by March of 2017 at the latest, and if
alternative delivery is selected, this obligation could be as early as September 2016.
Enclosed is the City of Fort Collin’s grant application and supporting information referenced in
the submittal. If additional information is needed for your consideration, please contact Dean
Klingner, P.E., Civil Engineer, City of Fort Collins, 970-221-6511, dklingner@fcgov.com. The City
would be pleased to provide additional details about the project and the rationale for TIGER
grant funding.
Sincerely,
Rick Richter
Rick Richter
Director of Infrastructure Services
City of Fort Collins
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 1
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight
Connectivity Project is the end product of
30 years of collaboration and partnerships
between a full range of public and private
sector entities. The City’s leadership
manifests itself in strong support for
the proposed improvements and land
use planning. Each improvement plays a
critical role in providing vital and urgent
transportation infrastructure necessary to
address current and anticipated needs. TIGER
funding for the proposed improvements helps
leverage local government and private sector
land development investments that will guide
economic development in the region over the
next 25 years.
The proposed improvements are vital early
components linked to the City’s Mountain
Vista SubArea Plan. Together, the Mountain
Vista SubArea Plan and the proposed
“enabling infrastructure” investments provide
the catalyst for:
• Community Revitalization: Facilitates the
transportation connectivity necessary
to revitalize existing disadvantaged and
underserved neighborhoods and link to
employment citywide, thereby improving
quality of life.
• Diverse Housing and Employment
Opportunities: Directs new development
and employment to a priority infill area
near downtown.
• Multi-modal Connectivity and Safety:
Fosters a safe, connected resilient and
accessible system for all modes of travel.
• Commerce and Accessibility
Improvements: Alleviates congestion
along the BNSF rail corridor to help
enhance operations and the overall ability
to move goods and services.
A variety of quotes from the Mountain
Vista SubArea Plan are presented in this
application. The plan itself is presented at
Appendix A.
Submittal Highlights
State of Good Repair
Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue are in a
poor state of repair characterized by
deficient bridges, substandard conditions
and accelerating deterioration caused by
increasing truck and automobile volumes.
Neither roadway meets City standards for
their current roadway designations or their
existing and projected traffic volumes. This
project would improve the resiliency of the
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 2
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Economic Competitiveness
One of the fundamental aims of this project
is to complete critical improvements that will
increase opportunity for economic growth.
If no improvements are made in the near
future, the existing sub-standard roadway
network will continue to deteriorate and
unmanageable congestion will increase.
This delay and the related impacts will
deter private sector investment and the
expansion of existing economic enterprises
and activity under both short-term and
long-term scenarios. These conditions will
make it difficult for the City to attract new
enterprises, and may cause some enterprises
to relocate entirely, fueling a cycle of
economic downturn.
Quality of Life and Sustainability
The proposed improvements will enhance
conditions at two historic residential areas,
reduce congestion, and make the entire area
more accessible. The project will enhance
modal connectivity and improve accessibility
and transport for economically disadvantaged
populations. Life-cycle analysis is integrated
into the City’s Asset Management Program
and contract requirements along with Value
Engineering (VE).
Survey results collected as part of the 2009
Pedestrian Plan indicated that both Vine Drive
and Lemay Drive rank in the top three least
favorite places to walk in the City of Fort Collins.
Figure 1: Illustration of the Proposed Lemay Grade Separation over BNSF and Vine Drive
Safety
The proposed improvements address
substantive safety issues by replacing non-
standard facilities and replacing an at grade
railroad crossings with a grade separated
facility.
Innovation
The project is a model of innovative project
delivery. The project has been innovative
from the beginning, including a highly
collaborative and accelerated project
delivery. The project will include features that
reduce capital and long-term costs, protect
the environment, improve mode choice and
safety, and preserve long-term multi-modal
benefits.
Partnership
The Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight
Connectivity Project is the end product of
30 years of collaboration and partnerships
between a full range of public and private
sector entities. The City’s leadership
manifests itself in strong support for the
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 3
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Project Readiness and Approvals
This project has been envisioned and
included in major City transportation plans
for over 30 years. This extensive and long
range planning would provide immediate
improvements in mobility and access for
existing neighborhoods, and would maximize
the potential for integrated land use and
transportation as the area grows and
develops over time.
The City has advanced the project design
by completing conceptual design and an
alternatives analysis in 2014, as well as
appropriating $1M in funding in 2015 to
advance the design and right-of-way review.
The Vine/Lemay Project Development Report
(published in September 2014) provides a
robust description of the purpose and need,
range of alternatives and environmental
impacts. This study will assist in streamlining
future NEPA clearance as federal funding
becomes available.
The project is currently envisioned to be
delivered using traditional design-bid-
build approach, however if phasing of the
improvements becomes critical the City
is prepared to deliver via an innovative
Contractor Manager/General Contractor
(CMGC) method or Design- Build (DB)
method. These alternative delivery methods
would be considered if they are determined
to appropriately manage risk for cost,
schedule, and quality.
The table below shows the cost breakdown of
the major project components.
The table below shows the approximate
sources of local funding which constitute
$10M toward the overall $27M project.
In addition to the local funding sources
above, BNSF is committed to contributing
5% of the grade separation cost. The exact
dollar amount will be confirmed in the
coming months.
The table below outlines anticipated benefits
of the project with associated metrics.
The calculated regional output for the project is
$46M. The regional earnings would be $13.3M.
Benefit Category Measured Benefit
Travel Time Savings, Total
Delay Reduction
23,157 hours per year
$466,614 per year
Total Crash Reduction
Cost Savings
$173,570 per year
Fuel Savings 32,224 gallons per year
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 4
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves the realignment of Lemay
Avenue and construction of a new bridge over
the railroad and Vine Drive, which directly
parallels the railroad. This new bridge will allow
existing Vine Drive to be reduced to a collector
street with a more robust arterial and multi-
modal version of Suniga Drive constructed
approximately one thousand feet to the north,
thereby eliminating the at-grade railroad
crossing, and associated safety and congestion
effects of an intersection and roadway directly
adjacent and parallel to the railroad.
The City of Fort Collins will provide 37 percent
($10 Million) of the $27 Million project cost
with the balance ($17 Million) requested of the
TIGER program. The source of the local funds
comes from a dedicated City appropriation to
the project, City General Fund monies, BNSF
contribution, developer obligation, and partner
agency funds.
Although the Colorado Public Utilities
Commission could ultimately require three
grade-separated railroad crossings in this area
(per the Mountain Vista SubArea Plan), the top
priority for a grade separation is at the BNSF/
Lemay Railroad crossing. Both the Union Pacific
Railroad (UPRR) and BNSF railroad lines serve
the northeast portion of Fort Collins. Their
operations include a shared railroad switching
yard along the existing Vine Drive between
Lemay Avenue and Timberline Road, and a UPRR
switching yard along Riverside Avenue between
Mulberry Street and Lincoln Avenue. Both are
secondary lines providing additional capacity to
other BNSF and UPRR railroad facilities in Weld
County. The existing at grade crossing at the
Vine/Lemay intersection operates at Level of
Service F conditions on a regular basis. This occurs
primarily when long, slow-moving trains impede
north/south traffic flow as they pass through
the intersection. Long queues on Lemay often
prohibit residential ingress and egress north and
south of Vine.
The grade separation would delay the need for
the other grade separations while allowing a
substantial amount of planned development to
occur and associated infrastructure funding to
accrue. Specifically, the new development would
help cover costs for the remaining improvements
as development occurs.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 5
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
The project will help facilitate connectivity for
all modes of travel, including enhancements for
bicyclists, pedestrians and transit users.
Enhanced Bicycle Travel
The City’s 2014 Bicycle Master Plan integrates
best practices and innovative thinking to
develop a comprehensive set of strategies for
safe and comfortable bicycling citywide. As
part of the plan, all streets proposed with this
project (existing Vine, Lemay and Suniga) will
incorporate state of the art bicycle facilities
based on the concept of improving safety,
comfort and accessibility for cyclists of all ages
and skill levels.
Transit Accommodations
Bus Route 8 currently serves the western edge
of this subarea and runs through northeast Fort
Collins via Vine Drive, Lemay Avenue, Conifer
Street and College Avenue. This route provides
connections to the River District, the Larimer
County Department of Human Services, the
North College Corridor, and Old Town Fort
Collins.
This project is currently envisioned to be delivered
using traditional design-bid-build approach,
however if phasing of the improvements
becomes critical the City is prepared to deliver
via an innovative Contractor Manager/General
Contractor (CMGC) method or Design-Build (DB)
method. These alternative delivery methods
would be considered if they are determined to
appropriately manage risk for cost, schedule, and
quality.
In summary, these improvements have been
identified as a result of 30 years of community
planning. The project plays a critical role in
providing vital and urgent transportation
infrastructure necessary to address current and
anticipated needs.
This project has garnered a broad range of
support from the congressional level to the local
level. Letters of Support, provided in Appendix D,
include the following:
Senator Michael F. Bennet, Colorado
Senator Cory Gardner, Colorado
Congressman Jared Polis, 2nd District Colorado
Gregory E. Dunaway, BNSF Railway
Darin Atteberry, Fort Collins City Manager
Terri Blackmore, Executive Director, North Front
Range MPO
Marc Engemoen, Public Works Director,
Larimer County
David May, President & CEO, Fort Collins Area
Chamber of Commerce
Matt Robenalt, Executive Director, Downtown
Development Authority
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 6
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
B. PROJECT LOCATION
The project is located within
the 1,500 acre Mountain
Vista SubArea, a primarily
undeveloped area within the
northeast portion of the City
of Fort Collins, Colorado. The
national, state, regional and
local settings of the proposed
improvements are presented
in Figures 2-5. The Mountain
Vista SubArea is projected to
accommodate a significant
portion of Fort Collins’ future
growth. Figures 2-5 clarify the
strategic importance of the
project area relative to the
Interstate system, Colorado’s
state highway system and the
planning and development
conditions in Fort Collins.
Importance to the Region and
Community
Investment in the proposed
project is necessary for the
health and continued prosperity
of Downtown Fort Collins and
management of the City’s and
Colorado’s economic growth.
This grade separation of BNSF/
Lemay is part of the City’s larger
strategy to revitalize existing
neighborhoods, provide more
efficient and direct access to
employment, and improve
quality of life for existing and
future residents. Federal funding
for the anticipated improvements
is critical because strong, smart
and phased growth in this area
is constrained by “enabling”
infrastructure with costs that
exceed the capacity of traditional,
innovative and private sector
funding mechanisms in place in
Fort Collins.
80
25 76
70
70
25
Fort Collins
Denver
WYOMING
UTAH
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 7
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Figure 4: Mountain Vista Framework Plan
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 8
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
PROPOSED GRADE SEPARATED
RAIL CROSSING
OTHER FUTURE GRADE SEPARATED
RAIL CROSSING
STREET (EXISTING)
STREET (PROPOSED)
RAILROAD
INTERSTATE
LEGEND
Vicinity Map
25
ANDERSONVILLE
NEIGHBORHOOD
WOODWARD, INC.
CAMPUS
ALTA VISTA
NEIGHBORHOOD
VINE DRIVE EXISTING
SUNIGA DRIVE
LEMAY AVE. . LINDENMEIR R D.
N COLLEGE AVE.
TIMPBERLINE DR.
MOUN
BNSF
SWITCHING
YARD
TAIN VISTA DR.
2 3
1
ANHEUSER
BUSCH
N
Improvement
Grade Separation of the Vine/
Lemay RR Intersection
2 Proposed Suniga Drive
from College to Lemay
Proposed Suniga Drive
from Lemay to Timberline
CSU
DOWNTOWN
FORT COLLINS
1
3
REALIGNED
LEMAY
*Future development (not included as
part of this funding request)
*
*
Figure 5: Vine/Lemay Intersection Local Context Map
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 9
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
C. PROJECT PARTIES
The project is the end product of collaboration
and partnerships between the City of Fort Collins,
Larimer County, CDOT, utilities, the Poudre School
District, BNSF Railroad, the North Front Range
Metropolitan Planning Organization, major
landowners, major existing and future employers
in Fort Collins (Anheuser Busch and Woodward),
project site neighbors, and the general public. The
City’s planning process leadership manifests itself
in strong support for the proposed improvements
and clear and consistent support for the
long-term vision supported by the proposed
improvements. Please refer to Appendix D for
letters of support.
D. GRANT FUNDS & SOURCES
This project proposes a grade separation of the
Vine/Lemay Intersection with a realignment of
Lemay Avenue to the east (see Figure 6).
The following table shows the total cost of project
improvements ($27M), of which $17M (63%)
is requested of the TIGER Discretionary Grant
program.
Improvement Cost
Grade Separation of the Vine/ BNSF/ Lemay
Intersection
$ 12M
Construction of Four-Lane Arterial Roadways $ 8M
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities and
Landscaping
$ 6M
Neighborhood Street (Local Street)
Construction
$ 1M
$ 27M
The following table shows the sources of local
funding which constitute $10M (37%) of the
$27M project.
In addition to the local funding sources
above, BNSF is committed to contributing
5% of the grade separation cost. The exact
dollar amount will be confirmed in the
coming months.
Local Funding Sources Cost
1. City of Ft. Collins 2015 Appropriation to
Project
$ 1M
3. Street Over-sizing $ 5M
4. Local Street Developer Obligation $ 1.5M
5. City General Fund $ 2.5M
TOTAL $ 10M
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 10
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Figure 6: Proposed Project Design
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 11
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
E. SELECTION CRITERIA
I. Primary selection criteria
The proposed improvements are a high priority
for the state, region and local communities.
The long term outcomes of investing TIGER
funding for construction of the project are in
direct alignment with the TIGER grant goals. The
long-term outcomes, or benefits, are measurable
and significant. The following discussions describe
and quantify long-term benefits of this project.
a. State of Good Repair
i. The project is part of and consistent with
relevant state, local or regional efforts to
maintain transportation facilities in a state
of good repair.
Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue are in a poor state
of repair characterized by deficient bridges,
substandard conditions and accelerating
deterioration caused by increasing truck and
automobile volumes. Structures along Vine
Drive are over 60 years old. Structures along
Lemay Avenue are over 45 years old. Two bridges
along these roads are functionally obsolete
due to inadequate width and are in a state of
rapid deterioration. Neither roadway meets City
standards for their current roadway designations
or their existing and projected traffic volumes.
The existing street network in the project
area lacks basic facilities for pedestrians and
continuous routes for bicycles creating an unsafe
and discouraging environment for these modes of
travel.
The existing at grade Vine/Lemay intersection
fails to meet current standards and operates with
failing levels of service due to capacity and long,
slow trains passing through the intersection.
Existing intersection design deficiencies include:
• Level of Service F traffic operations
• Lack of auxiliary lanes
• Small turning radii requiring Jersey barriers for
protection
Photo 1: Vine/Lemay Intersection Looking West
Photo 2: Vine/Lemay Intersection Looking Northeast at
Jersey Barriers and Lack of Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
and a Lack of Turning Lanes
Photo 3: Vine/Lemay Intersection Looking West at Traffic
Operations and Congestion
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 12
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
• Lack of adequate facilities for pedestrians, and
inadequate, discontinuous facilities for cyclists
Photos 1-5 clarify existing conditions.
The project will replace existing pavements with
30-year design life pavement. The inadequate
bridges will be replaced with structures with a
design life of 75 years. The new infrastructure will
allow safe travel for autos, commercial trucks,
public transit, bicyclists and pedestrians while
meeting estimated traffic demands through 2035.
ii. The project will rehabilitate, reconstruct and
upgrade a current surface transportation
project that threatens future economic
growth and stability due to its poor condition.
Investment in this project is inherently necessary
for the continued viability and resiliency of the
transportation network in the greater Fort Collins
area and management of Colorado’s economic
growth. If left unimproved, the poor condition
of the roadway network will threaten future
transportation efficiency, mobility of goods and
people and economic growth. This project directly
addresses those concerns. In addition, it would
improve the ability to withstand the occurrence
of an emergency or major disaster by grade
separating roadway from rail operations, and by
creating a more direct and efficient link for entry
and exit into the heart of downtown.
TIGER grant funding is needed to supplement
City funding programs. Without supplemental
funding for the project, existing residents and
employees of businesses in the vicinity will suffer
from inadequate infrastructure for all modes and
unnecessary delays due to rail movements. This
funding and timing gap will allow accelerated
deterioration of these roadways and will
encourage unplanned growth in agricultural areas
away from the City Center.
State Benefits
Colorado’s roadway network has deteriorated
and a lack of funding for improvements is a
serious impediment to economic growth and
future development. The economic health of
Fort Collins, Colorado’s 5th largest City, is a key
contributor to the economic health of Colorado as
a whole. Investment in the project will strengthen
the interdependent national, state and local
roadway network by enhancing offline roadway
conditions and critical system interconnectivity.
Regional Benefits
North Central Colorado and Larimer County,
especially the northeast region of Fort Collins,
face growth pressures that require coordinated
land use planning and critical infrastructure
investments that are beyond existing local and
state funding capabilities. The roadway system to
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 13
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
of Lemay Avenue. The roadway network and
the lack of capacity along Vine Drive and Lemay
Avenue and through the Vine/Lemay/BNSF
intersection create long-term gaps in the regional
roadway network. The planned improvements
would substantially enhance system resiliency and
interconnectivity while reducing roadway delays.
Local Community Benefits
Plans for grade separating Lemay Avenue from
the BNSF Railroad, have been developed for
over the last 30 years by the City of Fort Collins
and regional partners. The City of Fort Collins
ensures that all parts of the City are served by an
adequate, robust, and multi-modal transportation
network through policy tools such as the
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Without
Federal funding, the City is at risk of being forced
to deny development proposals in the Mountain
Vista master-planned area of northeast Fort
Collins because Vine Drive, Lemay Avenue and
the Lemay/BNSF crossing do not pass the City’s
“minimum level of service criteria” in their
existing condition of disrepair.
One of the fundamental aims of this project
is to complete critical improvements that will
enhance connectivity for existing underserved
neighborhoods and increase opportunity for
economic growth. Residents of both the Alta
Vista and Andersonville neighborhoods (located
at the Vine/Lemay intersection) suffer from the
constraints of congestion. Community outreach
confirms that many struggle with egress from
their neighborhoods on a consistent, daily basis
due to traffic back-ups along Lemay. This limits
connectivity to employment, schools and goods
and services.
The community of Fort Collins has established
a strong economic foothold, and has adopted
plans for future residential, commercial and
industrial growth that is infeasible without the
project. If no improvements are made in the
near future, the existing sub-standard roadway
network will continue to deteriorate and
unmanageable congestion will increase. This
delay and the related impacts will deter private
sector investment and the expansion of existing
economic enterprises and activity under both
short-term and long-term scenarios. These
conditions will make it difficult for the City to
attract new enterprises, and may cause some
enterprises to relocate entirely.
iii. The project is appropriately capitalized
up front and uses asset management
approaches that optimize long-term cost
structure.
Funding for City infrastructure is rooted in
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 14
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
b. Economic Competitiveness
This project brings multiple benefits. The
primary benefit is for the local community –
both in improving access and creating ladders of
opportunity related to job growth. This project
will help revitalize the area, and will improve
the community’s local and regional access to
employment, education and goods and services.
The grade separation will alleviate congestion and
delays, thereby enhancing long-term efficiency
and reliability in the transportation network. This
is crucial for the two neighborhoods closest to
the intersection, who will benefit from decreased
travel time and transportation costs due to
existing delays.
In addition, the project will increase the
economic productivity of the larger area,
which is situated northeast of Downtown in a
traditionally underserved area. In recent years,
this area has become a focus of new economic
activity, as reflected in the current construction
of the Woodward, Inc. Corporate Headquarters
along Lemay Drive south of the Vine/Lemay
intersection. Woodward’s campus will house
between 600 and 700 employees on opening
day (late 2015) and will gradually ramp up to
approximately 1,700 employees. This project will
enhance employee access to the campus, and will
help alleviate congestion pressures along Lemay
Drive.
Finally, the project will facilitate efficient and
reliable freight movement through removing
an at-grade crossing of the BNSF Railroad.
This improvement will help boost economic
productivity and efficiency in the moving of goods
and services, while enhancing safety for all modes
of transportation and for all users.
A full benefit cost analysis is included as Appendix
C. In summary:
• The project will improve long-term efficiency,
reliability and cost-competitiveness in the
movement of workers and goods.
• The project will make improvements that
allow for new investments in expansion,
hiring, or other growth of private sector
production in economically distressed areas.
• The City will strive to ensure that a reasonable
balance between employment and housing
is maintained as well as a balance between
basic and non-basic jobs. The primary intent
is to create a relative balance between
the wages generated by various types of
employment and housing prices.
The primary intent of this project is to provide
Ladders of Opportunity which increase
connectivity, support workforce development
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 15
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
ii. The project will enhance modal connectivity
and reduces congestion on existing modal
assets.
The existing roadway network is failing to meet
current travel demands, in particular the Level
of Service at the intersection of Vine and Lemay
is rated ‘F’, with daily delays during peak traffic
exacerbated by freight rail operations. The
congestion is causing changes to travel behavior
that are inefficient and adversely affecting
regional travel. Recent figures specific to the
Union Pacific rail crossing at Vine and Riverside
Drives (in close proximity to the project area)
indicate that over a 7 year period between
2007 and 2014, the duration of preemptions
increased approximately three minutes. The
number of preemptions longer than 15 minutes
increased from 10 (in 2007) to 86 (in 2014)
and the longest duration between 6:00 AM
and 6:00 PM increased from approximately 22
minutes to 1 hour 11 minutes. All of these figures
demonstrate a trend that the City is experiencing
at rail crossings citywide, including the Vine/
Lemay intersection. By grade separating the
Vine/BNSF/Lemay intersection and realigning
Lemay, not only will congestion be reduced, but
there will also be benefits related to changes
in travel patterns that will result in higher
efficiency and reduced congestion throughout the
transportation system.
iii. The project will improve accessibility and
transport for economically disadvantaged
populations, non-drivers, senior citizens
and persons with disabilities and will make
goods, commodities, and services more
readily available to these groups.
The single-family neighborhoods of Alta Vista and
Andersonville are located immediately adjacent
to the Lemay/BNSF intersection. These historic
neighborhoods are currently occupied by a
primarily Hispanic population with lower average
household incomes than other neighborhoods
within the City of Fort Collins.
The Alta Vista neighborhood contains the
northernmost collection of historic adobe
structures in North America. This culturally and
historically important neighborhood is one of the
original groups of residences associated with the
former sugar beet industry in Fort Collins, which
was prosperous from the turn of the century
through World War II. The neighborhood is
eligible for designation as Fort Collins Landmark,
and is eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places and the Colorado State Register of
Historic Places.
The primary access to both of these
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 16
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
This project has emerged as a vital component
of a series of planning processes and outcomes
including:
• East Vine/Lemay Intersection Realignment
Project Development Report (2014)
• City of Ft. Collins Bicycle Plan (2014)
• Lincoln Corridor Plan (2014)
• Pedestrian Plan (2011)
• Plan Fort Collins (2011)
• City Plan (2011)
• City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan
(2011)
• City of Fort Collins Capital Improvement
Plan (2011)
• Mountain Vista Sub-Area Plan (2010)
• Suniga 30% Design Plans (2009)
• Transport Strategic Operating Plan (2009)
• Northside Neighborhoods Plan (2005)
• I-25 Corridor Plan (2001)
• Larimer County Master Plan (1997)
The Mountain Vista subarea plan is the guiding
policy document to implement a community-
based vision. In Fort Collins, a “SubArea Plan”
provides a framework of community-based
principles, policies and implementation strategies
recommended by the Planning & Zoning and
Transportation Boards and adopted by City
Council. The Mountain Vista Subarea Plan
represents a strong framework between land
use and transportation, and direct link to the
Transportation Master Plan and City Plan (the
comprehensive plan for Fort Collins). Thus, the
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan is an element of City
Plan and provides more detailed policy direction
for future implementation decisions.
The planning process for the Subarea Plan
update included extensive public involvement
from property owners within the project area,
including, but not limited to, Anheuser-Busch
InBev, Poudre School District (PSD), service
and utility providers, Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railway, area residents, Boards and
Commissions, and City Council.
The planning process was divided into three
main sections. The first phase (March 2008 -
August 2008) primary tasks included identifying
background information associated with the
project start up. The project team identified key
issues, existing conditions and plan objectives.
A reevaluation of the original vision, goals and
policies was conducted to assess refinement
of this foundational language. The team set up
meetings with individual property owners and
provided updates to Boards and Commissions
during this phase.
Phase II (August 2008 - March 2009) focused
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 17
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
• Nine updates to the Planning & Zoning Board.
• Three updates to the Transportation Board.
The original schedule was extended several times
to thoroughly address public concerns.
The multi-modal transportation outcomes link
the City’s emerging bus rapid transit system,
existing bus service and bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure plans with the new Mountain Vista
roadway network and street cross-sections and
supporting facilities. The City’s Structure Plan,
Master Street Plan, and zoning designations
establish a foundation and direction for the
SubArea’s future development decisions.
The project is a critical part of the City’s Enhance
Travel Corridor network. Both City Plan and
Transportation Master Plan identify four
Enhanced Travel Corridors (ETCs). The purpose
of these corridors is to provide multi-modal
connections between key activity centers and
access to high frequency transit service and
bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 18
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Figure 7: Multi-modal Street Cross-Section Options for Suniga, Lemay and Other
Mountain Vista SubArea Plan Roadways
Examples of planned street cross-sections are
shown in Figure 7. Realignment of Suniga Drive
is a major component of the ETC planned for
northeast Fort Collins.
The project will incorporate bicycle, pedestrian
and transit needs into the project. All the
roadways will be built to the City of Fort Collins
standards which are complete streets, with
full bike lanes, separated sidewalks and transit
facilities. The City of Fort Collins was recently
recognized as a Platinum level bike friendly
city by the League of American Bicyclists. This
project provides a critical element of bicycle
infrastructure both north/south on the Lemay
realignment and east/west on Suniga.
The housing element of the plan helps the jobs/
housing balance within the City, supports the
downtown and provides affordable housing
within a diverse mix of zoning designations.
At this point, the planning process has effectively
addressed community planning controversies.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 19
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
d. Environmental Sustainability
In March 2015, the Fort Collins City Council
unanimously adopted some of the most
aggressive goals in the nation to reduce
community greenhouse gas emissions: 20
percent below 2005 by 2020 and 80 percent by
2030, which would put the community on a path
to be carbon neutral by 2050. The City’s 2015
Climate Action Framework lays out the path
to achieve these goals, many of which relate
to transportation, environmental sustainability
and smart growth. This project helps further the
Climate Action Framework by making transport
faster and more convenient, enhancing multi-
modal options and facilitating development close
to the urban core.
The following are anticipated sustainability
benefits from this project:
• Congestion reduction realized by the project is
estimated to be 23,157 hours per year.
• Annual air pollutant emission reductions
would be substantial (CO -1,856 kg/year, NOx
-352 kg/year, VOCs – 416 kg per year).
• Interconnected traffic signals that reduce
delay and stop and- go traffic conditions.
LED traffic signals will also reduce energy
consumption by 80%.
• Use of local materials that reduce the
embodied energy of construction.
• The incorporation of Low Impact
Development best practices to reduce storm
water impacts.
• The grade-separation, and elimination of the
railroad at-grade crossing, creates a “quiet-
zone”. These improvements will eliminate
the need for the train to sound a warning
horn (which is required) at the intersection.
This has a major positive impact to the
neighborhoods and residents living adjacent
to the project.
In order to control City operation and
maintenance costs, the City recently instituted a
set of Low Impact Development (LID) Standards
that will apply to this project. The standards
require industry best practices for controlling
costs. One primary focus area is improving
storm water quality and minimizing site runoff.
Another focus area involves long-term roadside
maintenance and watering costs. These costs
are minimized by low maintenance and naturally
sustaining vegetative plantings. This approach
has been recently developed through the City’s
Streetscape Standards which emphasize low-
water, native, and xeric planting concepts. With
respect to energy costs, the new facilities will
use Liquid Emitting Diode (LED) traffic signal
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 20
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
e. Safety
The grade-separation of the Vine and Lemay
intersection from the BNSF railroad eliminates
a difficult at-grade crossing of this railroad line,
with inherent safety benefits. The new alignments
and intersections will be built to current safety
standards, upgrading a situation that is outdated
and substandard. In addition, the project would
reduce delays for emergency services, thereby
improving safety for area residents.
Completion of the grade separation
improvement alone would result in a $174,572
accident reduction cost savings per year.
The grade separation savings result from the
elimination of the at grade highway-rail crossing
and from the intersection improvements that will
be constructed. There were two components to
the crash reduction:
1. Reduction in train/car crashes and
2. Reduction in other intersection crashes.
3. The safety benefits were evaluated using two
methods:
4. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Web
Accident Prediction System (WBAPS).
5. Methodology in the Highway Safety Manual,
1st Edition, described in section 4.4.2.13
“Excess Expected Average Crash Frequency
with EB Adjustment.”
The FRA Web Accident Prediction System
estimates the number of train-motor vehicle
crashes that can be expected with the current at
grade configuration. The Highway Safety Manual
methodology estimates the number of expected
multi-vehicle, single-vehicle, and pedestrian
crashes at an intersection. The two results were
summed to get the final benefit estimate.
The Federal Highway Administration has
established crash cost estimates based on crash
severity. Those values are published in the
Highway Safety Manual (HSM) in 2001 dollars.
Using the methodology described in the HSM to
convert to current values the following cost values
were used:
Fatal Crash = $5,377,400
Injury Crash = $84,100
Property Damage Only Crash = $9,700
From 2010 through 2012 there was an average
of thirteen crashes per year at the Vine/Suniga
intersection. With the improvements it is
estimated that this number of crashes will be
reduced by 52 percent on an annual basis. That
results in an overall safety savings of $174,572 per
year or 4.35 million present value dollars.
Photo 6: Existing Congestion Along
Lemay Avenue Looking South.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 21
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
II. Secondary selection criteria
a. Innovation
The project is a model of innovative project
delivery. The project has been innovative from
the beginning, including a highly collaborative
and accelerated project delivery. The project will
include features that reduce capital and long-term
costs, protect the environment, improve mode
choice and safety, and preserve long-term multi-
modal benefits.
Collaborative Comprehensive Community
Planning
The project is critical component of master-
planned growth in northeast Fort Collins that
has a 30-year history of collaboration and a
result embraced by the community and region.
The project improvements are a well-defined
implementation priority set forth in a series of
planning documents, including:
• East Vine/Lemay Intersection Realignment
Project Development Report (2014)
• City of Ft. Collins Bicycle Plan (2014)
• Lincoln Corridor Plan (2014)
• Pedestrian Plan (2011)
• Plan Fort Collins (2011)
• City Plan (2011)
• City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (2011)
• City of Fort Collins Capital Improvement Plan
(2011)
• Mountain Vista Sub-Area Plan (2010)
• Suniga 30% Design Plans (2009)
• Transport Strategic Operating Plan (2009)
• Northside Neighborhoods Plan (2005)
• I-25 Corridor Plan (2001)
• Larimer County Master Plan (1997)
Safe, Integrated, Multi-modal Connectivity
The roadway cross-sections and grade separation
provide distinct facilities and routes for buses,
other motor vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians,
along with connectivity to the City’s emerging
light rail system. The transportation network will
provide access, mobility, and connectivity for all
travel modes. Residents, businesses, and visitors
will have a choice of traveling via automobile,
walking, bicycling and transit.
Multi-modal transportation needs in this
subarea are vitally connected to city, county and
regional transportation systems. The multi-
modal transportation network and land uses in
this subarea were planned in conjunction with
each other.
Key connections for all travel modes will be
provided between the Community Commercial
District, Employment and Industrial Districts,
Community Park, and other activity centers. The
transportation network in this subarea will also
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 22
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Consistent with the Land Use Code, the
transportation system within this subarea
will have: 1) Arterial corridors providing
safe and efficient multi-modal access to
and through the subarea, including major
features such as railroad under/overpasses
(where necessary), and significant landscape
mitigation features; 2) Multi-modal
connections to and across the arterial
corridors, including pedestrian and bicycle
connections, providing convenient access
to and from the local networks that serve
individual developments and buildings; and
3) Integrated local networks with direct,
convenient interconnections between
developments and surrounding areas.
According to the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan,
the extension of Suniga Drive will be designated
as part of the Mountain Vista/North College
Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC). The ETC will be
designed for high frequency transit service, with
enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The
ETC will serve as a link between downtown Fort
Collins, the Timberline Road/Power Trail ETC,
this subarea’s Community Commercial District,
Employment District, Community Park, school
site, and a future park-n-ride at I-25.
Sustainability
The planning area and infrastructure
improvement reflect context-sensitive design,
avoidance and minimization of environmental
impacts and embrace sustainable design in terms
of project design features and specifications.
The emphasis of the Mountain Vista Plan is
economic sustainability. Mountain Vista’s
business center will accommodate the long-term
Employment and Industrial land use growth
demands of Fort Collins, providing a variety of
business and industry types and sizes, compatible
with surrounding land uses.
Capital Cost and Life-Cycle Cost Reduction
The City has demonstrated careful analysis of
project design to reduced project capital, operation
and maintenance costs. Life-cycle analysis is
integrated into the City’s Asset Management
Program and contract requirements along with
Value Engineering (VE).
VE will be applied to each of the proposed projects.
The City has extensive experience VE and includes
VE in all major engineering projects in the City.
Alternative Delivery
The City of Fort Collins has identified Construction
Management General Contracting (CMGC) or
Design Build as a potential alternative delivery
methods to reduce costs and streamline project
delivery for the proposed improvements. The
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 23
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
b. Partnership
Jurisdictional & Stakeholder Collaboration
The project is the end product of collaboration
and partnerships between the City of Fort
Collins, Larimer County, DDA, the Poudre School
District, BNSF Railroad, the North Front Range
Metropolitan Planning Organization, major
landowners, major existing and future employers
in Fort Collins (Anheuser Busch and Woodward),
project site neighbors, and the general public.
Progress with other enabling infrastructure is now
underway with water line construction, overall
roadway planning, and associated right of way
efforts.
Disciplinary Integration
As is evident from the many collaborators and
partners connected to the Mountain Vista
SubArea Plan and the proposed improvements,
there is a united effort to move this enabling
infrastructure from planning to construction.
This breadth of support from non-transportation
public and private agencies is clear indication of
the importance of this project in realizing the
vision for centrally located, transit oriented, land
development in northeast Fort Collins and the
economic health of the region. The proposed
Letters of Support for this project are shown
in Appendix D.
improvements will connect existing and new
communities in an efficient, environmentally
sustainable manner that will benefit the citizens
of northern Colorado for years to come. The
City and our partners are proud of this ground-
breaking demonstration of regional cooperation.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 24
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
F. RESULTS OF BENEFIT/COST
ANALYSIS
Costs and Benefits
Investment of federal dollars for the proposed
improvements will generate long-term benefits
that are in direct alignment with the goals of
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The project’s analysis of costs and benefits is
presented in Appendix C.
The long-term outcomes, or benefits, are
measurable and significant. The project enables
future development designed to create 15,065
jobs on 1,256 acres of job producing land use.
The grade separation alone will generate 23,157
hours of delay reduction per year and $174,572
in accident reduction cost saving per year.
Annual air pollutant emission reductions would
be substantial (CO -1,856 kg/year, NOx -352 kg/
year, VOCs – 416 kg per year). Railroad delay
reductions and at grade crossing maintenance
savings and benefits associated with improved
emergency vehicle access would also be
expected.
The northeast employment district is uniquely
marketable with available large parcel sizes,
direct access to an improved I-25 interchange,
and railroad access. The economic benefits
of this development are real and substantial.
Important community benefit includes:
• Job Creation for Low Income Workers
(through best practice hiring programs and
utilization of apprenticeship programs)
• Maximum Practicable Opportunities for
SBE, DBE, Veteran Owned Small Businesses
and Service Disabled Veteran Small
Businesses
• Use of Community Based Organizations
in Connecting Disadvantaged Business
Workers with Economic Opportunities
• Support for Entities that have a Sound Track
Record on Labor Practices and Compliance
with Federal Laws Ensuring Safety and
Equity
The project is ready for
implementation and will
create 600 construction-
related jobs.
• Best Practices in Compliance with National
Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity Laws
Mountain Vista’s business center will
accommodate the long-term Employment
and Industrial land use growth demands of
Fort Collins, providing a variety of business
and industry types and sizes, compatible with
surrounding land uses.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 25
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
G. PROJECT READINESS AND APPROVALS
Technical Feasibility
The following highlights the key aspects of technical feasibility that
achieve project readiness:
• This project has been envisioned and included in major City
transportation plans for over 30 years. This extensive and long-
range planning maximizes the potential for integrated land use
and transportation and allows incremental accommodation of the
ultimate plan as nearby properties change and develop. The recent
construction of the Woodward, Inc. Corporate Campus south of the
intersection along Lemay Avenue demonstrates the desirability of
this area for development as well as the challenges due to increasing
congestion and inadequate infrastructure.
• BNSF has expressed a commitment to fund a portion of the grade
separation. The City has completed numerous projects with the
BNSF including both a bicycle/pedestrian overpass and underpass in
2013 and 2014. These projects helped improve long-term safety and
accessibility, were constructed with minimal disruption to railroad
service and strengthened the City’s relationship with the BNSF. The
City understands the BNSF and PUC processes and design standards,
which will help streamline the project design and construction.
• The City has advanced the project design by completing conceptual
design and an alternatives analysis in 2014, as well as appropriating
$1M in funding in 2015 to advance the design and right-of-way
review.
• All of the necessary right-of-way for the southeast quadrant of the
Vine/Lemay/BNSF intersection has been secured and is owned by
the City of Fort Collins. The City is currently in negotiations with the
lone property owner in the northeast quadrant. The City is presently
preparing legal descriptions and will be making an initial right-of-way
offer to the property owner in the Summer of 2015.
• The project is currently envisioned to be delivered using traditional
design-bid-build approach, however if phasing of the improvements
becomes critical the City is prepared to deliver via an innovative
Contractor Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) method or Design-
Build (DB) method. These alternative delivery methods would be
considered if they are determined to appropriately manage risk for
cost, schedule, and quality.
Financial Feasibility
The City of Fort Collins has recent history with major construction projects
in the area and with arterial construction projects similar in nature to this
project definition. The following summarizes the capital cost break-down
of the project components, and the overall Federal Grant vs. Local Match
“Fort Collins has
weathered the
recession better than
many communities
throughout the
country,” said City
Manager Darin
Atteberry. “This
top rating from
Moody’s reflects
our dedication to
sound financial
management and
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 26
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
funding for the project. The following highlights
the key aspects of financial feasibility that achieve
project readiness:
• The basis for the cost estimate is a thorough
and professional planning process undertaken
with an extensive public involvement
component, multi-agency coordination,
and City Council approval. The project cost
estimate is outlined in detail in the City’s
Project Development Report (2014), attached
as Appendix B. Cost magnitudes are verified
by similar recently completed projects such
as the reconstructed Interchange at SH 392 &
I-25.
• All streets for the project will be built in
accordance with the Larimer County Urban
Area Street Standards and other applicable
standards. Cost estimates for these street
components are based on recent construction
cost data for similar streets built to the same
standards in the region.
• The City of Fort Collins has an AAA Credit
Rating from Moody’s.
• Moody’s Investors Service has assigned the
City of Fort Collins a AAA issuer rating with a
stable outlook as part of a bond refinancing.
The City is refinancing the 2004 Certificates
of Participation (COP) bonds used to build
the Police building and acquire various open
space properties. The refinanced COPs
received an Aa1 rating. The AAA rating is the
highest offered by the credit rating agency;
only 4.8% of the governments rated by
Moody’s have received the AAA designation.
• The City of Fort Collins has consistently
managed millions of dollars’ worth of federal
transportation grants over the past 20+ years.
• In the past 5 years, the City has successfully
managed over $100 million worth of Federal-
Aid grant projects.
Project Schedule
The City of Fort Collins has already been working
through the planning phases of the project
development process and early right-of-way
review. The project has community support
through the planning process, and has completed
a detailed Project Development Report which
identifies environmental resources of concern and
streamlines future NEPA clearance.
The project schedule (see Figure 8) focuses on
the primary goal of having all pre-construction
activities completed to allow for obligation of
construction funds by August of 2017 at the
latest, and if alternative delivery is selected this
obligation could be as early as September 2016.
The City has continually advanced the project
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 27
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
• The proposed roadway improvements have
already considered and addressed the key
environmental issues:
◦ Historic neighborhoods and specific
properties within the adjacent residential
neighborhoods are protected by generous
roadway buffers leaving the historic
properties and surrounding contexts
undisturbed by the project improvement
requirements. In fact, future conditions
will be less disruptive than under existing
conditions.
◦ The ditch north of Vine will be fully
protected and will remain viable during
and after construction.
◦ Protection of all residential structures and
neighborhoods will be achieved through
realigning Lemay. Indirect impacts on
existing residential uses will be reduced by
buffers between neighborhood boundaries
and the perimeter of the construction
disruption footprints.
◦ There are no protected species or habitats
(wetlands or other) that present the
potential to complicate the environmental
clearance or project permitting processes.
Assessment of Project Risks and Mitigation
Strategies
The City of Fort Collins will employ a number of
innovative methods to control risks of project
delivery. They include:
Project Delivery Risk: Environmental Clearances
• Through the 2014 Project Development
Report, the City conducted an extensive
process to analyze and screen project
alternatives, and to evaluate the
environmental issues of key concern. This
process positions the project for streamlined
NEPA clearance, anticipated to be a
Categorical Exclusion. The public outreach
process will continue through the NEPA and
final design phase to gather valuable feedback
on the selected alternative.
ID Task Name Start Finish
1 Sub-Area Planning Tue 9/1/09 Fri 5/24/13
2 City Project Development Activities Mon 5/27/13 Fri 5/9/14
3 Alternatives Analysis (PEL) Study Mon 5/12/14 Fri 9/12/14
4 Design/ROW review Funding Appropriation Thu 1/1/15 Thu 1/1/15
5 Advanced ROW review activities Fri 1/2/15 Thu 6/4/15
6 Design procurement Fri 6/5/15 Thu 8/13/15
7 Preliminary Design and Final Alternative Fri 8/14/15 Thu 1/14/16
8 Streamlined NEPA Clearance (CATEX or Template EA) Fri 1/15/16 Thu 6/30/16
9 Final Design and Bid Packaging Fri 1/15/16 Thu 9/22/16
10 Right of Way Acquisition Fri 2/26/16 Thu 11/3/16
11 BNSF RR Agreement Complete Fri 1/15/16 Thu 8/11/16
12 Local, Federal, State Requirements Met Fri 11/4/16 Fri 11/4/16
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 28
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
Project Delivery Risk: Construction Cost and
Design/Construction Schedule Overlap
• The City is committed to use alternative
delivery through design/build or CM/GC if
it is determined to add value by effectively
managing scope, schedule and cost risks. One
example of where alternative delivery could
help to achieve innovation and efficiency
is in the simultaneous procurement of
construction contractor while final design is
progressing. This can add value by involving
the construction contractor earlier in the
process while still maintaining control of the
risks during the design phase. This example
can help to achieve the highest level of control
on project features that are outside of the
scope and budget, and will reduce lost time
due to long duration overlaps in design and
construction procurement packaging. The City
will evaluate project delivery options as an
early action in the preliminary design phase of
the project.
Project Delivery Risk: Right of Way Acquisition
• By engaging the design team in the Right of
Way acquisition process, the City will have
maximum control on the schedule to achieve
timely acquisition. By investing early in the
2014 Project Development Report that
includes design that anticipated the right-
of-way needs and requirements, this risk is
reduced by identifying, understanding critical
issues and opportunities, and working early
to engage with property owners. The City has
already begun this process and this will result
in significantly reduced risk to the project
delivery.
Project Delivery Risk: Pre-Construction Activities
Cost
• The City of Fort Collins is committed to
using local funding for the pre-construction
activities for the project. This will ensure the
TIGER Discretionary Grant Funds are used for
the construction activities that result in the
highest benefits for increasing the economic
competitiveness and job creation.
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 29
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
H. FEDERAL WAGE RATE CERTIFICATION
The City of Fort Collins submits this application for the funding of the Suniga/Lemay Multi-Modal and
Freight Connectivity Project in northern Colorado. In response to item in the 2015 Notice of Funding
Availability, the following information is provided:
Federal Wage Rate
The City of Fort Collins certifies that it will comply with the Federal Wage Rate Certification
requirements of subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40 of the United States Code, as required by the
FY 2015 Appropriations Act.
Signed,
Rick Richter
Director of Infrastructure Services
City of Fort Collins
Improving Access and Quality of Life for All | 30
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
I. SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES FROM THE PRE-APPLICATION
It is important to note that the funding request submitted in the pre-application differs from the
overall budget and funding request identified in this final application.
The pre-application included the following funding request and summary of project costs:
TIGER Request: $34,000,000
Total Project Cost: $42,500,000
Total Federal Funding $34,000,000
Total Non-Federal Funding: $8,500,000
The pre-application costs included future roadway improvements that the City has determined would
be best to construct separate from this project. Thus, the focus of this final application is on the
funding of the grade separation of Lemay over the BNSF railroad, which is of highest priority. Future
roadway improvements (including full construction of Suniga Drive) have independent utilty from this
project and will be constructed as future funding sources become available.
As outlined in this final application, the cost of the grade separation of Lemay over the BNSF totals
$27 million. The local contribution to this project is $10 Million, which represents a 37% match toward
the overall $27 Million project cost. The funding request of the TIGER program is $17 Million. The
following table provides a breakdown of the cost of each major improvement.
Improvement Cost
Grade Separation of the Vine/ BNSF/ Lemay
Intersection
$ 12M
Construction of Four-Lane Arterial Roadways $ 8M
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities and
Landscaping
$ 6M
Neighborhood Street (Local Street)
Construction
$ 1M
$ 27M
The following table shows the sources of local funding which constitute $10M (37%) of the $27M
project.
In addition to the local funding sources above, BNSF is committed to contributing 5% of the
grade separation cost. The exact dollar amount will be confirmed in the coming months.
Local Funding Sources Cost
1. City of Ft. Collins 2015 Appropriation to
Project
$ 1M
3. Street Over-sizing $ 5M
4. Local Street Developer Obligation $ 1.5M
5. City General Fund $ 2.5M
TOTAL $ 10M
APPENDIX C: BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
June 4, 2015
APPENDIX C
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI‐MODAL AND FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS
BASE CASE ASSUMPTION
The benefit cost analysis focuses on the option of building an overpass where Lemay Avenue intersects
Suniga Drive and the BNSF railroad tracks, thereby eliminating the significant wait times caused when a
train goes through the area. This option is compared against a “no build” scenario, which assumes the
intersection remains as‐is, and becomes the base case assumption for the analysis. The base case
assumes Lemay Avenue continues to cross the railroad tracks at grade. Due to the City of Fort Collins’
policy which requires Adequate Public Facilities for new development to occur, development in the area
is significantly stunted unless this intersection issue is resolved. Existing and future traffic would
continue to experience significant wait times when a train is in the area, causing excessive idling and
vehicle emissions.
BENEFITS
Travel Time Savings Benefits
The Suniga/Lemay/BNSF intersection is an important connection between northeast Fort Collins and the
rest of the city. It provides primary access for residents and visitors to access Downtown. The number
of vehicles has increased annually. The capacity for this intersection to accommodate existing and
future traffic is significantly compromised because of its proximity to the railroad tracks. There is a
switching yard close to the intersection which significantly extends the time it takes for trains to cross
the intersection, causing significant time delays for travelers. Delay is reduced by eliminating train
blockages and by providing more capacity at the new Suniga/Lemay intersection. Reduction in delay for
train blockages was calculated as follows:
1,570 minutes/day x 320 days/year (<365 to account for lower traffic volumes on weekends) =
502,400 minutes/year or 8,373 hours/year x $20.15/vehicle‐hour value of time per person
($16.79/person assuming an average occupancy of 1.2) = $168,723/year.
Reduction in delay from intersection improvements calculated at 2,772 minutes/day x 320
days/year x 1 hour/60 min. x $20.15 = $297,898/year.
Total delay reduction = 23,157 hours/year x 20.15/hour = $466,614/year.
Accident Reduction Benefits
The grade separated intersection would reduce train/car crashes and other intersection crashes. The
calculation of benefits was generated as follows:
Reduction in train crashes estimated at:
0.0146 property damage only crashes/year
0.0074 injury crashes/year
0.0008 fatal crashes/year
at the following costs:
PDO ‐ $9,700
Injury ‐ $84,100
Fatal ‐ $5,377,400
Reduction in train/car crashes = $ 5,066/year.
Reduction in other intersection crashes estimated at 5.03 property damage only crashes/year
and 1.16 fatal or injury crashes/year at the following costs:
PDO ‐ $9,700
Fatal or Injury ‐ $103,200
Reduction in other intersection crashes = $168,500/year.
Total crash reduction cost savings = $173,570/year.
Fuel Savings Benefits
Improved operations would generate fuel consumption reductions as follows:
Reduction in fuel consumption from elimination of idling at the railroad = 20.4 gallons/day * 320
days/year = 6,531 gallons/year
Reduction in Fuel Consumption from intersection improvements = 80.3 gallons/day * 320
days/year = 25,698 gallons/year
Total = 100.7 gallons/day * 320 days/year = 32,224 gallons/year @ $3.50/gallon =
$112,784/year
Vehicle Emissions Reduction Benefits
When vehicles are waiting at the intersection for a train to pass, emissions such as nitrogen oxides,
volatile organics (VOCs) and carbon dioxide pollute the air. Reduced air emissions due to the grade
separated intersection were calculated based on factors applied to the avoided VHT resulting from the
“no‐build” scenario. Emission reduction benefits would be as follows:
From elimination of idling at the railroad:
CO – 1.4 kg/day * 320 days/year = 456 kg/year
NOx – 0.28 kg/day * 320 days/year = 89 kg/year
VOC – 0.3 kg/day * 320 days/year = 106 kg/year
From intersection improvements:
CO – 5.8 kg/day *320 days/year = 1,856 kg/year
NOx – 1.1 kg/day * 320 days/year = 352 kg/year
VOC – 1.3 kg/day * 320 days/year = 416 kg/year
Total:
CO – 7.2 kg/day *320 days/year = 2,312 kg/year
NOx – 1.38 kg/day * 320 days/year = 441 kg/year
VOC – 1.6 kg/day * 320 days/year = 522 kg/year
At‐Grade Railroad Maintenance Savings Benefits
By removing the at‐grade railroad crossing, savings will be seen from the on‐going maintenance that
otherwise would have occurred.
Other Benefits
Although not quantified for the purpose of the benefit‐cost analysis, there are other benefits associated
with the project that deserve mention. The first being improved access for emergency vehicles. With
the current at‐grade crossing, when a train is crossing there is not a viable alternative to allow
emergency vehicles to cross from north to south, or vice versa. Depending on the length and direction
of the train, an emergency vehicle could travel one mile to the east or west to attempt to cross the
tracks; however, this may not be possible if the train is long and covers multiple intersections, or it
causes a delay.
Another benefit to note is the development potential for the area near the Suniga/Lemay intersection.
Development is currently stunted because of the condition of the at‐grade crossing. The area directly to
the north and northeast, also known as the Mountain Vista area, is the largest area of Fort Collins that
remains undeveloped; and it will stay undeveloped unless the Suniga/Lemay intersection is improved.
According to the 2009 Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, the area will accommodate a population increase of
13,347 by 2030. During the same time period, the area is planned to accommodate 15,065 jobs.
EFFECTS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) developed regional input‐output multipliers, known as RIMS
(Regional Input‐Output Multiplier System). Originally developed in the 1970’s, BEA completed an
enhancement a decade later, known as RIMS II, which provided the data for this particular analysis.
RIMS II is based on an accounting framework called an input‐output (I‐O) table. For each industry, an I‐O
table shows the distribution of the inputs purchased and the outputs sold. A typical I‐O table in RIMS II is
derived mainly from two sources: BEA’s national I‐O table which shows the input‐output structure of
nearly 500 U.S. industries, and BEA’s regional economic accounts which are used to adjust the national I‐
O table to reflect a region’s industrial structure and trading patterns.
RIMS II multipliers by industry aggregation were purchased for the Fort Collins‐Loveland Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA) to estimate the total economic impact of projects on regional output, earnings,
and employment. For the purposes of this analysis, type II multipliers were used, which account for
direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
Construction Impacts
One side of the analysis looks at the impacts of the actual construction of the transportation
improvements. Industry aggregate multipliers were used for the construction industry. The estimated
budget (project cost, or change in final demand) was multiplied by the total multipliers for output,
earnings and employment; 1.7077, .4938, and 12.0873 respectively. For example, a $1,000,000 project
would result in a $1.7 million change in output for all industries in the region, and a $493,000 change in
earnings. The employment multiplier represents the total change in number of jobs that occurs in all
industries for each $1 million investment. Thus, 12 jobs would be created as a result of this $1 million
project.
The total project cost of $27,000,000 was used for the analysis. See Table 1 for the results.
Table 1: Economic Impacts for Construction of Improvements1
Construction Costs:
Grade Separation of Suniga/Lemay/BNSF and
Realignment of Lemay $27,000,000
Final‐demand multiplier:
Output ($) 1.7077
Earnings ($) .4938
Jobs per $1 million 12.0873
Impact on:
Regional output ($) $46,017,900
Regional earnings ($) $13,332,600
Regional employment (jobs) 600
Long‐Term Impacts
In addition to the impacts that result from the physical construction of the improvements, the long‐term
economic impacts were estimated using similar methodology. As previously mentioned, the Mountain
Vista Subarea Plan projected the area to accommodate 15,065 jobs by 2030, which assumes full build
out of the land. Assumptions were made regarding the distribution of job types based on the zoning for
particular land uses, as follows:
Total acres of commercial/employment land = 1,256
53% zoned for Employment, or office type use
46% zoned for Industrial, or manufacturing type use
9% zoned for School, or educational service type use
2% zoned for Commercial, or retail, service type uses
The percentage distribution of job type was then applied to the total 15,065 jobs projected for the area,
and the appropriate RIMS II multipliers were used. In some cases, multiple industry multipliers were
averaged. For example, multipliers for professional services, administrative services, and financial
services were averaged and that average multiplier was used to produce the economic impacts for that
particular land use.
Total jobs projected by 2030 = 15.065
53% or 7,984 jobs = professional/administrative/financial services
46%, or 5,423 jobs = manufacturing
9% or 1,356 jobs = education
2% or 301 jobs = food services/other services
1 The data used provides impacts on an annual basis; therefore, the analysis provides an overall snapshot of the
economic impacts for a one‐year period, and may not be accurate over the entire span of the project.
Final‐Demand Multiplier Direct‐Effect
Multiplier
Multiplier Industry Value added Earnings Employment Direct
Earnings
Direct
Jobs
Professional/admin/financial
services
0.9629 0.50733 14.7534 1.5659 1.6187
Manufacturing 0.8277 0.3724 9.1724 1.5942 1.685
Food services/other services 0.95115 0.51415 18.23085 1.50255 1.42695
Education 1.1196 0.6596 24.3277 1.4145 1.307
Employment Category Final‐Demand Change (millions) Value Added
(millions)
Earnings
(millions)
Professional/admin/financial
services
$876 $ 843.5 $444.4
manufacturing $996.3 $824.6 $371.0
Food services/other
services/
$23.5 $22.4 $12.1
Education $72.8 $81.5 $48.0
Total $1,968.7 $1,772.1 $875.6
It is important to understand the results of this analysis are based on critical assumption that
constructing the improvements will open up development in the Mountain Vista area and ultimately
result in the full build‐out projected during the 2009 planning process. In all likelihood, some
development will occur in the area regardless of whether the improvements are made. The results
provided here should be used cautiously; they are estimates based on a number of assumptions from
the latest information available.
SUMMARY OF BENEFITS
BENEFIT CATEGORY MEASURED BENEFIT
Travel Time Savings/Total delay reduction
23,157 hours/year
$466,614/year
Total Crash Reduction Cost Savings $173,570/year
Fuel Savings 32,224 gallons/year
$112,784/year
Emission Reductions
CO = 2,312 kg/year
NOx = 441 kg/year
VOC = 522 kg/year
Other Benefits (Not Quantified) Road Maintenance Savings
Emergency Vehicle Response Time Reduction,
Increased Population +13,347
Additional Jobs +15,065
APPENDIX D: LETTERS OF SUPPORT
SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND
FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT
TIGER Discretionary Grant Application
June 4, 2015
June 5, 2015
United States Department of Transportation
Anthony Foxx, Secretary of Transportation
1200 Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Secretary Foxx;
I am writing in support of the City of Fort Collins’ application for funding as a part of the 2015
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant. The City of Fort Collins’ project,
Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project, will provide funding for the construction of a
grade separated crossing at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad at Lemay Avenue and Vine
Drive and the construction of Suniga Drive (New Vine Drive) from State Highway 287 to Timberline Road.
The City of Fort Collins has done great due diligence in studying the need for such a project. After 30 years of
study and continual increases in vehicle and train traffic, accidents and city growth, the City of Fort Collins
has prioritized this project as its #1 transportation capital project. The City of Fort Collins has utilized an
extensive planning process working in partnership with City Departments, BNSF, area businesses and local
neighborhood groups to determine the best plan to appropriately serve the project area and increase the
safety and vitality of the affected neighborhoods. The City of Fort Collins previously developed a land use
and economic development plan for the surrounding area and has moved to the next phase of preliminary
design for the project.
The grade separated crossing proposed in the Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project
is a critical part of the transportation infrastructure within the City of Fort Collins. Improvement of the
intersection has become a safety issue for BNSF, emergency services, and the travelling public. Along with
improved safety, additional benefits stemming from this project include: multi-modal and transit
infrastructure, increased reliability in freight movement, revitalization of three underserved neighborhoods
adjacent to the project area, and increased access to business and educational services for the citizens of Fort
Collins.
The Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce is excited about the prospect of improving multi-modal
connections and relieving vehicle and train congestion in northeast Fort Collins. The Chamber is an active
and forward-focused organization of 1,000 members, with a wide range of supporters from sole proprietors
to large, multi-national corporations. Our organizations focus centers on the importance that the business
perspective is heard and understood by public officials. Our Chamber has earned the prestigious national 5-
star accreditation, putting us in the top 1% of all chambers throughout the United States. We offer our full
support in the City of Fort Collins’ Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project application
for funding.
Sincerely,
The Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce
David L. May
President & CEO
June 5, 2015
United States Department of Transportation
Anthony Foxx, Secretary of Transportation
1200 Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Secretary Foxx;
I am writing in support of the City of Fort Collins’ application for funding as a part of the
2015 Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant. The City of Fort
Collins’ project, Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project, will provide funding
for the construction of a grade separated crossing at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
railroad at Lemay Avenue and Vine Drive and the construction of Suniga Drive (New Vine Drive)
from State Highway 287 to Timberline Road.
The City of Fort Collins has done great due diligence in studying the need for such a project.
After 30 years of study and continual increases in vehicle and train traffic, accidents and city
growth, the City of Fort Collins has prioritized this project as its #1 transportation capital project.
The City of Fort Collins has utilized an extensive planning process working in partnership with City
Departments, BNSF, area businesses and local neighborhood groups to determine the best plan to
appropriately serve the project area and increase the safety and vitality of the affected
neighborhoods. The City of Fort Collins previously developed a land use and economic
development plan for the surrounding area and has moved to the next phase of preliminary design
for the project.
The grade separated crossing proposed in the Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight
Connectivity Project is a critical part of the transportation infrastructure within the City of Fort
Collins. Improvement of the intersection has become a safety issue for BNSF, emergency services,
and the traveling public. Along with improved safety, additional benefits stemming from this
project include: multi-modal and transit infrastructure, increased reliability in freight movement,
revitalization of three underserved neighborhoods adjacent to the project area, and increased
access to business and educational services for the citizens of Fort Collins.
The Fort Collins Hosing Authority (FCHA) is excited about the prospect of improving multi-
modal connections and relieving vehicle and train congestion in northeast Fort Collins. The FCHA’s
focus is a triple bottom line approach to providing affordable housing and supportive services. Our
organization assists over 5,000 individuals in Fort Collins and throughout Larimer County. We are
actively pursuing land bank opportunities in the northeast part of the City (Mountain Vista subarea)
in an effort to meet citizen demand for affordable housing. I offer my full support in the City of Fort
Collins’ Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project application for funding.
Sincerely,
Julie Brewen
CEO/Executive Director
Olga Duvall, Chair
Eric Shenk, Vice Chair
Transportation Board
United States Department of Transportation
Anthony Foxx, Secretary of Transportation
1200 Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Secretary Foxx;
I am writing in support of the City of Fort Collins’ application for funding as a part of the 2015
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant. The City of Fort Collins’
project, Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity Project, will provide funding for the
construction of a grade separated crossing at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad at Lemay
Avenue and Vine Drive and the construction of Suniga Drive (New Vine Drive) from State Highway 287
to Timberline Road.
The City of Fort Collins has done great due diligence in studying the need for such a project.
After 30 years of study and continual increases in vehicle and train traffic, accidents and city growth, the
City of Fort Collins has prioritized this project as its #1 transportation capital project. The City of Fort
Collins has utilized an extensive planning process working in partnership with City Departments, BNSF,
area businesses and local neighborhood groups to determine the best plan to appropriately serve the
project area and increase the safety and vitality of the affected neighborhoods. The City of Fort Collins
previously developed a land use and economic development plan for the surrounding area and has moved
to the next phase of preliminary design for the project.
The grade separated crossing proposed in the Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight
Connectivity Project is a critical part of the transportation infrastructure within the City of Fort Collins.
Improvement of the intersection has become a safety issue for BNSF, emergency services, and the
travelling public. Along with improved safety, additional benefits stemming from this project include:
multi-modal and transit infrastructure, increased reliability in freight movement, revitalization of three
underserved neighborhoods adjacent to the project area, and increased access to business and educational
services for the citizens of Fort Collins.
The City of Fort Collins Transportation Board (The Board) is excited about the prospect of
improving multi-modal connections and relieving vehicle and train congestion in northeast Fort Collins.
The Board is a citizen led, advisory group which examines issues relating to financing, the development
and implementation of projects pertaining to multi-modal improvements, transportation congestion, and
connectivity. The Board coordinates with other City boards, municipalities throughout the region, offers
recommendations to the Fort Collins City Council on key transportation issues and solutions. The Board
offers its full support in the City of Fort Collins’ Suniga / Lemay Multi-Modal and Freight Connectivity
Project application for funding.
Sincerely,
Olga Duvall
Transportation Board Chair
13 Final Procurement Package Mon 11/7/16 Fri 12/2/16
14 Construction Procurement Mon 12/5/16 Fri 2/10/17
15 Construction Notice to Proceed (funds obligated) Mon 2/13/17 Fri 3/24/17
16 Alternative Delivery Procurement (If needed) Fri 1/15/16 Thu 6/30/16
17 Alternative Delivery Construction NTP
(If needed)(funds obligated)
Fri 7/15/16 Thu 9/15/16
Qtr 2Qtr 3Qtr 4Qtr 1Qtr 2Qtr 3Qtr 4Qtr 1Qtr 2Qtr 3Qtr 4Qtr 1Qtr 2 Qtr 3Qtr 4Qtr 1Qtr 2Qtr 3Qtr 4
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Vine/Lemay Grade Separation Project
Figure 8: Project Schedule
by investing in preliminary planning, concept
design and alternatives analysis. An additional
$1M has recently been appropriated to advance
the project design, clearances and right-of-way
review.
Required Approvals
The project will build upon previous planning
efforts to streamline the environmental
clearances and reduce risks to project delivery.
• In 2014, the City completed a Project
Development Report that meet
the requirements of a Planning and
Environmental Linkage (PEL) study. This study
is intended to help streamline any future
NEPA clearance by narrowing the potential
design options and evaluating potential
environmental resources of concern. As
a result of the extensive alternatives and
environmental analysis completed for this
study, the City anticipates completion of a
streamlined NEPA clearance in the form of a
Categorical Exclusion for the federally funded
improvements.
wise use of debt
services; it’s great
news for Fort Collins.”
According to Moody’s,
the AAA issuer rating
reflects a stable local
economy supported
by the presence
of Colorado State
University, sound
wealth levels typical
of a college town,
a large tax base,
favorable debt levels,
and sound fiscal
operations.
City and its consulting partners have broad and
extensive experience with cost reductions and
schedule accelerations using CMGC and Design
Build approaches relative to traditional delivery
methods.. The City is prepared to initiate the
process immediately following confirmation of
funding commitments to determine the most
effective and efficient project delivery method.
The goal is a high quality, cost-effective project that
minimizes the time to reach construction while
being compliant with all Federal-Aid regulations.
• The goal is a high quality, cost-effective project
that minimizes the time to reach construction
while being compliant with all Federal-Aid
regulations.
• The City is currently under process to procure
preliminary design and project delivery review.
• The City will complete the design/ROW process
with overmatch dollars to insulate risk from the
Federal Grant Funds.
MOUNTAIN VISTA SUBAREA PLAN
CHAPTER 4 – FRAMEWORK PLAN 33
Figure 14 – Community Commercial District
Diagram
Potential hotel
and supporting
commercial
Potential civic uses such
as a branch library
Community park
multi-use trail
underpass to CCD
Grocery anchor
Both Mountain Vista
Drive and “Main
Street” aligned
southwest to
mountain views
Potential
live/work units
Employment
office park
emphasize connections to other destinations in
Fort Collins and neighboring communities. The
proposed improvements open the door to transit
in the planning area.
indications. LED traffic signals are proven to
require 80% less energy than incandescent
indications. Additional environmental benefits will
include:
• 25,698 gallons per year in fuel savings
• Water savings from efficient urban
development and design
• Energy efficiency, reduce dependence on oil
and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
The City’s recently adopted Lincoln Corridor
Plan envisions a “Great Street” and model
for sustainable practices. It reflects the
City’s commitment to innovations in green
infrastructure and investment in the long-term
viability of streets within the transportation
system.
on design. Travel demand modeling by
the consultant team determined future
traffic volumes and street classifications for
comparison between the 1999 and 2009 street
networks. A market analysis was conducted
to assess support for the amount of land
use designations in the subarea. In October
2008, three framework plan alternatives were
developed to compare different scenarios for
land use, street patterns, open lands and other
public facilities. In February 2009, three Plan
map options were developed to further test
land use and transportation choices. Based on
public feedback, the project team integrated the
successful elements of each alternative into a
single draft framework plan.
Phase III (March 2009 - September 2009)
developed the final plan document. The Plan
incorporates updated analysis data, land use
and transportation recommendations, and
implementation strategies to achieve the Plan.
The team also coordinated public events
throughout the planning process:
• Six meetings with major property owners.
• Four public open houses.
• Three City Council work sessions.
• Seven meetings with individual
neighborhoods.
neighborhoods is from Lemay and Vine. Access to
both neighborhoods is frequently constrained by
traffic congestion.
The proposed design for grade separation will
move these major arterials away from these
neighborhoods while retaining existing access
points for the residents. The grade separation
bypass alignment will shift traffic further away
from existing residences while substantially
reducing traffic congestion. The project will make
the entire area more accessible, and separate
local traffic from growing through traffic.
iv. The project results from a planning process
which coordinated transportation land
use planning decisions and encouraged
community participation in the process.
The project provides convenient, healthy and
sustainable transportation options:
• The project will enhance user mobility
through creation of more convenient
transportation options.
• The project will enhance modal connectivity
and reduces congestion on existing modal
assets.
• The project will improve accessibility and
transport for economically disadvantaged
populations, non-drivers, senior citizens and
persons with disabilities and will make goods,
commodities, and services more readily
available to these groups.
• The project results from a planning process
which coordinated transportation land
use planning decisions and encouraged
community participation in the process.
and revitalize the larger area.
c. Quality of Life
i. The project will enhance user mobility
through creation of more convenient
transportation options.
The Mountain Vista Subarea Plan identified
a transportation network to provide access,
mobility, and connectivity for all travel modes.
The Subarea Plan recommended three grade-
separated railroad crossings including the
proposed grade separation at Vine/BNSF/Lemay.
The new realignment of Lemay separates the
street intersection from the railroad crossing.
In the short-term, this would allow additional
capacity at both the intersection and crossing.
Currently the existing intersection of Vine and
Lemay, which includes the BNSF railroad crossing,
is severely congested, with limited options to
expand turn capacity due to existing land use
and natural constraints. Lemay as a major north/
south arterial is severely constricted at this point.
Creating a by-pass with a grade separated crossing
and moving the major intersection north will
be more convenient for the significant through
traffic in this area. This project will also move the
majority of traffic away from the two adjacent
residential areas, while still providing access.
traditional municipal tax base mechanisms
supplemented by a dedicated local ¼ cent sales
tax and the City’s development impact fee
system requiring private sector improvements
including street over-sizing requirements. In
order to appropriately allocate the City’s financial
resources, Fort Collins prioritizes planning
improvements and uses a well-established Asset
Management system to evaluate transportation
infrastructure conditions to efficiently plan
and maximize maintenance investments. The
proposed improvements are too costly for
immediate or short-term funding by the City or
State of Colorado. The City of Fort Collins has
a strong track record for maintenance of City
transportation infrastructure assets.
iv. This project includes a sustainable source of
revenue available for long-term operations
and maintenance.
Pavement and bridge management systems are
used by the City to determine the optimal time
for surface treatment repairs and reconstruction
based on minimizing life cycle costs. The
proposed project has been prioritized through an
infrastructure assessment and would be managed
by the City’s established system performance
management tools. The infrastructure assessment
characterizes investments that will reduce life
cycle costs.
The requested TIGER funds will not be used
for maintenance or operations of the project.
When complete, all of the improvements will
fall under the City’s jurisdiction.
accommodate this planned growth is deteriorated
and incomplete. The traditional grid network
in the established areas of Fort Collins does not
extend to this area. In fact, the only north/south
roadways connecting completely through this
area are US 287 (College Avenue), Lemay Avenue
and I-25. US Highway 287 and Lemay Avenue are
one mile apart. I-25 is another three miles east
Photo 4: Railroad Facilities and Operations Looking East from a
Location Just East of the Vine/Lemay/BNSF Intersection
Photo 5: Deficient Structure Located on
Lemay Avenue Looking North.
ARIZONA
KANSAS
COLORADO
OKLAHOMA
NEW MEXICO
NEBRASKA
Figure 2: National and State Setting
Figure 3: Regional and Local Setting (N.T.S.)
FORT COLLINS
Julie Brewen, CEO/Executive Director, Fort
Collins Housing Authority
Olga Duvall, Chair, Fort Collins Transportation
Board
$112,784 per year
Emissions Reductions CO = 2,312 kg per year
NOx = 441 kg per year
VOC = 522 kg per year
Other Benefits
(Not Quantified)
Road Maintenance Savings
Emergency Vehicle
Response
Increased Population
(+13,347)
Additional Jobs (+15,065)
Local Funding Sources Cost
1. City of Ft. Collins 2015 Appropriation to
Project
$ 1M
3. Street Over-sizing $ 5M
4. Local Street Developer Obligation $ 1.5M
5. City General Fund $ 2.5M
TOTAL $ 10M
Improvement Cost
Grade Separation of the BNSF/Lemay
Intersection
$ 12M
Construction of Four-Lane Arterial Roadways $ 8M
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities and
Landscaping
$ 6M
Neighborhood Street (Local Street)
Construction
$ 1M
$ 27M
proposed improvements and land use
planning.
Costs and Benefits
The cost of the grade separation of the
Suniga/Lemay intersection totals $27 million.
The local contribution to this project is $10
Million, which represents a 37% match
toward the overall $27 Million project
cost. The funding request of the TIGER
program is $17 Million. Detailed project
costs are outlined in Appendix B, the Project
Development Report.
transportation system through separating
roadway from rail and creating a more direct
and efficient connection into and out of
downtown. This project would also focus on
improving the multi-modal transportation
system to serve all modes safely and
efficiently.
The applicant must pay a fee of 1/2
of 1% of the loan amount to FRA for
financing and legal reviews.
FRA requires new applicants to attend an
information session, submit a draft
application, and then meet with FRA who will
provide feedback on the draft application.
Final applications are submitted, reviewed,
and once approved, the loan conditions are
negotiated and closed.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/
P0128
Public Works and
Economic Adjustment
Assistance Programs
EDA
Under the programs, grant funds are
issued to provide investments that
support construction, non-
construction, technical assistance,
and revolving loan fund projects.
Grants and cooperative agreements
are designed to leverage existing
regional assets and support the
implementation of economic
development strategies that advance
new ideas and creative approaches to
advance economic prosperity in
distressed communities. The
investments are aimed at supporting
economic development, supporting
job creation, and attracting private
investment in economically
distressed areas. (1)
Projects must be located in a Region that meets EDA’s
distress criteria. Proposed projects should be consistent
with an approved regional Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy (CEDS).
Eligible organizations include a(n): district organization of
a designated Economic Development District, Indian
tribes, state/county/city or other political subdivision of a
state, institution of higher education, public or private
non-profit organizations.
Beneficiaries of investments made under Public Works
are those communities who satisfy one or more of the
economic distress and/or “Special Need” criteria set forth
in 13 C.F.R. § 301.3(a) and 13 C.F.R. § 300.3 to revitalize,
expand, or upgrade their physical infrastructure to attract
new industry, encourage business expansion, diversify
their local economies, and generate or retain long-term
private sector jobs and capital investments.
Project improves
an access-road
to a future
commercial
business center,
which will
support
employment
growth in the
region.
Public Works:
FY 2012: $111.6M
FY 2013: $112.3M
FY 2014: $40.5M (requested)
The average size of a Public
Works investment was $1.4M
in FY 2013.
Economic Adjustment
Assistance:
FY 2012: $50.1M
FY 2013: $50.4M
FY 2014: $66M (requested)
The average award for the
Economic Adjustment
Assistance program was
$820,000 in FY 2013.
Typically 50%, but might vary.
Projects may receive an additional
amount, up to 30% of the project
cost, based on the relative needs of
the region, as determined by EDA.
Applications are competitively evaluated in
quarterly funding cycles (March 14, June 13,
and October 17) and decisions generally are
made within 20 business days of the funding
cycle deadline. An applicant may submit an
application at any time to receive feedback
on the application’s competitive and
technical merits. (1)
https://ofmpub.epa.gov/apex/
watershedfunding/f?p=116:2:0:
:NO::P2_X_PROG_NUM,P2_X_Y
EAR:51,2014
http://www.grants.gov/web/gr
ants/view-
opportunity.html?oppId=24829
7
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s
=program&mode=form&tab=st
ep1&id=e5254fa16829ebe6a08d
d1c79126ec8d
http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/
budget/FY14CJ/EDA_FY_2014_C
J_Final_508_Compliant.pdf
(1) Taken from website
Notes:
FY2013 Apportionments from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/notices/n4510765/n4510765_t1.cfm
FY2014 Apportionments from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/notices/n4510770t1.cfm
TIGER I: $1.5B, average award
$29.4M
TIGER II: $600M, average award
$8M
FY 2011: $526.944M, average
award $11.5M
FY 2012: $500M, average award
$10.6M
FY 2013: $473.847M, average
award $9.1M
TIGER 2014: $600M
Awards may not be less than
$10M (except in rural areas)
and not greater than $200M.
Projects are more competitive if
they demonstrate funding support
above a 20% match for urban areas
and a 0% match for rural areas.
For TIGER 2014: April 28, 2014
The President's budget proposal includes 4
years with $1.25 billion annually.
http://www.dot.gov/tiger
http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.
gov/files/docs/TIGER%202014%
20NOFA_FINAL.pdf
Transportation
Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act
(TIFIA)
USDOT
The program provides Federal credit
assistance in the form of direct loans,
loan guarantees, and standby lines of
credit to finance surface
transportation projects of national
and regional significance. TIFIA
credit assistance provides improved
access to capital markets, flexible
repayment terms, and potentially
more favorable interest rates than
can be found in private capital
markets or similar instruments. (1)
To qualify for TIFIA assistance, a project must meet the
following criteria:
- Minimum project cost of $50M, or minimum $15M for ITS
projects or minimum $25M for rural projects
- Federal funding cannot exceed 33% of eligible costs or
the amount of senior debt if the TIFIA loan does not have
an investment grade rating
- Senior debt obligations must receive an investment
grade rating
- The project must have a dedicated revenue source to
pledge as repayment on the TIFIA loan
Types of projects that are eligible for TIFIA assistance
include: highway facilities, bridges, transit design and
construction, passenger rail design and construction,
public freight rail facilities, intermodal facilities, projects
providing access to rail facilities, and port projects.
The project can
be considered to
be of regional
significance, as it
will provide for
the future
development of
a commercial
district and
transit service to
this important
employment
center.
Funding for credit subsidy:
FY 2013: $690M
FY 2014: $920M
Based on historic subsidy
costs, the budget authority
could approximately support a
lending capacity of
FY 2013: $6.9B
FY 2014: $9.2B
Colorado has used the TIFIA
program for 3 projects:
- Denver Union Station, $145.6
million TIFIA direct loan,
funded by the 0.4 percent
FasTracks sales and use tax
- Eagle Project (RTD), $280
million direct loan, funded by
lien pledges on sales tax
revenues
- U.S. 36 Managed Lanes/BRT
Project Segments 1 and 2, $54
million TIFIA direct loan,
repaid by toll revenues
collected on the managed
lanes
TIFIA offers three types of credit
assistance:
- Secured (Direct) Loans offers
flexible repayment terms
- Loan guarantees by the Federal
government to institutional
investors
- Lines of credit to supplement
project revenues
Estimated timeframe for initial review is 30
days. The estimated timeframe for
creditworthiness review is 45-90 days.
Estimated timeframe for approval is 90 days
after receipt of application. Estimated
timeframe for execution of a credit
agreement is 60 days from the application
approval date.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/
tifia/
http://www.fta.dot.gov/grants
/12861.html
Activities funded under this program are also
eligible for funding under the broader HSIP
eligibilities. The STP also includes eligibility
for funding of railway-highway crossings
projects.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map
21/factsheets/rhc.cfm
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/xin
gs/
Highway Safety
Improvement
Program (HSIP)
FHWA
The program seeks to achieve a
significant reduction in traffic
fatalities and serious injuries on all
public roads, including non-State-
owned public roads and roads on
tribal lands. The HSIP requires a data-
driven, strategic approach to
improving highway safety on all
public roads that focuses on
performance. (1)
A highway safety improvement project is any strategy,
activity or project on a public road that is consistent with
the data-driven State Strategic Highway Safety Plan
(SHSP) and corrects or improves a hazardous road location
or feature or addresses a highway safety problem. MAP-
21 provides an example list of eligible activities, but HSIP
projects are not limited to those on the list. $220M of the
HSIP program is set aside for the Railway-Highway
Crossings program.
Workforce development, training, and education
activities are also an eligible use of HSIP funds. (1)
Project
eliminates an at-
grade rail
crossing,
thereby
reducing the
likelihood of
safety incidents.
FY 2013: $2.39B* ($29.62M
apportioned to Colorado)
FY 2014: $2.41B* ($29.64M
apportioned to Colorado)
*Calculated as a sum of the
estimated individual State
HSIP apportionments
Except as provided in 23 U.S.C 120(c)
and 130, the Federal share is 90%
Not Described
From the State's HSIP apportionment, the
following sums are to be set aside:
-Railway-highway crossings -- $220 million.
-A proportionate share of funds for the
State's Transportation Alternatives (TA)
program.
-2% for State Planning and Research (SPR).
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsi
p/
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map
21/factsheets/hsip.cfm
Surface
Transportation
Program (STP)
FHWA
The program provides flexible
funding that may be used by States
and localities for projects to preserve
and improve the conditions and
performance on any Federal-aid
highway, bridge and tunnel projects
on any public road, pedestrian and
bicycle infrastructure, and transit
capital projects, including intercity
bus terminals. (1)
Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing,
restoration, preservation, or operational improvements
for highways, including designated routes of local access
roads under 40 USC 14501.
Replacement, rehabilitation, preservation, protection,
and anti-icing/deicing for bridges and tunnels on any
public road, including construction or reconstruction
necessary to accommodate other modes.
Highway and transit safety infrastructure improvements
and programs, installation of safety barriers and nets on
bridges, hazard eliminations, mitigation of hazards caused
by wildlife, railway-highway grade crossings.
Surface transportation planning.
Intersections with high accident rates or levels of
congestion.
Construction and operational improvements for a minor
collector in the same corridor and in proximity to an NHS
route if the improvement is more cost-effective (as
determined by a benefit-cost analysis) than an NHS
improvement and will enhance NHS level of service and
regional traffic flow.
Project proposes
the construction
of a bridge to
grade-separate
the rail from the
road, thereby
improving
performance of
both modes.
The project is in
the proximity of
two NHS routes
(SH 14 and US
Route 287).
FY 2013: $10.0B* ($137.22M
apportioned to Colorado)
FY 2014: $10.1B* ($137.34M
apportioned to Colorado)
*Calculated as a sum of the
estimated individual State
HSIP apportionments
Determined in accordance with 23
USC 120, including a special rate for
certain safety projects and a new
provision for increased Federal
share for projects incorporating
Innovative Project Delivery.
Exceptions to 23 USC 120 are
provided for certain freight
projects, workforce development,
training, and education activities,
and Appalachian development
highway system projects.
Not Described
50% of a State's STP apportionment (after TA
and SPR set-asides) is to be obligated in the
following areas in proportion to their relative
shares of the State's population:
-Urbanized areas with population greater
than 200,000 (this portion is to be divided
among those areas based on their relative
share of population)
-Areas with population greater than 5,000 but
no more than 200,000 (projects in these areas
are to be identified for funding by the State
in consultation with regional planning
organizations, if any)
-Areas with population of 5,000 or less
The remaining 50% may be used in any area
of the State.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map
21/factsheets/stp.cfm
The City could also dedicate future BOB
or KFCG revenues to repay low-interest
federal or CO SIB loans.
The City has issued bonds, but has not done so with BOB revenues.
Additional discussions with
City Finance Department
would need to be held to
discuss the potential bonding
capacity and implications for
future projects.
Would depend on the
bond rating of the City,
interest rate, and
projected future sales tax
revenues.
The timeframe for this
financing source
would be longer given
that it would be a new
financing structure for
the City and has
implications on
planned use of future
local dedicated sales
tax revenues.
Colorado State
Infrastructure Bank
(CO SIB)
The program provides low-interest
bearing loans to public or private
sponsors of public transportation
projects to help fund transportation
projects in Colorado.
Qualified projects include any commission-authorized project, right-of-way
acquisition, federal-aid project, maintenance project, or safety project.
Commission authorized projects include, but are not limited to,
environmental impact studies, feasibility studies, engineering,
construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitation, or
replacement of a public or private transportation facility within the state.
Right-of-way acquisition is defined as "the acquisition of real or personal
property, or interests therein, for a public or private transportation facility
within the state". Federal projects include any highway, transit, aviation,
rail, or other transportation project within the state that is eligible for
financing or financial assistance under state or federal law. Maintenance
project is one that is focused on maintenance, repair, improvement, or
construction of any public or private highway, road, street, parkway, transit,
aviation, or rail project within the state. Safety projects involve the
acquisition, improvement, or construction of rights-of-way, bridges,
tunnels, railroad-highway crossings, drainage structures, signs, guardrails,
or protective structures within this state. The project must not include
transportation facilities or other projects that will be restricted to private
use.
Project shall be evaluated on
the following criteria: the
type of project, whether it is
a public/private partnership,
financial need, repayment
source, security provisions or
sponsor's potential to secure
the loan, evaluation of
financial ratios and project's
current financial condition,
the term of financial
obligation(no more than 10
years), project viability,
project benefits to the
transportation system, and
whether or not their project
is in the TIP/STIP.
The committee determines
the size of the loan based
on the sponsor's ability to
repay it within a specified
period of time, regardless
of cost of the project.
Based on the committee's
recommendation, the
commission then sets the
maximum amount of the
loan that the project
sponsor can get.
Currently, $3.8 million in
CO SIB funding is available
for highway projects at a
2.5% interest rate (for 3rd
and 4th quarter of FY 2014).
The application
process is on a rolling
basis. The review
process usually takes
no longer than 2
months.
The loan shall be
repaid in no more
than 10 years.
http://www.coloradodot.info/business/budg
et/colorado-state-infrastructure-bank-co-
sib.html
MAPCCOONNSSTTRRAAIINNTTSS EXTENT
Fort Collins
Windsor
Loveland
¦¨§25
«¬14
¤£287
«¬14
0 200 400
Feet
Legend
Flood Zones
Regulatory Floodway
100-Year Floodplain
Natural Habitat Areas
Wet Meadow
Riparian Forest
Native Upland Plains Forest
Emergent Wetland
Aquatic Water
Stormwater
Wastewater
Overhead Power Line
Utilities Parcel Boundary
National Wetlands
Inventory
Stream
Ditch
Railroad
Bike Lane
Community Path
Transportation
utilizes the switching yard. By the year 2035, the lingering congestion effects in the street
network system continues up to 30 minutes after the train crossing event. This doubling of
system delay and long-lasting residual system effects further demonstrates the need to make
improvements.
· The future effectiveness, year 2035, of the relocated at-grade crossing will greatly depend on
whether the switching yard can be relocated or must stay:
o If the switching yard is moved, system delays due to a train crossing event are negligible
when compared to the delays encountered in the system without a train.
o If the switching yard remains, system delays due to a train crossing event with switching
movements are 16% higher than when the compared to the delays encountered in the
system without a train.
MAP EXTENT UNDERPASS
Fort Collins
Windsor
Loveland
¦¨§25
«¬14
¤£287
«¬14
0 200 400
Feet
(Wall
Legend
Underpass Alignment
Proposed Sidewalk
Railroad
Parcel Boundary
Stream
Ditch
Water
Stormwater
Wastewater
Utilities
1. Existing crossing may need to be closed to get railroad concurence on new overpass.
Potential to remain open in limited capacity.
2. Old Vine to remain open until new Vine Connection to east is complete..
Possible to remain open in ultimate condition.
¤£287
«¬14
0 200 400
Feet
(Retaining Wall
Legend
Overpass Alignment
Proposed Sidewalk Parcel Boundary
Stream
Ditch
Railroad
Water
Stormwater
Wastewater
Utilities
1. Existing crossing may need to be closed to get railroad concurence on new overpass.
Potential to remain open in limited capacity.
2. Old Vine to remain open until new Vine Connection to east is complete..
Possible to remain open in ultimate condition.
Water
Stormwater
Wastewater
Utilities
Ditch
Stream
Parcel Boundary
Railroad
1. Existing crossing may need to be closed to get railroad concurence on new overpass.
Potential to remain open in limited capacity.
to proximity to Dry Creek
Neighborhood
Connectivity*
The ability to maintain a pedestrian and bicycle crossing at the existing crossing location is
possible, but will require both PUC and BSNF approvals. Continue to explore all
complimentary strategies for improving safety and connectivity.
Construction Risks Constructing new at-grade
crossing while keeping BNSF
operational will be difficult.
General construction risks.
Timing of placing bridge
girders over operational
tracks.
Constructability of underpass
in high groundwater, and
constructing BNSF tracks is
complex without a shoe-fly
option.
Total Project Cost $23 to $24 million $26 to $27 million $40-$41 million