Full Text
Program Category: 08 Project # 09 Project # 10 Project # Street Improvements S-21 S-10 S-10 Yes No NA X Funding Source Accounting Code FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Assessments 54,000 420,000 CTEP 45,000 240,000 Gas Tax 10,000 Funding source to be determined 80,000 - 109,000 - - 740,000 - Budgeted Funds Accounting Code FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 A. Land Cost B. Construction Cost 87,200 - - 592,000 C. Contingencies (10% of B) - 8,720 - - 59,200 D. Design & Engineering (15% of B) - 13,080 - - 88,800 E. Percent for Art of B) F. Equipment Costs G. Other - 109,000 - - 740,000 - 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 Doug Harby Public Works CJK 49 Project Title: Master Sidewalk Plan Implementation Phase I Date Submitted to Finance 02/13/2009 Today's Date and Time 06/03/2009 14:09 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 increasing concern for air quality and energy conservation has placed more emphasis on non-motorized transportation. New regulations on the ADA mandate access for the disabled community. Recent Supreme Court decisions have laid part of the responsibility for assuring that sidewalks are in a safe condition upon local government. The most likely source of federal funds will be Surface Transportation Program Enhancement Activity. This program will supplement the assessments with CTEP funds in areas where the normal costs for sidewalk improvements are substantially increased by existing conditions such as topography, or lack of right-of-way. Phase I will be the installation of sidewalks on Lolo Street from Sharon's Gardens to Rattlesnake Creek. This portion of Lolo Street lies within a 30 foot right-of-way. Curbing will be installed on both sides of the street and assessed to the adjacent property owners. Sidewalk will be placed on the south side and assessed to the property owners where row or easements exist. CTEP money would be used to pay for the sidewalks in exchange for sidewalk easements where necessary on the south side of Lolo Street. CTEP money will also be used to construct a raised sidewalk on the south side of the bridge. Spent in Prior Years ---PAGE BREAK--- Program Category: 10 Project # Street Improvements S-10 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 2 3 6 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 49 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (See C.I.P. Instructions For Explanation of Criteria) Qualitative Analysis Comments Project Rating Project Title: Master Sidewalk Plan Implementation Phase I Subdivision coordination: Rattlesnake School elementary and subdivision above. Quantitative Analysis Comments Leveraging of federal funds. ---PAGE BREAK--- FY10 CIP#: S-10 Note: These projects are not listed in any particular order. Lolo - Sharon's Gardens to Rattlesnake Creek 23rd - 39th to Hillview Way Gharrett - 39th to 55th High Park - All Lincoln Hills - Rattlesnake to Contour Duncan - Vine to Lolo POTENTIAL PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE CTEP MASTER SIDEWALK PLAN IMPLEMENTATION This selection is based on sidewalk installation projects located on high priority corridors or in high priority areas. These projects all have existing conditions, which makes them more expensive or impactive than the norm.