Full Text
Program Category: 08 Project # 09 Project # 10 Project # Street Improvements S-02 S-19 S-08 Yes No NA X Funding Source Accounting Code FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Transportation Impact Fund Balance 6/30/09 $700,000 (net of 44 Ranch) 300,000 825,000 800,000 650,000 1,100,000 Assessments 300,000 2,675,000 1,050,000 1,000,000 650,000 City in Kind 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Federal Aid 1,000,000 To Be Determined 450,000 800,000 4,600,000 1,950,000 2,200,000 1,750,000 - Budgeted Funds Accounting Code FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 A. Land Cost B. Construction Cost 640,000 3,680,000 1,560,000 1,760,000 1,400,000 C. Contingencies (10% of B) 64,000 368,000 156,000 176,000 140,000 D. Design & Engineering (15% of B) 96,000 552,000 234,000 264,000 210,000 E. Percent for Art of B) F. Equipment Costs G. Other 800,000 4,600,000 1,950,000 2,200,000 1,750,000 - Expense Object Accounting Code FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Personnel Supplies Purchased Services Fixed Charges Capital Outlay Debt Service - - - - - - Responsible Person: Responsible Department: Preparer's Initials Total Score Steve King Public Works CJK 46 Project Title: Transportation Impact Fee Funded Projects Date Submitted to Finance 03/26/2008 Today's Date and Time 04/29/2009 11:58 Description of additional operating budget impact: OPERATING BUDGET COSTS Spent in Prior Years Funded in Prior Years REVENUE EXPENSE Is this equipment prioritized on an equipment replacement schedule? Are there any site requirements: How is this project going to be funded: Does this project have any additional impact on the operating budget: How is this project going to be spent: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM City of Missoula CIP Project Request Form FY 2010-2014 Description and justification of project and funding sources: The list of possible projects for the next five years are shown on the attached projects list. In most cases the assessments are for the curb and sidewalk improvements or development access costs. Assessments may also include private developer contributions. Projects may include additional miscellaneous locations such as spot improvements at intersections, and safety or capacity mitigations related to growth, with costs not to exceed $100,000. Not all projects will be completed within the 5-year timeline. Spent in Prior Years ---PAGE BREAK--- Program Category: 10 Project # Street Improvements S-08 Yes No 1. Is the project necessary to meet federal, state, or local legal requirements? This cri- terion includes projects mandated by Court Order to meet requirements of law or other X requirements. Of special concern is that the project be accessible to the handicapped. 2. Is the project necessary to fulfill a con- tractual requirement? This criterion includes Federal or State grants which require local X participation. Indicate the Grant name and number in the comment column. 3. Is this project urgently required? Will de- lay result in curtailment of an essential ser- vice? This statement should be checked "Yes" only if an emergency is clearly indi- X cated; otherwise, answer "No". If "Yes", be sure to give full justification. 4. Does the project provide for and/or im- prove public health and/or public safety? This criterion should be answered "No" un- less public health and/or safety can be X shown to be an urgent or critical factor. Raw Score Total Range Weight Score (0-3) 5. Does the project result in maximum benefit to the community from the 3 5 15 investment dollar? (0-3) 6. Does the project require speedy implementation in order to assure its 2 4 8 maximum effectiveness? (0-3) 7. Does the project conserve energy, cultural or natural resources, or reduce 1 3 3 pollution? (0-2) 8. Does the project improve or expand upon essential City services where such 2 4 8 services are recognized and accepted as being necessary and effective? (0-3) 9. Does the project specifically relate to the City's strategic planning priorities or other 3 4 12 plans? Total Score 46 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (See C.I.P. Instructions For Explanation of Criteria) Qualitative Analysis Comments Project Rating Project Title: Transportation Impact Fee Funded Projects Quantitative Analysis Comments ---PAGE BREAK--- TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUNDED PROJECTS SUBJECT TO CHANGE Updated: 04/29/2009 EXPENDITURE SIDE (ANNUAL) FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact PRIORITY CIP# PROJECT Fees Fees Fees Fees Fees 1 S-05 South 3rd West (Russell to Reserve) $250,000 $200,000 2 S-04 Lower Miller Creek Road Phase I (Linda Vista Boulevard to Big Fork Road) 3 Craig Lane/Orange Street Traffic Signal & MRL Bridge $375,000 4 Hillview Way $200,000 5 Miller Creek/Old Highway 93 $750,000 6 South 3rd West (Reserve to Hiberta) $800,000 7 Mullan and George Elmer Drive Intersection Signal $450,000 8 S-04 Lower Miller Creek Road Phase II (Miller Creek Road to Linda Vista Boulevard) $150,000 $150,000 9 Mullan and Mary Jane Intersection $100,000 10 Miscellaneous Projects $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 ANNUAL TOTALS: $300,000 $825,000 $800,000 $650,000 $1,100,000 REVENUE SIDE (ANNUAL) IMPACT FEE FUNDS FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Begin Balance: 700,000 $ 800,000 $ 455,000 $ 231,000 $ 272,200 $ Annual Revenue: 400,000 $ 480,000 $ 576,000 $ 691,200 $ 829,440 $ Potential Fund Balance: 1,100,000 $ 1,280,000 $ 1,031,000 $ 922,200 $ 1,101,640 $ Potential Fund Balance: 1,100,000 $ 1,280,000 $ 1,031,000 $ 922,200 $ 1,101,640 $ Planned Expenditures: (300,000) $ (825,000) $ (800,000) $ (650,000) $ (1,100,000) $ Potential Year End Balance: 800,000 $ 455,000 $ 231,000 $ 272,200 $ 1,640 $