The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBOCC Packet 11142012 Half Cent 2012 Budget AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY REGULAR MEETING DATE: November 14, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving a Revision to the 2012 Budget for the ½-Cent Transit Sales and Use Tax STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Brian Pettet and Tom Oken ISSUE STATEMENT: Attached for your review and approval is a resolution which, if approved, would authorizethe following supplemental 2012 ½-cent transit sales and use tax budget: Increase AABC pedestriancrossing design & engineering by $125,000 Each of themembers of the Elected Officials Transportation Committee is required to passits own resolution to approve of budget requests. BACKGROUND: The Aspen City Council, Pitkin County Commissioners and Snowmass Village Town Council meet together as the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (“EOTC”). The proposed$125,000 increase in the 2012budget for AABC pedestrian crossing design & engineering was approved by the EOTC at its October 18, 2012meetingon the condition that an itemization of the tasks and time comprising the increase be provided. Attached is a memo from the Parsons engineering team itemizing the original scope of the project and the additional tasks required to complete the project. LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN: Flourishing Natural and Built Environment: Ease of mobility via safe and efficient transportation systems. KEY DISCUSSION ITEMS: BUDGETARY IMPACT: The resolution approvesa $125,000 addition to the 2012budget for the ½-cent transit sales and use tax. RECOMMENDED BOCC ACTION: Approve as aninformal (one reading) resolution as part of the consent agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Approving a Revision to the 2012Budget for the ½-Cent Transit Sales and Use Tax Fund Parsons Scope vs. Budget Summary A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING A REVISION TO THE2012BUDGET FOR THE ½-CENT TRANSIT SALES AND USE TAXFUND RESOLUTION NO. _______-2012 RECITALS 1.The Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax. 2.By intergovernmental agreement dated September 14, 1993, the Parties agreed: a.to conduct regular public meetings to continue to refine and agree upon proposed projects and transportation elements consistent with or complimentary to the Plan; and b.that all expenditures and projects to be funded from the County-wide one-half cent transit sales and use tax shall be agreed upon by the Parties and evidenced by a resolution adopted by thegoverning body of each party. 3.At a public meeting held on October 18, 2012, the Parties considered the following supplemental budget request for2012:Increase the AABC pedestrian crossing design & engineering by $125,000. 4.By adoption of this resolutionthe Board of County Commissioners wishes to approve the supplemental budget request. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado,that the followingincreaseto the 2012budget for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved as summarized below: AABC pedestrian crossing design & engineering $125,000 INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2012. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO _________________________ By: _________________________________ Jeanette Jones Michael M. Owsley, Chairman Deputy County Clerk Date: ________________ MANAGER APPROVAL: ______________________ Jon Peacock, County Manager Parsons Scope vs. Budget Summary th October 29, 2012 th As requested of Parsons by the E.O.T.C. during the meeting on October 18, 2012, below is an itemized list of scope elements necessary to provide a thorough and complete Publ Alternatives Analysis, required Agency Coordination, Preliminary Des Post Advertisement Support for the Pitkin County Pedestrian Cros The Project tasks below are broken out as original scope elements and unforeseen or additional out of scope work. Several of these categories are comprised of both i-scope and out-of-scope elements. The out-of-scope work has often been part of in-scope services but required a higher amount of effort than could have been anticipated at the time of contract execution with Pitkin County. Original Scope Required Tasks: Required Budget: Hours: Planning and Alternatives Analysis Phase: Coordination and Interface with CDOT, Airport, RFTA and Citizens $90,000 = 682 Hrs As-needed meetings with each Agency and Public Groups to gain input on proper site and crossing technique Evaluation of options with both public groups and agency of recommended design and locations with below grade and above grade option. Coordination and Interface with CDOT updating them on design decisions and requesting comments Update Airport, RFTA and Citizens on preferred selection Preliminary Design: Coordination and Interface with CDOT, Airport, RFTA and Citizens: $70,000 = 594 Hrs Meetings with Agencies to review plan Design preferred option to present to both public groups and agencies to evaluate design issues Update Airport, RFTA and Citizens on preferred selection Final Design: Extensive coordination with CDOT` $90,000 = 800 Hrs Coordination Meeting with multiple Agencies Final Design of Preferred Alternative Construction Plan and Specification Package Developed and sent for Advertisement Sub-Total for Original Scope Budget: $250,000 Unforeseen / Additional Scope Required Tasks: Required Budget: Hours: Planning and Alternatives Analysis Phase: Coordination and Interface with CDOT, Airport, RFTA and Citizens $51,500 = 356 Hrs Individual meetings with multiple Agencies and Public ensured proper siting Thorough Evaluation Process with both public groups and agency / consultant teams to design and evaluate 2 locations with a below grade and above grade option. Continued high level of coordination and Interface with CDOT to identify plan format, funding, schedule and environmental process requirements Preliminary layout and evaluation efforts of 4 alternatives, 2 above and 2 below grade crossings Responses to E.O.T.C. request for additional evaluation: $ 4,500 = 61 Hrs Structural evaluation of McBride Proposal Quantity / Cost Estimate of McBride Proposal 2 additional renderings of alternative sites 3 additional rendered cross-sections developed for site Preliminary Design: Coordination and Interface with CDOT, Airport, RFTA and Citizens $25,000 = 263 Hrs Additional Potholing needs, special use permit preparation and Traffic Phasing required for tunnel alternative instead of a simpler bridge option. RFTA Airport and CDOT Coordination Efforts: Coordination and Interface with CDOT, Airport, RFTA and Citizens $10,000 = 86 Hrs Additional Meetings with all Agencies coordinating multiple phasing and design options to create an integrated project Thorough Evaluation Process with agency / consultant teams to evaluate crossing design, schedule, scope and cost sharing. Additional Meetings with all Agencies including sharing and receiving files from RFTA Consultant Provide multi-project schedule and interfaces to ensure constructability of 3 projects CDOT Plan Checking and Design Process: $30,000 = 260 Hrs Alternative Structures Selection Report Alternative Wall Selection Report Additional coordination with CDOT and specialty groups Multiple discussions on plan process as CDOT or local agency CDOT requested Parsons provide recommendation for most appropriate drainage design requirements. Post Design Advertisement Support: $ 4,000 = 34 Hrs Additional hours estimated to answer contractor questions regarding design, quantities or specifications Sub-Total for Additional Budget Required: $125,000 Project Total: $375,000 This list of required steps, including unanticipated planning, design and coo describe legitimate reasons as to why the tunnel project is exceeding the budgetary goal of $250,000. Parsons, under the direction of the E.O.T.C. and County Staff, has strived to execute the project as efficiently as possible. Thank you for your time and your trust and if you have any furth answer. Parsons Team