link to march tc electronic meetings or ... · budget amendment of fy 2020 (jeff sudmeier)...

Colorado Transportation Commission Schedule & Agenda

March 18 & 19, 2020 2829 W. Howard Place

Denver, Colorado 80204

Bill Thiebaut, Chairman Pueblo, District 10

Shannon Gifford Denver, District 1

Don Stanton Arvada, District 2

Eula Adams Arapahoe County, District 3

Karen Stuart, Vice-Chair Broomfield, District 4

Kathleen Bracke Fort Collins, District 5

Barbara Vasquez Cowdrey, District 6

Kathy Hall Grand Junction, District 7

Sidny Zink Durango, District 8

Irv Halter Colorado Springs, District 9

Gary Beedy Genoa, District 11

THE CHAIRMAN MAY ALTER THE ITEM SEQUENCE OR TIMES

Unless otherwise noted, all meetings in March will be held electronically.

Link to March TC Electronic Meetings

OR

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?reload=9&list=PLYszme4xVADCRgy-VVOq9JL08wjxc3XIE

The times indicated for each topic on the Commission agenda are an estimate and subject to change. Generally, upon the completion of each agenda item, the Commission will immediately move to the next item. However, the order of agenda items is tentative and, when necessary to accommodate the public or the Commission's schedules, the order of the agenda items are subject to change.

Documents posted at http://www.coloradodot.info/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html no less than 24 hours prior to the meeting. The documents are in draft form and for information only until the Commission takes final action.

HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE Wednesday, March 18, 2020

10:00 a.m. Regular HPTE Board Meeting

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WORKSHOPS Wednesday, March 18, 2020

11:45 am Joint HPTE/TC Workshop on Unsolicted Proposals (Nick Farber) (15 minutes) (Page #5)

12:00 p.m. Whole System, Whole Safety Workshop: Zero Deaths: • No presentation• Policy Discussion Related to Safety (Bill Thiebaut)

1

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYszme4xVADCRgy-VVOq9JL08wjxc3XIE

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?reload=9&list=PLYszme4xVADCRgy-VVOq9JL08wjxc3XIE

http://www.coloradodot.info/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html

http://www.coloradodot.info/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html

12:00 p.m. Infrastructure & Mobility Systems Workshop On Time, On Budget:

• Dashboard of Major Projects & Notification of Developments/Variances (Jane Fisher) (5 minutes) (Page #9)

Getting to Work on Time: • No presentation

State-of-the-Art Mobility/Mobility Systems: • Policy Discussion related to Infrastructure & Mobility Systems (Bill

Thiebaut)

12:05 p.m. Funding, Finance & Budget Workshop Fresh, Sustainable and Equitable Funding:

• No presentation

Prudent Investments: • No Presentation

Streamline Budget: • FY 20 Budget Workshop/Supplements/Amendments, including Strategic

Safety & Urban Arterials Funding (Jeff Sudmeier, Rebecca White) (25 minutes) (Page #12)

• FY 21 Budget Workshop – Questions Only (Jeff Sudmeier) (5 minutes)• PD 703.0 (Jeff Sudmeier) (30 minutes) (Page #38)• Policy Discussion related to Funding, Finance & Budget (Bill Thiebaut)

(Page #48)

1:05 p.m. Other Workshop Items Statutes, Rules, PDs and Audits:

• Statutory compliance regarding IGAs (Steve Harelson, Kathy Young) (15 minutes)(Page #70)

• PD 14 Workshop (Rebecca White) (30 minutes) (Page #81)

1:50 p.m.

2:35 p.m.

Statewide Plan Committee (Rebecca White) (45 minutes) (Page #94)

Mobility Systems Committee • Update on DTR activities (David Krutsinger) (30 minutes) (Page #120)• Discussion of traffic management system software upgrade (Ryan Tyler,

John Lorme) (15 minutes) (Page #161)

3:20 p.m.

3:50 p.m.

Small Business Diversity Committee (Greg Diehl) (30 minutes)(Page#170)

Adjournment

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING Thursday, March 19, 2020 8:00 a.m. Commissioner’s Breakfast

9:30 a.m. 1. Call to Order, Roll Call

9:35 a.m. 2. Public Comments (3 minutes per person, 10 minute limit)

9:45 a.m. 3. Comments of Individual Commissioners

2

10:15 a.m. 4. Executive Director’s Report (Shoshana Lew)

10:20 a.m. 5. Chief Engineer’s Report (Steve Harelson)

10:25 a.m. 6. HPTE Director’s Report (Nick Farber)

10:30 a.m. 7. FHWA Division Administrator Report (John Cater)

10:35 a.m. 8. STAC Report (Vincent Rogalski)

10:40 a.m. 9. Act on Consent Agendaa) Temporary Resolution #1: Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of

February 20, 2020 (Herman Stockinger) (Page #179)b) Temporary Resolution #2: Approve Referral of CDOT Region 3 Access

Appeal to the Office of Administrative Courts (Kathy Young) (Page #191)c) Temporary Resolution #3: Region 3 Disposal: I-70B & F 1/2 Road (Parcel

5A-X) (Mike Goolsby) (Page #198)d) Temporary Resolution #4: Region 1 Disposal: SH 88 & 7th Ave. (Parcel

200Rev-EX) (Paul Jesaitis) (Page #202)e) Temporary Resolution #5, MMOF Match Relief (Rebecca White) (Page

#205)f) Temporary Resolution #6, IGA Approvals by TC (Steve Harelson)

(Resolution packet only) 10:45 a.m. 10. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #7, 9th Budget Supplement of FY

2020 (Jeff Sudmeier) (Page #225)

10:50 a.m. 11. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #8, 8th Budget Amendment of FY 2020 (Jeff Sudmeier) (Resolution Packet Only)

10:55 a.m. 12. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #9, Adoption of the FY 2021 Budget (Jeff Sudmeier) (Resolution Packet Only)

11:00 a.m. 13. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #10, Approval of STIP Amendment 1for FY2020 - FY2023 STIP (Rebecca White) (Page #228)

11:05 a.m. 14. Environmental Awards (Rebecca White, Steve Harelson)

11:15 a.m. 15. Other Matters:

11:20 a.m. 16. Adjournment

The Bridge Enterprise Board of Directors meeting will begin immediately following the adjournment of the Transportation Commission Meeting. Est. Start Time: 11:15 a.m.

BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING Thursday, March 19, 2020 11:20 a.m. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call

2. Audience Participation• Subject Limit: 10 minutes; Time Limit: 3 minutes

3. Act on Consent Agenda• Temporary Resolution #BE1, to Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of

February 20, 2020 (Herman Stockinger) (Page #231)

3

4. Discuss & Act on Temporary Resolution #BE2, Bridge Enterprise 7th BudgetSupplement for FY ’20 (Jeff Sudmeier) (Page #232)

5. Discuss & Act on Temporary Resolution #BE3, Bridge Enterprise FY 2021Budget (Jeff Sudmeier) (Page #233)

6. Discuss & Act on Resolution to Acknowledge New Bridge Enterprise Vice-Chair (Bill Thiebaut) (Page #235)

7. Adjournment

INFO ONLY • Monthly Cash Memo (Jeff Sudmeier)• Statutory Reporting to TC (Jeff Sudmeier)

4

HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION

2829 W. Howard Place, Denver, Colorado 80204 | 303.757.9249 | FAX: 303.757.9179 |

Date: March 18, 2020

To: High-Performance Transportation Enterprise Board / Colorado Transportation Commission

From: Nick Farber, Director, HPTE

Subject: Moratorium on Unsolicited Proposals on Interstate 25 North, Interstate 270, and Central 70 Purpose The purpose of this memo is to describe the HPTE’s updated Unsolicited Proposal Policy and the HPTE Board and Transportation Commission moratoriums on unsolicited proposal on Interstate 25 North, Interstate 270, and Central 70. Action No action at this time. If the Board and Transportation Commission are amenable, HPTE will bring an agenda item to the April Board and Commission meetings to lift the moratoriums on all or a portion of the corridors. Background An Unsolicited Proposal is a written proposal submitted to HPTE on the initiative of a Proposer for the purpose of obtaining a contract with HPTE. It uses unique solutions to offer innovative and efficient means of completing surface transportation infrastructure projects or generates revenue and/or other value that will enable HPTE to better pursue its legislative mandate. It is not an offer responding to HPTE’s previously published expression of need including a Letter of Interest (LOI), Request for Information (RFI), Request for Qualifications (RFQ), or Request for Proposals (RFP). In June and July of 2012, the HPTE Board and Transportation Commission passed resolutions (HPTE # 74 and TC - 3003 respectively) that adopted moratoriums on unsolicited proposals on I-270, I-70 East (now Central 70), and I-25 North. This was to preserve the HPTE’s ability to solicit proposals on these corridors. Between 2012 and 2019, HPTE did not receive any unsolicited proposals, but has enjoyed success with CDOT on soliciting projects on I-25 North Segments 2 and 3, and on the Central 70 Project, the largest project CDOT has undertaken to date. HPTE has also recently partnered with Region 1 to conduct a Direct Connect Alternatives Analysis and Traffic and Revenue Study on I-270. During the February 2019 Board Retreat, the HPTE Board of Directors requested that HPTE staff revise the Unsolicited Proposal Policy (UP) with the goal of increasing engagement with the market and soliciting new revenue generating ideas. The revised UP seeks to clarify the entire unsolicited proposal process including establishing types of proposals being sought, process for submission and the overall procurement process. HPTE staff revised the UP based on an analysis of the current HPTE UP, a peer review of other Departments of Transportation (DOT’s), including LA Metro, RTD, Arizona DOT, and Utah DOT, and suggestions from HPTE advisors. Since January of this year HPTE has received eight unsolicited proposals - four were rejected either because there was a moratorium on the corridor or they did not meet the HPTE Unsolicited Proposal Policy requirements, and three proposals are being considered to determine if they meet the threshold requirements. If they have passed the threshold review, the information will have been presented to the Board at today’s meeting. Analysis of UP Moratoriums Over the past eight years, CDOT and HPTE have procured over $1.4 billion worth of projects on I-25 north and Central 70 and are moving forward with the project planning process on I-270, but there is still a

5

HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION

2829 W. Howard Place, Denver, Colorado 80204 | 303.757.9249 | FAX: 303.757.9179 |

need for infrastructure investment on those corridors. As shown above, HPTE currently has interest from the P3/Developer industry on some of these corridors for unsolicited proposals, but have had to reject them because of the moratoriums. The HPTE thinks it is time to lift the moratoriums on all of the corridors so staff can evaluate ideas from industry to see if they are worthwhile moving forward.

Options / Decision Matrix

1. Staff Recommendation: Lift the UP moratoriums on I-270, I-25 North, and Central 70. 2. Lift one or a combination of the moratoriums, but keep one or more in place. 3. Keep all of the moratoriums in place.

Attachments

1. HPTE Resolution # 74 2. TC #- 3003

6

Resolution – HPTE # 74 No resolution was used for the: Suspension of unsolicited proposals on I70E, I25N, I270 Voted at 6/20/13 BOD mtg; minutes apvd at 7/18/13 BOD mtg

7

TO: Transportation Commission FROM: Steve Harelson, Chief Engineer Jane Fisher, Director, Office of Program Management DATE: March 18, 2020 SUBJECT: Dashboard of Major Projects Purpose The purpose of this memo is to provide an update of dashboards for major projects and their application in identification of items that may warrant management attention. Action Information only.

Monthly Project Reporting The Transportation Commission has previously requested a major project update on a monthly basis. PowerBI dashboards associated with Calendar Year 2020 (CY20) Active Construction Projects and Major Projects have been updated. Figure 1 details the screenshot for the CY20 Active Construction Projects and applicable content includes:

Graph detailing CY20 baseline, forecast, and actual expenditures (based on February month end SAP data). Results to date correlate with an XPI of 0.83 (actual expenditures vs. baseline)

Listing of number of projects planned to incur construction expenditures in CY20 Listing of CY20 baseline and project count by procurement status (awarded, not advertised and

advertised) Count of projects by region that have CY20 baseline greater than $10 million dollars and less than $10

million dollars. Interactive map detailing projects by region with dot size generally correlated with magnitude of CY20

forecasted expenditures.

Figure 2 details the screenshot for major projects (defined as project with planned total project cost greater than $100 million dollars) and applicable content includes:

Listing of number of major projects, current budget, and estimated cost at completion (difference between the two totals is the portion of projects that is not yet budgeted).

Project health in the context of red/yellow/green indicators for schedule, budget, resources, quality, scope, risks, and issues.

Project schedule overview (construction start, construction end, and % of schedule duration expended) Cost and schedule variance per comments provided at the December TC meeting. Cost variance is

estimated as baseline as established at construction contract award vs. total project cost. Schedule variance is estimated as current contract completion date vs. completion date at construction contract award. As indicated the C-470 project currently has a cost and schedule variance and the Central 70 project has a schedule variance.

Summary of open risks, action items, issues, and decisions (RAID) Interactive map detailing projects by region with dot size generally correlated with total project cost.

2829 W. Howard Place, Suite 562 Denver, CO 80204

9

Figure 1 – CY 20 Construction Activity Overview

10

Figure 2 – Major Project Dashboard Screenshot

11

2829 W. Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 303-757-9208

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 18, 2020 SUBJECT: FY 2020 BUDGET WORKSHOP / 8TH BUDGET AMENDMENT Purpose To review several topics related to the FY 2019-20 Annual Budget, including the 8th Budget Amendment. Action The Division of Accounting and Finance (DAF) is requesting Transportation Commission (TC) review of proposed adjustments and allocations resulting from the receipt of supplemental federal funding and reconciliation of FY 2020 federal revenues, and review and approval of the eighth amendment to the FY 2019-20 Annual Budget. Supplemental Federal Funding In general, federal transportation funding programs and funding levels are established in a multi-year transportation authorization act. Congress ultimately appropriates funding based on that authorization act through annual appropriations. In the last few years (FY 18, FY 19, and FY 20) Congress has included in final appropriations certain amounts of supplemental funding provided to the States in addition to their regular apportionments based on the authorization act. In FY 2019 that included $37.3 million in Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds. These funds are already reflected in the current TC Program Reserve balance of $48.8 million. Notice was recently provided of additional supplemental appropriations for FY 2020. This includes $10.6 million in Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds and $8.5 million in Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation funds. The FY 2020 supplemental funds will be reflected in the April TC Program Reserve balance, resulting in a total balance of $67.9 million. The Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds include a suballocation to urbanized areas greater than 200,000. As such, it is proposed that the portion of these funds associated with urbanized areas greater than 200,000, totaling $16.5 million, be suballocated to DRCOG, NFR MPO and PPACG through the STP-Metro Program. The Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation funds must be used for bridge replacement and rehab. It is proposed that these funds, totaling $8.5 million, be added to the Structures Program to advance additional bridge projects. Approval of these allocations will reduce the TC Program Reserve Balance from $67.9 million to $43.0 million. Federal Revenue Reconciliation When Congress appropriates funds annually they do so through the establishment of an obligation limitation. The obligation limitation reflects how much of the funds authorized through the transportation authorization act are ultimately made available to the States. In recent years the obligation limitation has been about 93% (i.e. Congress makes available to the States 93% of the authorized amounts). FY 2020 appropriations were finalized when Congress passed the final FY 2020 appropriations act in December. Final FY 2020 federal appropriations have since been noticed and came in at a lower than anticipated level of obligation limitation, with total federal revenues coming in at $534 million, $16.7 million less than forecasted and reflected in the current FY 2019-20 Annual Budget.

12

of 3


The variance in revenue associated with dedicated revenue sources (i.e. those sources dedicated to a specific federal program, for example National Highway Freight Program or CMAQ) will result in positive or negative adjustments to each specific budget program. Adjustments related to flexible revenue sources will result in adjustments to the TC Program Reserve Balance. Table 1 below outlines each of these adjustments, with the majority of the $16.7 million in revenue reductions being in flexible revenue sources resulting in a negative $14.7 million adjustment to the TC Program Reserve balance. These revenue adjustments will be reflected in the 9th Budget Amendment in April and will result in a further reduction in the TC Program Reserve balance from an estimated balance of $43.0 million to $28.2 million. Table 1

Budget Amendments The eighth Budget Amendment includes five items requiring TC approval. The first two of these relate to the previously described allocations of supplemental federal funding. Structures Allocate $8.5 million in FY 2020 Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation funds from the TC Program Reserve (Line 68) to the Structures Program (Line 5) in order to advance additional bridge projects. STP-Metro Allocate $16.5 million in FY 2019 and FY 2020 Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds from the TC Program Reserve (Line 68) to the STP-Metro Program (Line 51) in order to suballocate to DRCOG, NFR MPO, and PPACG the portion of these supplemental funds associated with urbanized areas greater than 200,000. Urban Arterials In February, staff presented a proposal to allocate an additional $17.2 million to the Urban Arterials Initiative. The Urban Arterials Initiative is currently included on the $1.6 billion list of projects funded primarily via SB 17-267, SB 18-001, and SB 19-262. This program, developed in partnership with DRCOG, will focus on high injury/high crash locations on urban arterials in the Greater Denver area. With the commitment of an additional $17.2 million by CDOT, DRCOG has agreed (subject to approval in March) to commit $9.5 million of its STP-Metro funds to the Urban Arterials Initiative. Projects will be identified through a competitive project selection process.

13

of 3


Allocate $17.2 million from the TC Program Reserve (Line 68) to the Strategic Projects Program (Line 18). Approval of this allocation will result in a further reduction in the TC Program Reserve balance to an estimated $11.1 million. Strategic Safety Program The Strategic Safety Program is focused on decreasing the frequency and severity of accidents through systematic statewide safety improvement programs, which include: 6-inch striping, interstate cable rail, rumble strips, variable speed limit signage, and MASH compliant guardrail. In February, staff proposed the allocation of additional funds to the Strategic Safety Program. Given a delay in the issuance of SB 267 COPs and the receipt of additional premium, and other significant draws on the Program Reserve this month, staff is delaying this request until a later month. The eighth budget amendment, however, does include a request of $3.1 million in existing Strategic Safety Program funds to used to facilitate the delivery of striping improvements, $1.8 million will be transferred for 6- inch striping in regions one and five. The remaining $1.3 million will re be used for the currently adverstised MASH guardrail contract. Allocate $1.8 million from the Strategic Safety Program (Line 37) to Traffic Services (Line 29) to provide additional funding for 6-inch striping, and allocate $1.3 million from the Strategic Safety Program (Line 37) for the currently advertised MASH guardrail contract. Snow and Ice Control The Division of Maintenance and Operations (DMO) is requesting $5.5 million from the Transportation Commission Maintenance Reserve Fund to cover a projected budget deficit associated with winter operations. Per the attached memo, DMO is requesting 40% of the projected budget shortfall to ensure all of the Maintenance and Traffic sections remain solvent for the winter season and are able to complete summer maintenance activities. In December the Transportation Commission added an additional $10 million to the existing $10 million Snow and Ice Reserve, for a total of $20 million. Approval of an additional $5.5 million draw this month will bring the total drawn to date to $17.3 million, leaving a Snow and Ice Reserve balance of $2.7 million. Allocate $5.5 million from Maintenance Reserve Fund (Line 35) to Snow and Ice Control (Line 28) in order to provide additional funding for winter operations during the 2020 winter season. Options and Recommendation

1. Approve proposed Budget Amendment (see temporary resolution #7) -- STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 2. Approve a portion of proposed Budget Amendment. 3. Request additional information and defer action to a subsequent month.

Attachments Attachment A: Presentation Attachment B: Memorandum from Division of Maintenance and Operations Attachment C: Amended FY 2019-20 Annual Budget

14

FY 20 Budget WorkshopSupplemental Funding

Federal Revenue Reconciliation8th Budget Amendment

15

Supplemental Federal Funding$8.5 M

$48.8 M

$48.8 MTC Program Reserve

$37.3 M

FY 19 Supplemental Highway Infrastructure

Program Funds$37.3 M

• The current TC Program Reserve balance of $48.8 million includes $37.3 million in federal funding provided as Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds in the final apportionment of FY 19.

16

Supplemental Federal Funding

$67.9 M$48.8 MTC Program Reserve





FY 20 Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehab

Funds$8.5 M

• Notice was issued in February of an additional $10.6 M in Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds in FY 20, as well as an additional $8.5 million in Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehab funds.

• Supplemental Highway Infrastructure Program funds include an allocation to urbanized areas > 200,000 (i.e. MPO suballocation to DRCOG, NFR MPO, and PPACG)

• Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehab funds must be used for bridge replacement or rehab, the balance of the supplemental funds are flexible.

17

Supplemental Federal Funding

$67.9 M$48.8 MTC Program Reserve





FY 20 Supplemental Bridge Replacement and Rehab

Funds$8.5 M

Allocate to Structures Program (Line 5) for additional bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects$8.5 M

Allocate to STP-Metro Program (Line 51) for suballocation to DRCOG, NFR MPO, and PPACG$16.5 M

18

Federal Revenue Reconciliation

$37.3 M

$67.9 M

TC Program Reserve

• Final FY 2020 federal appropriations came in at a lower than anticipated level of obligation limitation, resulting in the need for revenue adjustments to several budget programs

• Revenues came in $16.7 M less than forecasted, going from $550.7 M to $534 M, with the majority of the reduction in flexible programs

• Positive or negative adjustments in flexible programs are reflected in adjustments to the TC Program Reserve Balance

19

Federal Revenue Reconciliation

$48.8 M

$43.0 MTC Program Reserve TC Program

Reserve$28.2 M

After allocations to Structures and STP-Metro

After reconciliation of flexible Federal revenues

20

8th Budget Amendment

TC Program Reserve$28.2 M

8th Budget Amendment (This month)• $8.5 M from TC Program Reserve (Line

68) to Structures (Line 5)• $16.5 M from TC Program Reserve (Line

68) to STP-Metro (Line 51)• $17.2 M from TC Program Reserve (Line

68) to Strategic Projects (Line 18)• $1.8 M from Strategic Safety Program

(Line 37) to Traffic Services (Line 29)• $1.3 M in Strategic Safety Program (Line

37) for MASH contract. • $5.5 from Maintenance Reserve (Line 35)

to Snow and Ice Control (Line 28)

9th Budget Amendment (Next month)• Adjustments based on federal revenue

reconciliation

21

Urban Arterials Initiative

$28.2 M


• Allocate $17.2 M from the TC Program Reserve (Line 68) to Strategic Projects (Line 18) for the Urban Arterials Initiative.

• Defer decision on additional Strategic Safety Program funds to a later month. 22

Maintenance

TC Program Reserve

• Transfer $5.5 M to Snow and Ice Control (Line 28) from the Maintenance Contingency Reserve (Line 35)

Section Budget Expenditure % Winter

Remaining % Budget

Remaining % Surplus/

Deficit Surplus/Deficit

S&I Contingency

Request Greeley $14,905,639.30 $11,318,307.29 32.04% 24.07% -7.97% ($1,188,434.82) $446,000.00 G.J. $18,832,631.88 $17,402,060.50 32.04% 7.60% -24.44% ($4,603,403.88) $1,804,000.00 Durango $5,464,048.82 $5,101,584.25 32.04% 6.63% -25.41% ($1,388,216.67) $545,000.00 Pueblo $12,809,552.60 $11,113,851.68 32.04% 13.24% -18.80% ($2,408,479.73) $938,000.00 Aurora $16,636,059.25 $13,148,851.50 32.04% 20.96% -11.08% ($1,842,985.63) $705,000.00 Craig $6,202,600.95 $4,865,847.37 32.04% 21.55% -10.49% ($650,559.76) $248,000.00 Alamosa $4,342,217.91 $3,715,095.79 32.04% 14.44% -17.60% ($764,124.50) $297,000.00 EJMT $11,397,449.33 $8,940,799.58 32.04% 21.55% -10.49% ($1,195,093.02) $456,000.00 Aurora T $0.00 $0.00 32.04% 0.00% 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 Pueblo T $0.00 $0.00 32.04% 0.00% 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G.J. T $11,200.00 $14,825.15 32.04% -32.37% -64.41% ($7,213.63) $3,000.00 Greeley T $47,900.00 $45,593.17 32.04% 4.82% -27.22% ($13,040.33) $5,000.00 Durango T $41,200.00 $51,800.24 32.04% -25.73% -57.77% ($23,800.72) $9,000.00 State $90,690,500.04 $75,718,616.53 32.04% 16.51% -15.53% ($14,085,352.70) $5,456,000.00

Total S&I Contingency Request: $5,456,000

• Transfer $1.8 million from Strategic Safety Program (Line 37) to Traffic Services (Line 29) for delivery of 6” striping through the MLOS program, and approve $1.3 million in the Strategic Safety Program (Line 37) for MASH compliant guardrail.

23

Coming Attractions


$28.2 M

April

May

June

July

Augu

st

Sept

embe

r

SB 267 PremiumEst $65 - $95 M

Federal Redistribution

Est $25 - $50 M

• There are opportunities over the next several months to program additional funds, and to consider increasing the TC Program Reserve balance

Year-End CloseEst $2 M - $5 M

24

Purpose The Division of Maintenance and Operations (DMO) is requesting $5,456,000 from the Transportation Commission Maintenance Contingency Reserve. Action Requested Approval of requested additional funds. Background While Maintenance sections remain concerned that they will have funding to complete expected non-snow related spring and summer activities, DMO is requesting 40% of the projected budget shortfall to help ensure the sections are able to fully fund winter snow activities without significantly impacting non-snow related spring and summer activities. PROCESS Winter Operations Within the DMO, winter is defined as October 14th through May 8th. Using the MLOS Section Snow and Ice Report, a request for supplemental funding is recommended, if the Remaining Winter exceeds the S&I Section Budget Remaining. In January 2020, the draw schedule to accelerated due to the early heavy snow experienced throughout the state. However, this in February and Marchmonth we have reverted back to the original draw schedule. The following guidelines are used to determine the Section TC Recommendation. Snow and Ice Section Recommendation Percentage Guide

Month Percentage Request Month Percentage Request October 0% March 40%

November 0% April 50% December 10% May 60% January 20% June 100% February 30%

4201 East Arkansas Ave, 3rd Floor Denver, CO 80222

TO: Transportation Commision FROM: John Lorme, Director, Division of Maintenance and Operations CC: Jeffrey J. Sudmeier, Chief Financial Officer DATE: March 4, 2020 SUBJECT: FY20 Maintenance Contingency Request

25

Section Budget Expenditure % Winter

Remaining % Budget

Remaining % Surplus/

Deficit Surplus/Deficit

S&I Contingency

Request Greeley $14,905,639.30 $11,318,307.29 32.04% 24.07% -7.97% ($1,188,434.82) $446,000.00 G.J. $18,832,631.88 $17,402,060.50 32.04% 7.60% -24.44% ($4,603,403.88) $1,804,000.00 Durango $5,464,048.82 $5,101,584.25 32.04% 6.63% -25.41% ($1,388,216.67) $545,000.00 Pueblo $12,809,552.60 $11,113,851.68 32.04% 13.24% -18.80% ($2,408,479.73) $938,000.00 Aurora $16,636,059.25 $13,148,851.50 32.04% 20.96% -11.08% ($1,842,985.63) $705,000.00 Craig $6,202,600.95 $4,865,847.37 32.04% 21.55% -10.49% ($650,559.76) $248,000.00 Alamosa $4,342,217.91 $3,715,095.79 32.04% 14.44% -17.60% ($764,124.50) $297,000.00 EJMT $11,397,449.33 $8,940,799.58 32.04% 21.55% -10.49% ($1,195,093.02) $456,000.00 Aurora T $0.00 $0.00 32.04% 0.00% 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 Pueblo T $0.00 $0.00 32.04% 0.00% 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G.J. T $11,200.00 $14,825.15 32.04% -32.37% -64.41% ($7,213.63) $3,000.00 Greeley T $47,900.00 $45,593.17 32.04% 4.82% -27.22% ($13,040.33) $5,000.00 Durango T $41,200.00 $51,800.24 32.04% -25.73% -57.77% ($23,800.72) $9,000.00 State $90,690,500.04 $75,718,616.53 32.04% 16.51% -15.53% ($14,085,352.70) $5,456,000.00

Total S&I Contingency Request: $5,456,000

26

Attachment C: FY 2019 - 2020 CDOT AMENDED ANNUAL BUDGET FEBRUARY 29, 2020

Line Budget Category / Program

Rollforward

from FY 2018-

19

FY 2019-20

Allocation Plan

Proposed TC

Amendments

Approved TC

Amendments

EMT and Staff

Approved

Adjustments

Total FY20 Program

Budget Available

including Changes Directed By Funding Source

1 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

2 Capital Construction $427.9 M $1,085.9 M $25.6 M $218.4 M $91.6 M $1,849.5 M

3 Asset Management $44.5 M $318.9 M $8.5 M $0.0 M -$2.2 M $369.6 M

4 Surface Treatment $2.7 M $222.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$0.8 M $223.9 M TC FHWA / SH / SB 09-108

5 Structures $2.0 M $56.6 M $8.5 M $0.0 M -$1.1 M $66.0 M TC FHWA / SH / SB 09-108

*6 System Operations-AM $4.8 M $24.1 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $28.9 M TC FHWA / SH

7 Geohazards Mitigation $0.6 M $9.7 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $10.3 M TC SB 09-108

8 Permanent Water Quality Mitigation $16.1 M $6.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $22.6 M TC FHWA / SH

9 Emergency Relief $18.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$0.4 M $17.9 M FR FHWA

10 Safety $22.1 M $140.5 M $0.0 M -$11.4 M -$0.9 M $150.3 M

11 Highway Safety Improvement Program $5.2 M $44.0 M $0.0 M -$11.4 M -$0.5 M $37.3 M FR FHWA / SH

12 Railway-Highway Crossings Program $6.3 M $3.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $9.8 M FR FHWA / SH

13 Hot Spots $0.0 M $2.2 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$0.4 M $1.8 M TC FHWA / SH

14 FASTER Safety $4.2 M $68.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $72.7 M TC SB 09-108

15 ADA Compliance $6.3 M $22.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $28.7 M TC FHWA / SH

16 Mobility $361.3 M $626.5 M $17.2 M $229.8 M $94.8 M $1,329.5 M

17 Regional Priority Program $33.3 M $48.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.9 M $82.7 M TC FHWA / SH

18 Strategic Projects $286.0 M $555.0 M $17.2 M $229.8 M $95.6 M $1,183.6 M SL SB 17-267 / SB 19-262

19 National Highway Freight Program $41.9 M $23.1 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$1.8 M $63.3 M FR FHWA / SH

20 Maintenance and Operations $38.9 M $336.0 M $0.0 M $34.6 M -$10.5 M $398.9 M

21 Asset Management $26.7 M $315.4 M $3.2 M $20.3 M -$0.9 M $364.7 M

22 Maintenance Program Areas $4.3 M $265.7 M $8.6 M $10.0 M $8.0 M $296.6 M

23 Roadway Surface $0.6 M $36.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.1 M $38.2 M TC SH

24 Roadside Facilities $0.4 M $24.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.7 M $25.5 M TC SH

25 Roadside Appearance $0.2 M $10.7 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.3 M $11.2 M TC SH

26 Structure Maintenance $0.1 M $6.1 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.2 M $6.4 M TC SH

27 Tunnel Activities $0.1 M $6.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.2 M $6.3 M TC SH

28 Snow and Ice Control $1.3 M $79.2 M $5.5 M $7.2 M $2.4 M $95.6 M TC SH

29 Traffic Services $1.1 M $65.4 M $3.2 M $0.0 M $2.0 M $71.6 M TC SH

30 Materials, Equipment, and Buildings $0.3 M $17.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.5 M $18.1 M TC SH

31 Planning and Scheduling $0.3 M $17.7 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.5 M $18.6 M TC SH

32 Toll Corridor General Purpose Lanes $0.0 M $2.3 M $0.0 M $2.8 M $0.1 M $5.2 M TC SH

33 Property $0.3 M $17.6 M $0.0 M $5.7 M $1.6 M $25.2 M TC SH

34 Road Equipment $22.1 M $22.1 M $0.0 M $4.4 M -$10.5 M $38.2 M TC SH

35 Maintenance Reserve Fund $0.0 M $10.0 M -$5.5 M $0.2 M $0.0 M $4.7 M TC SH

36 Safety $2.8 M $0.0 M -$3.2 M $11.4 M -$8.4 M $2.6 M

37 Strategic Safety Program $2.8 M $0.0 M -$3.2 M $11.4 M -$8.4 M $2.6 M TC FHWA / SH

38 Mobility $9.4 M $20.6 M $0.0 M $2.9 M -$1.2 M $31.6 M

39 Real-Time Traffic Operations $0.1 M $10.6 M $0.0 M $2.8 M -$1.4 M $12.0 M TC SH

40 ITS Investments $9.4 M $10.0 M $0.0 M $0.1 M $0.2 M $19.6 M TC FHWA / SH

41 Multimodal Services $98.0 M $69.8 M $0.0 M -$13.1 M $17.7 M $172.5 M

42 Mobility $98.0 M $69.8 M $0.0 M -$13.1 M $17.7 M $172.5 M

43 Innovative Mobility Programs $16.0 M $12.1 M $0.0 M -$14.3 M $0.0 M $13.8 M TC FHWA / SH

44 Strategic Transit and Multimodal Projects $73.3 M $50.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $16.3 M $139.6 M SL SB 17-267

45 Rail Commission $2.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $2.5 M SL SB 18-001

46 Bustang $6.2 M $7.7 M $0.0 M $1.2 M $1.4 M $16.5 M TC SB 09-108 / Fare Rev.

47 Suballocated Programs $433.3 M $243.6 M $16.5 M $0.0 M -$29.5 M $663.9 M

48 Aeronautics $18.1 M $33.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.6 M $51.9 M

49 Aviation System Programs $18.1 M $33.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.6 M $51.9 M AB SA

50 Highway $245.1 M $123.6 M $16.5 M $0.0 M -$15.2 M $370.0 M

51 STP-Metro $149.3 M $55.4 M $16.5 M $0.0 M -$4.9 M $216.3 M FR FHWA / LOC

52 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality $73.4 M $50.2 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$14.3 M $109.2 M FR FHWA / LOC

53 Metropolitan Planning $7.0 M $8.6 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $3.2 M $18.7 M FR FHWA / FTA / LOC

54 Off-System Bridge Program $15.4 M $9.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.8 M $25.7 M TC / FR FHWA / FSH / LOC

55 Transit and Multimodal $170.1 M $86.8 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$14.9 M $242.0 M

56 Recreational Trails $2.4 M $1.6 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$2.1 M $1.9 M FR FHWA

57 Safe Routes to School $8.0 M $3.1 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.9 M $13.0 M TC FHWA

58 Transportation Alternatives Program $31.7 M $12.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$0.5 M $43.4 M FR FHWA / LOC

59 Transit Grant Programs $56.3 M $47.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $103.6 M FR / SL / TC FTA / LOC / SB 09-108

60 Multimodal Options Program $71.8 M $22.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$14.1 M $80.1 M TC/SL SB 19-125 / SB 18-001

61 Administration & Agency Operations $16.5 M $111.6 M $0.0 M $6.1 M $3.7 M $137.9 M

*62 Agency Operations $16.5 M $73.3 M $0.0 M $6.1 M $3.6 M $99.5 M TC / AB FHWA / SH / SA / SB 09-108

63 Administration $0.0 M $38.3 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.1 M $38.4 M SL SH-GA

64 Debt Service $0.0 M $62.8 M $0.0 M $1.9 M $0.0 M $64.7 M

65 Debt Service $0.0 M $62.8 M $0.0 M $1.9 M $0.0 M $64.7 M DS FHWA / SH

66 Contingency Reserve $191.2 M $23.8 M -$42.1 M -$175.3 M $68.7 M $66.3 M

67 Contingency Fund $23.3 M $15.0 M $0.0 M $17.4 M $0.0 M $55.7 M TC FHWA / SH

68 Reserve Fund $167.9 M $8.8 M -$42.1 M -$192.7 M $68.7 M $10.6 M TC FHWA / SH

69 Other Programs $18.2 M $27.9 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.0 M $47.0 M

70 Safety Education $9.4 M $12.9 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.6 M $23.9 M TC/FR NHTSA / SSE

71 Planning and Research $8.8 M $14.6 M $0.0 M $0.0 M -$0.6 M $22.8 M FR FHWA / SH

72 State Infrastructure Bank $0.0 M $0.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.4 M TC SIB

73 TOTAL - CDOT $1,224.0 M $1,961.3 M $0.0 M $72.6 M $142.8 M $3,400.7 M

*Allocated plan amounts do not reflect budget originally pushed due to reorganization

28

74 COLORADO BRIDGE ENTERPRISE

75 Capital Construction $48.3 M $96.9 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $13.7 M $158.9 M

76 Asset Management $48.3 M $96.9 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $13.7 M $158.9 M

77 Bridge Enterprise Projects-CBE $48.3 M $96.9 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $13.7 M $158.9 M BEB SB 09-108

78 Maintenance and Operations $0.8 M $0.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.3 M

79 Asset Management $0.8 M $0.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.3 M

80 Maintenance and Preservation-CBE $0.8 M $0.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $1.3 M BEB SB 09-108


82 Agency Operations-CBE $2.4 M $1.8 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $4.2 M BEB SB 09-108


84 Debt Service-CBE $0.0 M $18.2 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $18.2 M BEB FHWA / SH

85 TOTAL - BRIDGE ENTERPRISE $51.5 M $117.4 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $13.7 M $182.6 M

86 HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE

87 Maintenance and Operations $45.0 M $18.8 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $3.1 M $66.9 M

88 Express Lanes Operations-HPTE $45.0 M $18.8 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $3.1 M $66.9 M HPTEB Tolls / Managed Lanes Revenue


90 Agency Operations-HPTE $2.8 M $5.7 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $2.9 M $11.4 M HPTEB Fee for Service


92 Debt Service-HPTE $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M HPTEB Fee for Service

93 TOTAL - HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE $47.8 M $24.5 M $0.0 M $0.0 M $5.9 M $78.3 M

94 TOTAL - CDOT AND ENTERPRISES $1,323.3 M $2,103.2 M $0.0 M $72.6 M $162.4 M $3,661.6 M

29


MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 18, 2020 SUBJECT: FY 2020-21 FINAL ANNUAL BUDGET Purpose To present the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan for Transportation Commission (TC) adoption. Action The Division of Accounting and Finance (DAF) is requesting that the TC adopt the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan. FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan The FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan is available on the Department’s website: https://www.codot.gov/business/budget/cdot-budget/draft-budget-documents/fy-2020-21-budget-allocation-plan. The Plan includes a Budget Narrative, Revenue Allocation Plan, Spending Plan, and other appendices. The total revenue available for allocation in the Final Budget is $1,983.9 million, which is allocated as follows:

• $973.6 M to capital construction programs • $368.9 M to maintenance and operations programs • $224.1 M to suballocated programs • $70.1 M to multimodal services • $120.9 M to Colorado Bridge Enterprise • $22.6 M to High Performance Transportation Enterprise

The FY 2020-21 Final Revenue Allocation Plan is balanced, with all flexible revenue allocated. Revenues specific to a program that are considered inflexible (i.e., Fast Act and State mandated programs such as safety education and Aeronautics) have been automatically adjusted based on the FY 2020-21 Revenue Forecast. Asset Management and Maintenance programs are funded according to the FY 2020-21 Asset Management Planning Totals, approved by the TC in August 2017. All other program revenues are flexible and are initially set based on the FY 2019-20 budget amounts as adopted by the TC in March 2019 (and subsequently amended), and then modified through the work plan budget and decision item processes. Changes to FY 2020-21 Revenue Allocation Plan The Department made several minor modifications to the Final Revenue Allocation Plan since February, briefly described below. Projected FY 2019-20 roll forwards were further refined from the original estimates provided in February. The roll forward budget from FY 2019-20 that is available in FY 2020-21 is estimated at approximately $1.1 billion. Of this amount, the majority of the funds have been programmed which means the Department has planned projects to use this funding. Roll forwards will be updated after the end of the fiscal year to reflect final year-end amounts.

30

https://www.codot.gov/business/budget/cdot-budget/draft-budget-documents/fy-2020-21-budget-allocation-plan

of 2


Additionally, the Department added footnotes to provide clarification with regard to allocations for Snow and Ice Control and Multimodal Services:

• Snow and Ice Control (Line 28) - The Maintenance Reserve Fund (Line 35) under Maintenance and Operations, Asset Management includes an additional $10 million in contingency for Snow and Ice removal. This funding is set aside in addition to the $78.7 million allocation for Snow and Ice Control.

• Strategic Transit and Multimodal Projects (Line 44) - SB 17-267 directed the State Treasurer to execute lease-purchase agreements on existing state facilities to generate revenue for priority transportation projects. At least 10 percent of these proceeds must be used for transit projects. Of the $50 million in estimated revenue for transit projects, the department anticipates spending $2.4 million on Administration, $27.6 million on the construction of bus and pedestrian facilities, and $20.0 million on rolling stock.

• Rail Commission (Line 45) - SB 18-001 appropriated $2.5 million to the Southwest Chief and Front Range Rail Commission in FY 2018-19. Pursuant to SB 19-125, this funding is available until the close of FY 2020-21.

• Multimodal Options Program (Line 60) - SB 18-001 created the Multimodal Transportation Options Fund, and allocated $71.75 million to the fund in FY 2018-19 and $22.5 million to the fund in FY 2019-20. This funding is annually appropriated by the General Assembly. The FY 2018-19 appropriation is available until the close of FY 2022-23 pursuant to SB 19-125, and the FY 2019-20 appropriation is available until the close of FY 2023-24 pursuant to SB 19-207. Of the total funding, the department will spend approximately $6 million on administration and operating costs, approximately $14 million for CDOT bus purchase and facility construction, and approximately $74 million will be passed through to local agencies for rolling stock purchases.

Options and Recommendation Pursuant to Section 43-1-113 (9)(c), C.R.S., the TC is required to adopt a Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan for the upcoming fiscal year by April 15. DAF requests TC adoption of the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan. Options include:

1. Adopt the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan by resolution. (Staff Recommendation) 2. Request additional changes to the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan prior to April 15,

2020. Next Steps Upon Adoption, the FY 2019-20 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan will be delivered to the Governor on or before April 15, 2019. The TC has the authority to amend the budget after this date. The budget may also be changed according to revised Common Policy or other legislatively approved changes. Attachments Attachment A – FY 2020-21 Revenue Allocation Plan Attachment B – FY 2020-21 Spending Plan Attachment C – Personnel Report Attachment D – FY 2019-20 Estimated Rollforwards for Capital Construction Programs

31


Rollforward from

FY19-20

*Estimated

FY 2020-21

Proposed Allocation

Plan

FY 2020-21

Final

Allocation Plan Directed By Funding Source


2 Capital Construction $518.8 M $976.4 M $973.6 M

3 Asset Management $69.3 M $327.3 M $325.2 M

4 Surface Treatment $2.0 M $223.2 M $223.2 M TC FHWA / SH / SB 09-108

5 Structures $0.8 M $51.8 M $51.8 M TC FHWA / SH / SB 09-108

6 System Operations $0.0 M $33.5 M $31.4 M TC FHWA / SH

7 Geohazards Mitigation $0.5 M $12.3 M $12.3 M TC SB 09-108

8 Permanent Water Quality Mitigation $2.0 M $6.5 M $6.5 M TC FHWA / SH

9 Emergency Relief $64.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M FR FHWA

10 Safety $26.5 M $128.3 M $127.6 M

11 Highway Safety Improvement Program $10.0 M $32.8 M $32.8 M FR FHWA / SH

12 Railway-Highway Crossings Program $5.0 M $3.6 M $3.6 M FR FHWA / SH

13 Hot Spots $0.0 M $2.2 M $2.2 M TC FHWA / SH

14 FASTER Safety $7.5 M $68.3 M $67.6 M TC SB 09-108

15 ADA Compliance $4.0 M $21.4 M $21.4 M TC FHWA / SH

16 Mobility $423.0 M $520.8 M $520.8 M

17 Regional Priority Program $14.0 M $48.4 M $48.4 M TC FHWA / SH

18 Strategic Projects $379.0 M $450.0 M $450.0 M SL SB 17-267 / SB 19-262

19 National Highway Freight Program $30.0 M $22.4 M $22.4 M FR FHWA / SH

20 Maintenance and Operations $21.5 M $349.2 M $368.8 M


22 Maintenance Program Areas $0.0 M $260.7 M $265.2 M

23 Roadway Surface $0.0 M $36.1 M $41.4 M TC SH

24 Roadside Facilities $0.0 M $24.1 M $21.8 M TC SH

25 Roadside Appearance $0.0 M $10.6 M $10.7 M TC SH

26 Structure Maintenance $0.0 M $6.1 M $4.5 M TC SH

27 Tunnel Activities $0.0 M $5.9 M $3.4 M TC SH

28 Snow and Ice Control $0.0 M $78.4 M $78.7 M TC SH

29 Traffic Services $0.0 M $64.8 M $70.3 M TC SH

30 Materials, Equipment, and Buildings $0.0 M $17.1 M $16.4 M TC SH

31 Planning and Scheduling $0.0 M $17.6 M $18.1 M TC SH

32 Toll Corridor General Purpose Lanes $0.0 M $2.9 M $2.9 M TC SH

33 Property $6.0 M $18.1 M $29.3 M TC SH

34 Capital Equipment $12.0 M $21.6 M $23.5 M TC SH

**35 Maintenance Reserve Fund $0.0 M $12.0 M $12.0 M TC SH

36 Safety $0.0 M $11.4 M $11.4 M

37 Strategic Safety Program $0.0 M $11.4 M $11.4 M TC FHWA / SH

38 Mobility $3.5 M $22.6 M $24.6 M

39 Real-Time Traffic Operations $1.0 M $12.6 M $14.6 M TC SH

40 ITS Investments $2.5 M $10.0 M $10.0 M TC FHWA / SH

41 Multimodal Services $107.0 M $68.9 M $70.1 M

42 Mobility $107.0 M $68.9 M $70.1 M

43 Innovative Mobility Programs $6.0 M $11.1 M $11.1 M TC FHWA / SH

***44 Strategic Transit and Multimodal Projects $94.0 M $50.0 M $50.0 M SL SB 17-267

****45 Rail Commission $0.0 M $0.1 M $0.1 M SL SL

46 Bustang $7.0 M $7.7 M $8.9 M TC SB 09-108 / Fare Rev.

47 Suballocated Programs $344.5 M $226.2 M $224.1 M

48 Aeronautics $13.0 M $33.3 M $31.8 M

49 Aviation System Programs $13.0 M $33.3 M $31.8 M AB SA

50 Highway $206.0 M $125.8 M $125.7 M

51 STP-Metro $140.0 M $55.7 M $55.7 M FR FHWA / LOC

52 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality $50.0 M $50.5 M $50.5 M FR FHWA / LOC

53 Metropolitan Planning $1.0 M $9.2 M $9.1 M FR FHWA / FTA / LOC

54 Off-System Bridge Program $15.0 M $10.5 M $10.5 M TC / FR FHWA / SH / LOC

55 Transit and Multimodal $125.5 M $67.1 M $66.6 M

56 Recreational Trails $0.5 M $1.6 M $1.6 M FR FHWA

57 Safe Routes to School $5.0 M $3.1 M $3.1 M TC FHWA

58 Transportation Alternatives Program $20.0 M $12.3 M $12.3 M FR FHWA / LOC

59 Transit Grant Programs $20.0 M $50.1 M $49.6 M FR / SL / TC FTA / LOC / SB 09-108

*****60 Multimodal Options Program $80.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M TC/SL SB 19-125

61 Administration & Agency Operations $12.2 M $93.9 M $100.9 M

62 Agency Operations $12.2 M $58.3 M $62.6 M TC / AB FHWA / SH / SA / SB 09-108

63 Administration $0.0 M $35.7 M $35.7 M SL SH

64 Project Initiatives $0.0 M $0.0 M $2.6 M TC SH

65 Debt Service $0.0 M $62.8 M $62.8 M

66 Debt Service $0.0 M $62.8 M $62.8 M DS FHWA / SH

67 Contingency Reserve $40.0 M $51.0 M $15.0 M

68 Contingency Fund $20.0 M $15.0 M $15.0 M TC FHWA / SH

69 Reserve Fund $20.0 M $36.0 M $0.0 M TC FHWA / SH

70 Other Programs $13.4 M $24.0 M $25.1 M

71 Safety Education $8.0 M $11.9 M $13.0 M TC/FR NHTSA / SSE

72 Planning and Research $5.0 M $11.7 M $11.7 M FR FHWA / SH

73 State Infrastructure Bank $0.4 M $0.4 M $0.4 M TC SIB

74 TOTAL - CDOT $1,057.4 M $1,852.5 M $1,840.3 M

Key to Acronyms:

TC = Transportation Commission

FR = Federal

SL = State Legislature

AB = Aeronautics Board

SH = State Highway

SIB = State Infrastructure Bank

LOC = Local

SB = Senate Bill

SA = State Aviation

Attachment A: FY 2020-21 Revenue Allocation Plan

Draft Estimates

Dra

ft E

stim

ate

sD

raft

Est

imat

esD

raft

Est

imat

es

Dra

ft E

stim

ate

sD

raft

Est

imat

esD

raft

Est

imat

es

Dra

ft E

stim

ates

Dra

ft E

stim

ates

Dra

ft E

stim

ate

s

32

75 COLORADO BRIDGE ENTERPRISE

76 Construction $45.0 M $100.2 M $100.2 M


78 Bridge Enterprise Projects $45.0 M $100.2 M $100.2 M BEB SB 09-108



81 Maintenance and Preservation $0.8 M $0.5 M $0.5 M BEB SB 09-108


83 Agency Operations $2.9 M $2.0 M $2.0 M BEB SB 09-108

84 Debt Service $0.0 M $18.2 M $18.2 M

85 Debt Service $0.0 M $18.2 M $18.2 M BEB FHWA / SH

86 TOTAL - BRIDGE ENTERPRISE $48.7 M $120.9 M $120.9 M

87 HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE


89 Express Lanes Operations $55.0 M $11.0 M $17.0 M HPTEB Tolls / Managed Lanes Revenue


91 Agency Operations $1.0 M $5.6 M $5.6 M HPTEB Fee for Service

92 Debt Service $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M

93 Debt Service $0.0 M $0.0 M $0.0 M HPTEB Fee for Service

94 TOTAL - HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE $56.0 M $16.6 M $22.6 M

95 TOTAL - CDOT AND ENTERPRISES $1,162.1 M $1,990.0 M $1,983.9 M

*Roll forward budget is budget from a prior year that hasn't been

committed to a project or expended from a cost center prior to the

close of the fiscal year. Estimated Roll forward budget will be

incorporated prior to finalizing the FY 2021 budget, and updated

after the close of FY 2020.

** $10M of the FY21 Maintenance Reserve Final Allocation Plan

budget is specifically allocated for Snow and Ice Control.

***SB 17-267 directed the State Treasurer to execute lease-

purchase agreements on existing state facilities to generate

revenue for priority transportation projects. At least 10 percent of

these proceeds must be used for transit projects. Of the $50

million in estimated revenue for transit projects, the department

anticipates spending $2.4 million on Administration, $27.6 million

on the construction of bus and pedestrian facilities, and $20.0

million on rolling stock.

****SB 18-001 appropriated $2.5 million to the Southwest Chief

and Front Range Rail Commission. Pursuant to SB 19-125, this

funding is available until the close of FY 2020-21.

*****SB 18-001 created the Multimodal Transportation Options

Fund, and allocated $71.75 million to the fund in FY 2018-19 and

$22.5 million to the fund in FY 2019-20. This funding is annually

appropriated by the General Assembly. The FY 2018-19

appropriation is available until the close of FY 2022-23 pursuant to

SB 19-125, and the FY 2019-20 appropriation is available until the

close of FY 2023-24 pursuant to SB 19‑207. Of the total funding,

the department will spend approximately $6 million on

administration and operating costs, approximately $14 million for

CDOT bus purchase and facility construction, and approximately

$74 million will be passed through to local agencies for rolling

stock purchases.

Dra

ft E

stim

ates

Dra

ft E

stim

ates

33

Projected Cash Balance $1,111.8MProjected FY21 Revenue $1,840.3MProjected FY21 Receivables $150MTOTAL Projected - CDOT $3,102.1M

Line Budget Category / ProgramFY 2020-21 Projected

ExpendituresFY 2020-21 Actual

Expenditures % Spent1 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION2 Capital Construction3 Pre-Construction Activities4 Right of Way 5 Acquisitions $ 43.2M6 Personal Services $ 1.2M7 Professional Services $ 4.8M8 Other $ .6M9 Design and Other Pre-Construction Activities

10 Professional Services $ 113.6M11 Personal Services $ 18.0M12 Other $ 6.6M13 Construction Activities14 Contractor Payments $ 1,016M15 Professional Services $ 30.8M16 Personal Services $ 2.5M17 Other $ 2.0M18 Other Capital Project Activities19 Indirect Allocations $ 104.0M20 Construction Engineering Allocations $ 69.0M21 Maintenance and Operations22 Personal Services $ 169.6M23 Operating $ 122.6M24 Capital $ 21.6M25 Property $ 18.1M26 Road Equipment $ 21.6M27 Multimodal Services, Non Construction28 Personal Services $ 7.8M29 Operating $ 28.3M30 Capital $ 9.6M31 Suballocated Programs32 Aeronautics $ 36.5M33 Payments to Local Governments $ 161.8M34 Administration & Agency Operations35 Personal Services $ 36.6M36 Operating $ 47.3M37 Capital $ 4.6M38 Debt Service39 Debt Service $ 62.8M40 Other Programs, Non Construction41 Personal Services $ 2.9M42 Operating $ 9.0M43 Capital $ .4M44 Studies (Non-construction Activities) (DTD) $ 6.4M45 TOTAL - CDOT $ 2,180M

Department of Transportation - FY 2020-21 Spending PlanLast updated February 2020

34

46 COLORADO BRIDGE ENTERPRISEProjected Cash Balance $302.3MProjected FY21 Revenue $120.9MTOTAL Projected - BRIDGE ENTERPRISE $423.2M

47 Capital Construction48 Asset Management49 Bridge Enterprise Projects-CBE $ 234.1M50 Maintenance and Operations51 Asset Management52 Maintenance and Preservation-CBE $ .5M53 Administration & Agency Operations54 Agency Operations-CBE $ 2.0M55 Debt Service56 Debt Service-CBE $ 18.2M57 TOTAL - BRIDGE ENTERPRISE $ 254.8M

58 HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISEProjected Cash Balance $44.5MProjected FY21 Revenue $22.6MTOTAL Projected - HPTE $67.1M

59 Maintenance and Operations60 Express Lanes Operations-HPTE $ 1.6M61 Administration & Agency Operations62 Agency Operations-HPTE $ 5.6M63 Debt Service64 Debt Service-HPTE $ 16.9M65 TOTAL - HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE $ 24.0M66 TOTAL - CDOT AND ENTERPRISES $ 2,459M

35

Budget Category / Program FY 2019-20 Positions

FY 2019-20 Projected

Salary and Benefts FY 2020-21 Positions

FY 2020-21 Projected

Salary and Benefits

Capital Construction 1146.0 $122,340,970 1137.0 $122,268,081

Asset Management 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Safety 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Mobility 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Construction Program Direct Indirect Staff Expenditures 1146.0 $122,340,970 1137.0 $122,268,081

Maintenance and Operations 1874.0 $141,390,359 1881.0 $143,336,264

Asset Management 1852.0 $139,231,554 1860.0 $141,257,692.8

Safety 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Mobility 22.0 $2,158,805 21.0 $2,078,571

Multimodal Services 5.0 $541,982 9.0 $1,132,487

Mobility 5.0 $541,982 9.0 $1,132,487

Suballocated Programs 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Aeronautics 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Highway 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Transit and Multimodal 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Administration & Agency Operations 287.0 $30,908,070 285.0 $31,176,326

Debt Service 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Contingency Reserve 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Other Programs 2.0 $245,985 2.0 $251,822

TOTAL - CDOT 3314.0 $295,427,367 3314.0 $298,164,981

COLORADO BRIDGE ENTERPRISE

Construction 0.0 $0 0.0 $0


Maintenance and Operations 0.0 $0 0.0 $0


Administration & Agency Operations 1.0 $114,646 1.0 $117,486


TOTAL - BRIDGE ENTERPRISE 1.0 $114,646 1.0 $117,486

HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE

Maintenance and Operations 0.0 $0 0.0 $0

Administration & Agency Operations 9.0 $1,135,356 9.0 $1,147,054


Total - HPTE 9.0 $1,135,356 9.0 $1,147,054

TOTAL - CDOT AND ENTERPRISES 3324.0 $296,677,369 3324.0 $299,429,521

Appendix G: CDOT Personnel Report

36


Rollforward

from FY19-20

*Estimated

FY 2020-21

Final

Allocation Plan Approved TC Amendments


2 Capital Construction $518.8 M $973.6 M

3 Asset Management $69.3 M $325.2 M

4 Surface Treatment $2.0 M $223.2 M Planned through FY24

5 Structures $0.8 M $51.8 M Planned through FY 24

6 System Operations $0.0 M $31.4 M Planned through FY 24 for Traffic Signals, FY 21 for ITS Investments

7 Geohazards Mitigation $0.5 M $12.3 M Planned through FY 24

8 Permanent Water Quality Mitigation $2.0 M $6.5 M Planned through FY 21

9 Emergency Relief $64.0 M $0.0 M Planned through FY 21

10 Safety $26.5 M $127.6 M

11 Highway Safety Improvement Program $10.0 M $32.8 M Planned through FY 22

12 Railway-Highway Crossings Program $5.0 M $3.6 M Planned through FY 22

13 Hot Spots $0.0 M $2.2 M Planned through FY 21

14 FASTER Safety $7.5 M $67.6 M Planned through FY 22

15 ADA Compliance $4.0 M $21.4 M Planned through FY 23

16 Mobility $423.0 M $520.8 M

17 Regional Priority Program $14.0 M $48.4 M Planned through FY 24

18 Strategic Projects $379.0 M $450.0 M Planned through FY 23

19 National Highway Freight Program $30.0 M $22.4 M Planned through FY 20

Attachment D: Programming Status of Capital Construction Budget

37


MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 18, 2020 SUBJECT: PROPOSED CHANGES TO POLICY DIRECTIVE 703.0 Purpose To outline essential updates and changes to Policy Directive (PD) 703.0 and align the directive with current policies, procedures, and requirements. Action This review is for informational purposes and no action is requested this month. Staff seeks Transportation Commission (TC) input in order to finalize updates to PD 703.0 in preparation for formal adoption at the April TC meeting. Background PD 703.0 "Annual Budget, Project Budgeting and Cash Management Principles," approved by the Commission on August 21, 2014, established one document containing guidance to the Department regarding what levels of approval are required for different budget processes and transactions. The intent of PD 703.0 is to ensure appropriate oversight and review, maximize the flow of funds to construction and maintenance projects, and apply effective and efficient cash management strategies. The PD was last updated in 2016. An update to PD 703.0 is needed to address changes to processes and programs since the time of the last update. This includes incorporating new processes such as the new budget amendment process, adding new programs, and removing outdated programs and references. Staff will also solicit input from the TC on whether the approval thresholds delineating what requires TC approval remain at the appropriate level. Additionally, staff is proposing changes to add detail to clarify certain processes and requirements as well as reduce complexity and simplify in certain areas. Proposed Changes to PD 703 The Department is proposing changes to both the narrative and matrix portions of the PD. The details of these proposed changes are included in three attachments: Redlined Narrative, Proposed Matrix and Redlined Matrix. The Proposed Matrix includes blue highlights to indicate where new content has been added. Yellow rows highlight content that has been significantly changed. Green rows indicate minor or no changes to content. The Redlined Matrix shows the original PD 703.0 matrix with red strikethroughs to indicate those sections that are proposed for deletion and yellow highlights to show proposed changes (these are also reflected in the Proposed Version). Overall, the proposed changes include reorganizing the matrices to simplify and consolidate, removing redundant or outdated requirements, and adding new programs that did not exist at the time of the last update to the PD. Changes are also proposed to update language to make requirements easier to understand for the end user. In some cases, requirements have been clarified or strengthened to improve internal controls. For example, requirements for pre-award and contract modification orders were updated to increase scrutiny on project budget increases, and content has been added related to the Asset Management budget setting process.

38

of 2


Highlighted below are some of the more significant changes proposed: Overall Structure

• Propose adding an asset management table establishing that the asset management cap and the approval of planning budgets for each asset class must be reviewed and adopted by resolution by the TC. Asset management treatment lists can be approved via two of three signatures from the Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer, or Chief Engineer and treatment changes can be approved at the staff level.

Budget Transactions

• Incorporate recent changes to the budget process. This includes addressing the budget amendment process by adding a line indicating that any transfers between budget lines in the Revenue Allocation Plan or Regions for $1 million or more will require TC approval.

• Propose adding a line that specifies any new revenue sources and/or budget programs that include flexible fund types will be initially allocated to the Program Reserve, then brought to the TC for review and approval for further allocation.

• Propose aligning Contingency Reserve with other budget lines, requiring that any request of $1 million or more shall be reviewed by the TC, and any requests under $1 million may be approved via two of three signatures from the Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer, or Chief Engineer.

• Propose directing the Department to draw from Maintenance Reserve for Wildfire and Snow and Ice as needed by obtaining approval via two of three signatures from the Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer, or Chief Engineer. Any draws from the budget would then be reported monthly to the TC for review and oversight. All requests over $1 million that are not Wildfire or Snow and Ice related will be taken to the TC for review and approval.

• Propose adding a line to address indirect costs, which have not previously been reviewed by the TC. This line will require increases over $1 million be brought to the TC for review.

Project Related Transactions:

• Add new programs to the table: National Highway Freight Program, Innovative Mobility, and other smaller programs such as Rest Areas, etc.

• Propose applying the same thresholds for review and approval to the Strategic Projects (SB 17-267, SB 18-001, etc.) program as apply to the majority of the other programs.

Next Steps Based on TC feedback and direction, staff will finalize proposed changes to PD 703.0 and return in April for final review and adoption of the revised PD. Attachments:

a. Policy Directive 703.0 Narrative, track changes b. Policy Directive 703.0 Matrix, proposed c. Policy Directive 703.0 Matrix, redlined d. Presentation

39

Policy Directive 703.0 UpdatesMarch 18, 202040

Policy Directive 703.0

2Policy Directive 703.0 Updates

•Background•Description of Current Policy•Overview of Proposed Updates•Commission Input on Level of Risk/Oversight

February Workshop

•Overview of General Proposed Updates•Focus on Significant Proposed Updates

•Continued Commission Input

March Workshop

•Final Review•Request for Approval and Adoption

April Workshop

41

Overview of General Updates


Simplify and consolidate; create categories

Remove redundant or outdated requirements

Add new programs, remove old programs

Update language so it is easier to understand

Clarify and strengthen requirements

42

Focus on Significant Updates


• All individual transactions from Program Reserve must be taken to the TC for review and approval.

Program Reserve

• Individual transactions less than $1 million can be approved by CDOT executive management (EMT).

• Transactions exceeding $1 million must be taken to the TC for review and approval.

Contingency Reserve

43



• Snow & Ice / Wildfire reimbursements require CDOT EMT approval. CDOT will report monthly to TC.

• Individual transactions greater than $1 million (for items other than Snow & Ice / Wildfire) will require TC review and approval.

Maintenance Reserve

44



• New line added to increase oversight• Less than $250,000 – staff authority• Between $250,000 - $1 million – EMT approval• Over $1 million – TC approval

Indirect Costs

45



• Aligned approval thresholds with those of other projects• Less than $250,000 or 10% - staff authority• $250,000-$500,000 or 10%-15% - EMT approval• Greater than $500,000 or 15% - TC approval

Strategic Projects (SB 17-267, SB 18-001, etc.)

46

Questions?March 11, 202047

of 6

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

X POLICY DIRECTIVE □ PROCEDURAL DIRECTIVE

Subject Annual Budget, Project Budgeting, and Cash Management Principles

703.0

Effective

Supersedes 08/21/2016

Originating Office Office of Finance Management and Budget (“OFMB”)

I. PURPOSE To establish the policy by which the Colorado Department of Transportation will determine and submit the annual budget and project budgets to the Colorado Transportation Commission. The Commission will focus on substantive budget matters, i.e. those budget matters that involve material change or significant risk, and will exercise oversight on routine budget matters. II. AUTHORITY Colorado Transportation Commission pursuant to § 43-1-106(8)(h), C.R.S. III. APPLICABILITY This Policy Directive applies to all divisions, regions and offices of the Colorado Department of Transportation. IV. DEFINITIONS See Appendix A "“Definitions"” V. POLICY

A. Scope. This Policy Directive applies to all funds and accounts administered by the Department. The scope includes the formation and execution of the Department'sDepartment’s budget and the approval of the Department'sDepartment’s programs.

B. Objective. The objective of this Policy Directive is to document annual budget and project budgeting policies followed by the Department with the Commission'sCommission’s approval to maximize the flow of funds to the Department'sDepartment’s construction and maintenance projects applying effective and efficient cash management strategies.

1. The Commission will evaluate the Department'sDepartment’s ability to apply

effective and efficient cash management strategies using the following criteria:

a. Available revenues in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program

48

Subject Annual and Project Budgets and Cash Management Principles

Number

703.0

Page 2 of 8

(STIP) are as high as can be justified within relevant state and federal laws;

b. Those revenues are fully allocated to programs or groups of projects

within the STIP;

c. Appropriations for construction and maintenance projects are as high as can be justified in conformance with state and federal laws;

d. Conjointly with meeting the Department'sDepartment’s objectives around

the timely delivery of projects, the minimum monthly forecasted cash balancesbalance of each fund are Fund 400 is not significantly different than the target cash balancesbalance approved for that fundFund 400 by the Commission. An exception exists in the case of the receipt of large General Fund transfers or receipt of other large proceeds, in which case, effort should be made to effectively and efficiently deliver projects and manage cash until cash balances return to target levels.

C. Principles.

1. Financial risk is a necessary element in maximizing the flow of funds to projects. The Department may take necessary financial risks in order to accelerate projects while implementing the necessary controls in order to stay in compliance within overall risk management measures.

2. It is necessary to obtain Commission approval for projectfunding changes

including Program Budget, Cost Center Budget, or Project Budget modifications only when the modification is of high risk as defined by:

a. increases in project costs or allocations substantively change the total

funds allocated to a program as determined by the Transportation Commission;

b. project location or scope changes deviate Substantivelysubstantially from the approved project prioritization processprocesses or listlists; and

c. any other modifications to the project Substantivelyconstruction costs substantially increase the risk to a project already identified as holding significant risk.

3. Level of Department and Commission governance is aligned to level of risk. Reference Appendix B "Annual Budget, Revenue, and Financial Position"; Appendix C "“Project Related Transactions";”; Appendix D “Budget Related Transactions”; and Appendix D "E “Other Transactions".”.

49


Number

703.0

Page 3 of 8

D. Annual Budget.

1. The Department shall produce a long-range revenue forecast, by year (produced every five years), including annual revenues and extending over at least 20 years, and a short-range revenue forecast, by month extending over at least 48 months, for use in all of the Department'sDepartment’s programs and budgets.

2. Pursuant to § 43-1-113(2), C.R.S., annually, on or before December 15, the

Commission shall adopt and the Department shall submit a proposed draft budget allocation plan for the beginning of the fiscal year beginning on July 1 of the succeeding year. No later than April 15 of each year, the Commission shall adopt and submit a final budget allocation plan to the Office of State Planning and Budget.

3. The level of Department and Commission risk regarding the annual budget shall

be defined as outlined in Appendix BD.

A. Project Budgets.

1. Projects typically will be managed within a four-year program or

programs of projects; for example, a four-year surface treatment program or a four-year FASTER Safety program.

2. The Department shall approve the scope, schedule and cost of each

project through development and construction, and shall report to the Commission to obtain initial approval of the scope, schedule and cost of each project; and to approve subsequent substantive changes to the scope, schedule and cost of each project as outlined in Appendix B.

E. Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

1. Pursuant to 23 C.F.R. 450.216, the Department is required to develop a STIP. 2. The Department shall use the STIP as the principal expression of its programs and

projects for the execution of highway construction projects that have been selected by the Commissionall federal dollars assigned to transportation projects that have been adopted by the TC. For purposes of this PD, this will include highway construction and any federalized transit projects funded with specific state funding, such as FASTER transit.

3. 3. Any project that requires federal authorization or obligation must be

included in the STIP prior to any budget actions. Guidelines for developing the STIP may be found here: STIP Development Guidelines (4P). Guidance

50

https://www.codot.gov/programs/planning/transportation-plans-and-studies/4p-stip-development-guidelines


Number

703.0

Page 4 of 8

for amending or modifying the STIP may be found here: STIP Amendment GuidelinesThe Department shall develop a rolling four (4) year STIP.

4. The STIP must list regionally significant projects individually.

Other projects will be grouped into programs.

5. The STIP will be amended at least once a year for major changes. Upon the conclusion of a fiscal year, a new fiscal year will be amended into the STIP as the fourth federally recognized year.

6. Minor changes will be made by Administrative Modification

which will be approved by the Department Executive Director.

F. Project Budgets.

1. Projects typically will be managed and selected within a four-year program or programs of projects based on defined criteria, and in alignment with Transportation Commission performance objectives established in PD 14.

2. The Department shall approve the budget of each project through

development and construction, and shall determine the level of approval for subsequent substantive changes to the cost of each project as outlined in Appendix C.

G. Cash Balance Policy

1. The Department shall prepare and maintain a Fund 400 Forecast model for the

purpose of managing the Department'sDepartment’s cash balance.

2. This model will incorporate SAP expenditures and analytical forecasts with vendor construction project drawdown schedules and budget revenues.

3. The resulting cash balance forecast will be charted against the Transportation Commission approved cash balance threshold to identify future cash balance risk points.

4. Risk will be identified and managed monthly through a Fund 400

Management process.

5. The cash balance threshold will be reviewed at least once a year.as necessary. Any recommended changes for levels of risk or annual average monthly balance will be approved by the Commission.

51

https://www.codot.gov/business/budget/statewide-transportation-improvement-program-stip-reports-information/current-stip-reports-information/FINAL%20STIP%20Amendment%20Procedures%20_4-3-2008_-SHORT%20Version.pdf/view

https://www.codot.gov/business/budget/statewide-transportation-improvement-program-stip-reports-information/current-stip-reports-information/FINAL%20STIP%20Amendment%20Procedures%20_4-3-2008_-SHORT%20Version.pdf/view


Number

703.0

Page 5 of 8

6. Level of Department risks approved by the Commission and the Fund 400 Management process principles are identified and maintained within the Appendix E -F – Cash Balance Management.

H. Asset Management

1. The department shall produce a Transportation Asset Management Cap which will be established through the Program Distribution process conducted as part of each Statewide Planning Cycle. The cap will establish, for planning purposes, the total amount of funding available to be used between the 12 assets.

a. The Performance and Asset Management Branch (PAMB) and the

Transportation Asset Management Oversight Committee (TAMOC) will work together to refine an annual recommendation for any changes to the Cap amount. The Cap amount gets set four years in advance e.g. the Cap set in FY 2021 will be for FY 2025. The Cap estimate will be submitted to the Commission each June for approval.

b. The recommendation for the Cap amount will be presented in June to

the Transportation Commission for adoption by resolution on a yearly basis.

2. Once the Cap is established, PAMB will host the annual budget setting

workshop. The workshop will develop recommendations on how to distribute the total cap amount among the 12 assets (planning budgets).

a. The recommended planning budgets will be presented in August or September to the Transportation Commission for adoption by resolution on a yearly basis.

3. Once planning budgets are established, asset managers will create treatment

lists for all 12 assets. Treatments are chosen to advance asset performance according to established metrics for each asset.

a. The initial treatment lists will require the signature of two Executive

Management Team (EMT) members for approval. Treatments lists will be presented to EMT in November on a yearly basis.

b. Regions will submit modifications to treatment lists to headquarters-

level asset managers for approval.

i. Each asset manager will develop the change approval process for their treatment list and will communicate it to the Regions.

i.ii. Modified treatment lists will be submitted to EMT for review

52


Number

703.0

Page 6 of 8

on a yearly basis.

4. Planning budgets will establish the initial allocations in the annual budget for each respective year, subject to availability of revenue. The Transportation Commission may consider changes to the initial allocations dependent on CDOT staff recommendations.

VI. DOCUMENTS REFERENCED IN TIDSTHIS POLICY DIRECTIVE

1. Appendix A - "– “Definitions"”

1. Appendix B - "Annual Budget, Revenue, and Financial Position"

2. Appendix C - "– “Project Related Transactions"”

3. Appendix C – “Budget Related Transactions”

3.4.Appendix D- " – “Other Transactions"”

4.5.Appendix E - "– “Cash Balance Management"”

6. Appendix F- “Asset Management”

VII. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

1. The OFMB shall establish procedures to implement this Policy Directive.

2. The OFMB shall train all COOTCDOT employees who are impacted by or involved with this Policy Directive.

3. This Policy Directive shall be effective upon signature.

VIII. REVIEW DATE This directive shall be reviewed on or before June 2019July 2021.

6- /t - 16 ________________________________ ___________________________ Secretary, Transportation Commission Date of Approval Appendix A- Definitions

53


Number

703.0

Page 7 of 8

"“Allotment Advice"” shall mean project or program level budget actions, initiated by Department staff, that is approved by OFMB staff without EMT or Commission approval. "“Amendment” shall mean a change to the Budget allocation either through an increase, decrease or transfer between Budget lines. “Approval"” shall mean administrative permission to proceed with a project, program, or other anticipated expenditure that will require one or more officials to exercise their expenditure authorities in order to enter into one or more commitments to pay for goods or services that are needed to accomplish the project or program objectives. For purposes of this Policy Directive, the Colorado Transportation Commission approves projects Approval authority will be determined based on risk outlined in each Appendix. There are 3 possible risk levels needing varying Approval: Staff, Executive Management Team and Transportation Commission. "“Budget"” shall mean a financial plan that shows intended authorizations, appropriations, and allotments of funds into and out of an accounting entity. When all inflows and outflows of funds of the accounting entity are shown in the budget, the budget becomes a prospective statement ofrevenuesof revenues and expenditures for that entity. CDOT maintains several budgets including those for Colorado Bridge Enterprise, High Performance Transportation Enterprise, the Aeronautics Division, and the core budget ofCDOTof CDOT, all of which are included in the State'sState’s annual budget- – the Long Bill. "“Cash Management"” shall refer to the balancing of expected cash outflows with expected cash inflows. " “Confirmation Item"” shall mean approvedapproval of an action undertaken prior to the scheduled TC meeting, but included on formal Budget Supplement document. as an informational item. "“Department"” shall mean the Colorado Department of Transportation pursuant to § 43-1-103, C.R.S. "“Decision Item” shall mean significant changes in budget requests that are meant to address strategic initiatives, mandates, or perceived shortfalls. “Programs"” shall mean a logical grouping of similar projects in scope; or small and miscellaneous in nature, typically identified and funded via the Department Budget. "“Project"” shall mean highway or other transportation related improvement activities contained under a single sub account number in CDOT' sCDOT’s SAP financial management information system.

54


Number

703.0

Page 8 of 8

"“STIP"” shall mean Statewide Transportation Improvement Program -– A federally required, fiscally constrained, program that depicts transportation projects for a minimum of four fiscal years up to eight (8(4) fiscal years. "“STIP Administrative Modification"” shall mean minor changes to project costs, funding sources, or initiation dates. " “Substantive"” shall be used to mean exceeding the approved amount over a scope, schedule or budget threshold set by the Department'sDepartment’s Executive Director or designee “STIP Amendment"” shall mean any major change to a project, including addition or deletion, major change to cost, initiation dates, or scope including amending a year into the STIP. "“Supplement” shall mean any change requiring Transportation Commission approval within a program or Budget line, including a decision to fund a project or increase the funding of a project per the Policy Directive guidance. “TC Approval Required"” shall mean project level budget actions, initiated by Department staff requiring Commission approval as part of a budget supplement packet. "“Transportation Commission"” or "“Commission"” shall mean the Colorado Transportation Commission pursuant to§ § 43-1-406, C.R.S. "Transportation Commission “EMT-Approved List"” shall mean a list of projects approved by the Transportation CommissionEMT for an Annual Program per established processes.

55

1) Greater than or equal to 15% and greater than or equal to

$500,000; or 2) greater than or equal to $5,000,000 above the

original approved amount

1) 10% or greater and between $250,000-$500,000 above the

original approved amount; or 2) Less than 15% and between

$500,000 and $4,999,999 above the original approved amount

1) Less than $250,000 above the original approved amount; or 2)

less than 10% and between $250,000-$499,999 above the


TC Approval Required if not on Approved List or if not Based upon

Program Metrics

Allotment Advice if on EMT-Approved List or Based Upon Program Metrics

Emergency Relief Allotment AdviceTC Approval Required if not on

Approved List or if not Based upon Program Metrics


TC Approval Required Allotment Advice if on EMT-Approved

List TC Approval Required if not on

Approved List or if not Based upon Program Metrics


Other Capital Construction Programs -Permanent Water Quality Mitigation, Railway-Highway Crossings Program,

Hot Spots, ADA Compliance, RPP

Maintenance Program Areas

ITS InvestmentsRequires 2 of 3 Signatures from

Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO

Other Maintenance and Operations Programs - Property, Road

Equipment, Rest Areas, Strategic Safety Program, Real-Time Traffic

Operations

Other Multimodal Services Programs -Rail Commission, Bustang

Multimodal Services

TC Approval Required Allotment Advice

Allotment Advice

TC Approval RequiredRequires 2 of 3 Signatures from


Project Related Transactions

Project Type Original Construction Budget

Pre-Award Adjustment and Contract Modification Orders

Project Closure Adjustments

Capital Construction

Asset Management: Surface Treatment, Structures (Bridge On-System, Culverts, Walls, Tunnels),

System Operations (ITS Maintenance, Traffic Signals), Geohazard Mitigation

Allotment Advice

Strategic Projects(i.e. SB 17-267, SB 18-001)

National Highway Freight Program

Innovative Mobility Program (including RoadX), Strategic Transit,

Multimodal Options

Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO

Highway Safety Improvement Program, FASTER

Safety ProgramTC Approval Required

Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief

Engineer, CFOAllotment Advice

Allotment AdviceTC Approval RequiredRequires 2 of 3 Signatures from




Allotment Advice

Allotment Advice

Maintenance and Operations



For all MLOS transactions, including Maintenance Projects, see "Budget Transactions and Other Transactions"


Allotment Advice

56


Program MetricsAllotment Advice if on EMT- Approved List or Based Upon

Program MetricsOther Suballocated Programs:

Aviation System Programs, STP-Metro, CMAQ, Metro Planning, Off-System Bridge, Recreational Trails,

TAP

Other Programs: Safety Education, SPR

Federal Discretionary Grants - State Match Required

Federal Discretionary Grants - No State Match Required

Local contributions to state projects

Bridge EnterpriseRequires 2 of 3 Signatures from


High Performance Transportation Enterprise

Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO as well as the Director

of HPTE

Allotment Advice

Other Programs

Suballocated Programs

Allotment Advice

Allotment Advice

Submittal of Grant does not require Commission Approval. Refer to respective line item of Appendix B for rules governing the state match.

Allotment Advice

Allotment Advice

Enterprises

Enterprise Board Approval Required

HPTE Board Approval Required

Allotment Advice

Safe Routes to School (Advisory Committee to make

Transit Grant Programs TC Approval RequiredRequires 2 of 3 Signatures from


Allotment Advice

TC Approval Required TC Approval Required Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief

Allotment Advice

57

Transaction Type High Risk: TC Review and Approve

Moderate Risk: 2 SignaturesED (or Designee), Chief Engineer, CFO as well as

the Director of HPTE if applicable Report To and Inform TC or Enterprise Board

Low Risk: Staff Manage

Annual Budget Setting Common Policy Changes Presented as informational Reviewed annually

Annual Budget Setting Decision Items Greater than or equal $1 million per annum Less than $1 million per annum; Notable new program costs over $500k at staff discretion should be provided to

Year End Cost Center Roll Forwards Greater than or equal $1 million per annum Less than $1 million per annumPre Approved Automatic Rollforward Per Maintained

List as Required by Statute, TC Resolution or EMT Approval

Project Debudgets and Year End Pool Balances Approval of Exemption Requests Execution of Rollforwards or Retirements per Year End and Project Debudget Policy

Year End Budget Pool Roll Forwards Reallocation of Funds Between Budget Lines Review Execution of Rollforwards or Retirements per Year End and Project Debudget Policy

Formal Budget Amendments

Transportation Commission Program Reserve Individual transactions

Transportation Commission Contingency ReserveIndividual transactions greater than or equal to $1

million (Commisson Chairperson approval for emergency requests for Confirmation Items)

Individual transactions less than $1 million

Maintenance ReserveIndividual transactions greater than or equal to $1

million for items other than Snow and Ice and Wildfire Reimbursements

Snow and Ice and Wildfire Reimbursements require EMT approval. Report monthly to Transportation

Commission

New Revenue Sources, Previous Year Revenue Reconciliation, Change in Revenue Estimates Impacting

Current Year Budget, and Federal RedistributionN/A New transfers of General Fund resulting from legislation

that are allocated to the Strategic Projects line.

Dedicated/Inflexible Fund Types Allocated to Associated Programs

Flexible Fund Types Allocated to TC Reserve for Future Distribution or Reduction

Allocation of Federal Discretionary Grants N/A N/A Project Specific Allocations to Associated Regions

Additional Local Contributions N/A N/A Allocated to Regional Local Overmatch Program

Transfers to/from Other States or Federal Agencies N/A N/A Dedicated/Inflexible Fund Types Allocated to Associated Programs

Transfers between Budget Lines, Cost Centers or Pools Individual Transfers >= $1,000,000 Individual Transfers >= $250,000 Individual Transfers < $250,000

Budget Amendments and Other Changes

EMT or Staff Authorized Changes

Budget Transactions

Development of Annual Budget

Annual Budget Allocation Plan Annual Budget Adoption:

November - adopt Proposed BudgetMarch - adopt Final Budget

Allocations based on TC approved Asset Management Planning Budget

Allocations based on dedicated revenue sourcesAllocations based on predetermined schedule or previously approved plan (i.e. debt service, ADA

Compliance)Allocations continuing a previously approved prior year

level of funding (i.e. RPP, Hot Spots, PWQ, etc.)

Year End Roll Forwards

58

MLOS Cost Centers Transfers Budget transfers across regions >$250,000 and requires additional DHM approval

Budget transfers across sections or transfers across regions s <$250,000

Transfers across sections >=$250,000 require additional DHM approval

Increases to Indirect Costs Increases or new requests > $1,000,000 Increases or new requests >= $250,000 Increases or new requests < $250,000

Other Budget Transfers

59





Capital Development Committee Any requests made to the CDCCash Balances and Revenue Forecasts Periodic Risk Assessment cash balance threshold Monthly Cash Memo Evaluate construction lettings each month

Commercial Loans Change that will trigger a loan and require Legislative Authority

Payment schedule included in quarterly and annual reports

Federal Funds Transfers Transfers between fund types per 23 U.S. Code § 126 Transfers to/from other states for research projects or federal agencies such as FTA.

Full Time Employee Requests Increasing the total # of CDOT FTE’s Filling existing vacancies orReclassifying to best meet business needs

Maintenance Projects (M Projects)State performed maintenance work (Structure Repairs, Overlays, Seal Coats) costing in excess of $50,000 up to

$150,000

Emergency projects within Maintenance budget; Year end roll-forwards

State performed maintenance work (Structure Repairs, Overlays, Seal Coats) costing less than $50,000

Review Annual Statement of Toll Credit Earnings and Use

Provide strategic/programmatic directionIndividual Use >=$250,000 beyond preapproved

strategy Individual Use < $250,000 beyond preapproved strategy

Other Transactions

Use of Toll CreditsExecution of actions per strategic/programatic direction

60

Cash Balance ThresholdsConfidence Level 0.1% = 1/1,000Cash Balance Values Low = $160M Average = $205M High = $300M

Nov-Dec-Jan Aug JunCalendar Year Distribution 2016-2019

Management ProcessDeliverables

Fund 400 Forecast Model data management. Input of current month expenditure, drawdown and revenue data.

Identification of risk points in the 48 month forecast chart; and analysis and variance reconcilation.

Final and closed forecast model each month

Completed variance analysis

Risk identification

Cash Management

Cash balance threshold values to be incorporated into the Fund 400 Forecast Model to identify risk points.

ReportingMonthly - 48 month forecast chart of cash balance projection to cash balance thresholds. Identification of risks, if any.

Annually/As Needed - Report on the effectiveness of management process and practices, any recommendations for process changes, or changes to thresholds.

61

Asset Management Transaction TypeHigh Risk: TC Review and

Approve




Approval of Asset Management Cap (Total dollars dedicated to asset management program each year)

Adopted by resolution along with asset management planning budgets

for each asset.N/A N/A

Approval of planning budgets for each asset class in asset management program

Adopted by resolution along with asset management cap. N/A N/A

Asset Management Treatment Lists N/A

Asset Management treatment lists require the signature of two senior executives for approval. The two signatures can

come from: Executive Director (or Designee), Chief Engineer, Chief Financial Officer.

Once treatment lists are approved by designated EMT members, treatment changes are approved by

headquarters-level asset managers. The change-approval process for each asset is determined by the

headquarters-level asset manager.

Asset Management

62

Event Type High Risk: TC Review and ApproveModerate Risk: 2 Signatures

ED (or Designee), Chief Engineer, CFO Report To and Inform TC Low Risk: Staff Manage

STIP STIP Amendments no less than annually Quarterly analysis of fiscal constrained project schedule Administrative Modifications

Capital Development Committee Requests made to the CDC using quantitative metrics Moved to Other Transactions

Quarterly report of allotments to projects

Annual forecast of amounts required to complete projects

Quarterly reports on construction lettingsand revenue forecasts

Annual reports

Common Policies Presented as informational Reviewed annuallyMoved to Budget

Transactions

Decision Items Greater than or equal $1 million per annum (Annual Process)

Less than $1 million per annum (Annual Process); Notable new program costs over $500k at staff discretion should be provided to the TC as an

Information Item(requires dual signature)

Moved to Budget

Transactions

Cost Center Roll Forwards Greater than or equal $1 million (Annual Process) Less than $1 million (Annual Process)(requires dual signature)

E0249-010 (Equipment) , S0014-010 (Haz Mat), S0193-010 (Engineering Training) , S0247-010 (Road Equip) , OI440-010 (ITS), SM265-010 (Property Management),

SM275-010 (Camp George West HVAC)Moved to Budget

Transactions

Budget Pool Roll Forwards Reclassifications of previous FY funds to RAMP or other programs RPP and Local Program Pools

Moved to Other Transactions

Individual projects Not on Approved List Individual projects on Approved List Individual projects on Approved List

Additions greater than or equal to 15% and greater than or equal to $500,000

Additions between 10%-15% or between $250,000- $500,000 Additions less than 10% or less than $250,000

Cash-Based Expenditures Budget increases greater than or equal to 10% of program and greater than $1 million

Budget increases less than 10% of programand less than $1 million

Quarterly review of the project schedule; expenditure forecasts and ‘plan’ vs. ‘actual’ analyses

Moved to Budget Transactions

Project Budgets (see Project Related Transactions)

Revenue-Based BudgetAnnual Budget Adoption:

November - review draft budgetMarch - adopt final

Local agency project contributions, Federal Discretionary allocations, State administered grants August - Review final budget including legislative items

4-year Program of Projects and Corresponding Budget

(see Project Related Transact.)

Acceptance of Asset Management Program, Integrated Safety Plan and Programs of Project

lists or defined program metrics

Locally and Regionally administered programs; or as programmed in STIP or as shown in project

schedule for STIP amendments and budget supplements

Appendix B: "Annual Budget, Revenue, and Financial Position"

Moved to Other Transactions

Cash Balances and Revenue Forecasts Annual Risk Assessment OCM limit on construction lettings each month

63

Greater than or equal to 15% and greater than or equal to $500,000 or greater than or equal to $5,000,000 above

the original approved amount

Between 10%-15% or between $250,000-$500,000 above the original approved

amount

Less than 10% or less than $250,000 above the original

approved amount

2013 Emergency Relief and Permanent Repairs Allotment Advice

Emergency Requests (from the Transportation Commission

Contingency Relief Fund or other programs)

Allotment Advice

Non-emergency Transportation Commission Contingency

Reserve Fund Requests


Program Metrics

Allotment Advice if on Transportation Commission

Approved List or Based Upon Program Metrics

Maintenance Levels of Service

Transportation Systems Management & Operations

- New Capital


Project Closure

Pre-Award Adjustment and Contract Modification Orders(to the currently approved project budget)

Initial Project Funding

Allotment Advice


TC Approval Required

Requires Commission Chairpersonapproval for

Confirmation Item

Asset Management Programs: Geohazard, Tunnels, Walls, Bridge On-System, Culverts, Surface Treatment, Property

Management, Road Equipment, ITS-Replacement, Signals

Replacement(Including RAMP.)

TC Approval Required Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO

Appendix C: "Project Related Transactions"

For all MLOS transactions, including Maintenance Projects, see "Other Transactions"


Project Type

64




amount


approved amount

Project Closure




Project Type


Program Metrics




Program Metrics



Strategic Projects (e.g. 7th Pot) Allotment Advice

Federal Discretionary Grants -State Match Required


Federal Discretionary Grants - No State Match Required

Regional Priority Program

Other State Administered Programs -Congestion Relief,

Hot Spots and Railroad Crossings, Planning and

Research

No Commission Approval Required for any action


FASTER Safety Program

Allotment AdviceHighway Safety Improvement Program

No Commission Approval Required for any action with quarterly reporting to Transportation Commission

Allotment Advice





65




amount


approved amount

Project Closure




Project Type



Approved List

Local contributions to state project

Local Administered Programs: CMAQ, TAP, STP-Metro, Bridge

Off-System, Metro Planning


Program Metrics




Program Metrics



High Performance Transportation Enterprise

Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO as well as the

Director of HPTE

Safe Routes to School (Advisory Committee to make

Recommendations to the Transportation Commission)

TC Approval Required Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO Allotment Advice

Bridge Enterprise (Note: CDOT and BE projects are treated

jointly when determing thresholds)

Enterprise Board Approval Required



HPTE Board Approval Required

Allotment Advice

Allotment Advice


Transit and Rail TC Approval Required Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO Allotment Advice

66

Greater than or equal to 7.5% if more than $100,000 or greater than

or equal to $1,000,000 above the original approved amount

Less than 7.5% or less than $100,000 above the original

approved amount

Greater than or equal to 7.5% if more than $100,000 or greater than or equal to

$1,000,000 above the original approved amount

Less than 7.5% or less than $100,000 above the


RAMP Operations and Partnership TC Approval Required Requires 2 of 3 Signatures from Executive Director or Designee, Chief Engineer, CFO TC Approval Required



Project Type

Initial Project Funding Pre-Award Adjustment and Contract Modification Orders (to the currently approved project budget)

Project Closure

67


Moderate Risk: 2 SignaturesED (or Designee), Chief Engineer, CFO as well as the

Director of HPTE if applicable Report To and Inform TC or Enterprise Board


FTE Requests Increasing the total # of CDOT FTE’s Salary cap relief Filling existing vacancies orReclassifying to best meet business needs

Commercial Loans Change that will trigger a loan and require Legislative Authority

Payment schedule included in quarterly and annual reports

Transportation Commission Loans TC Approval Required for any loan from the Commission

Transfers between budget lines TC Approval Required for current year funds Reclassifications of previous FY funds to RAMP Moved to Budget Transactions

Budget Pool Level Transfers between Regions and/or HQ Regional Priorities Program and 7th PotSee Project 4 Year Budget for Quarterly report of allotments to projects to include Statewide administered programs (e.g.

Asset Management programs, TSM&O, Safety)Local administered programs (e.g. CMAQ, TAP, Metro)

Transfers between cost centers and program pools Total Year to Date >= $1,000,000 Individual Transfers >= $250,000 Individual Transfers < $250,000

Transfers between Capital and Operating Budget or Personal Services Total Year to Date >= $1,000,000 Individual Transfers >= $250,000 Individual Transfers < $250,000

Transfers between Personal Services and Operating Budget Individual Transfers >= $250,000 Individual Transfers < $250,000

Increases to Indirect CostsIncreases >= $250,000; Division of Accounting and Finance

required to evaluate increase in costs impact to overal Indirect Cost Rate prior to approval

Increases < $250,000

Moved to Budget Transactions

Aeronautics Allocations for administrative costs

MLOS Annual Budget including Maintenance Program Areas Budget transfers across regions Budget transfers across sections or program areas within a region Moved to Budget Transactions

see new version

Maintenance Projects (M Projects) State performed maintenance work (Structure Repairs, Overlays, Seal Coats) costing in excess of $50,000 up to $150,000

Emergency projects within Maintenance budget; Year end roll-forwards

State performed maintenance work (Structure Repairs, Overlays, Seal Coats) costing less than $50,000

Earmarks and Federal discretionary funds Application requiring state match not available from current program State match is available, though project requires additional funds for completion, reference guidelines for other funds Application requiring no state match

Other Programs (Administration & Operations) To be reviewed on a biennial basis beginning in FY16(FY 2015 total budget allocation of $276,507,411)

Transportation Commission Transition Fund > = $1,000,000 < $1,000,000

Contingency Funds Any use of Transportation Commission Contingency Reserve Fund and Snow and Ice Contingency Reserve

Project contingencies allotted in projects but managed collectively

(eg: program contingency)(requires dual signature)

Project contingency as part of approved project budget

Appendix D: "Other Transactions"

68

Cash Balance ThresholdsConfidence Level 0.1% = 1/1,000Cash Balance Values Low = $160M Average = $205M High = $300M

Nov-Dec-Jan Aug JunCalendar Year Distribution 2016-2019

Cash balance threshold values tobe incorporated into the Fund 400Forecast model to identify riskpoints.

Management ProcessDeliverables

Model Team

Cash Balance Team

Action TeamResponsible for evaluating the action recommendation. Identification of possible actions to projects, asset programs or regions that address the action recommendation.

Issuance of direction to execute appropriate actions from team evaluation.

Responsible for identification of risk points in the 36 month forecast chart; and analysis and variance reconcilation.

Action recommendation to manage risk points and analysis.

Monthly - For CDOT internal review - Recommendation report that outlines risk and high level analysis findings.

Annually - For TC review - Assessment report on any recommended Management process changes.

Monthly - For CDOT internal review - Report of evaluation and actions taken to manage forecast model risk points.

Appendix E - "Cash Balance Management"

Reporting

Responsible for the Fund 400 Forecast Model data management. Input of current month expenditure, drawdown and revenue data.

Final and closed forecast model each month.

Monthly - For CDOT internal review - 36 month forecast chart of cash balance projection to cash balance thresholds.

Annually - For TC review - Assessment report on any recommended Management process changes.

Annually - For TC review - Assessment report on the effectiveness of management process and practices.

160 170 180230

280 300250

210 190 170 160 160

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

$ M

illio

ns

Cash Balance ThresholdsConfidence Level of 1/1,000

Monthly Minimum Annual Average

160 170 180230

280 300250

210 190 170 160 160

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400


$ M

illio

ns

Cash Balance ThresholdsConfidence Level of 1/1,000

Monthly Minimum Annual Average

69

2829 W. Howard Place Denver, CO 80204-2305 P 303.757.9011 www.codot.gov

Memorandum ________________________________________________________________ TO: Transportation Commission FROM: Marci Gray & Lauren Cabot DATE: February 28, 2020 SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Agreements over $750,000.00 Purpose Compliance with CRS §43-1-110(4) which requires intergovernmental agreements involving more than $750,000 must have approval of the Commission to become effective. To date agreements with local agencies have been approved by the Chief Engineer, but not by the Transportation Commission. In order to be in compliance with Colorado laws, approval is now being sought for all intergovernmental agencies agreements over $750,000 going forward. Action CDOT seeks approval for all Intergovernmental Agency projects over $750,000 that have not been fully executed. CDOT proposes information provided and have approval granted on the consent agenda monthly. Background CRS §43-1-110(4) was enacted in 1991 giving the Chief Engineer the authority to negotiate with local governmental entities for intergovernmental agreements conditional on agreements over $750,000 are only effective with the approval of the commission. Most contracts entered into with intergovernmental agencies involve pass through funds from the federal government often with matching local funds and infrequently state money. Currently, CDOT seeks to comply with the Colorado Revised Statutes and develop a process to streamline the process.

Engineering Contracts 2829 W. Howard Place, Ste. 339 Denver, CO 80204-2305

70


Next Steps To develop a process to obtain Transportation Commison approval for all IGAs over $750,000, as soon as reasonably possible. CDOT seeks to present to the Commission a Consent Agenda every month listing all of the known projects identifying the region, owner of the project, project number, total cost of the project, including a breakdown of the funding source and a brief description of the project. CDOT requests that the approval of the project includes approval of all future contracts, amendments, and option letters that arise from the project. CDOT staff can provide additional information necessary to facilitate this process. Attachments Presentation

71

Intergovernmental Agreements(IGAs)

72

Contracts over $750,000

C.R.S. §43-1-110(4) The executive director or the chiefengineer shall represent the department in negotiationswith local governmental entities concerningintergovernmental agreements between the departmentand such local governmental entities to implement theprovisions of this article. No such intergovernmentalagreement involving more than seven hundred fiftythousand dollars shall become effective without theapproval of the commission.

March 11, 2020 Engineering Contracts TC Compliance Project 273

Consent Agenda

Engineering Contracts proposes a summary presented on the consent agenda with the following details for each project:

the region, owner of the project,project number, total cost of the project,including a breakdown of the funding source and a brief description of the project.


Consent Agenda

• Abandonments, disposals and similar items are covered underthe Consent Agenda currently, and unlike Right of WayCondemnations actions, where the TC workshops each item,IGAs (like abandonments, disposals and other items on theConsent Agenda are not controversial and are supported by allparties involved.

• Because an IGA outlines all the terms of the project approvalof the agreement may serve as approval for all futurecontributors, option letters to encumber funds and phasedates, and amendments for that project.


Consent Agenda Request

Consent Agenda details:


Region Owner Project Local Agency Total $ Fed. LA StateDescription

R1 Local 23281Arapahoe $3,331,250 $2,665,000 $666,250 $0Dry Creek Rd EB Lane

Local 23282Arapahoe $4,366,250 $3,493,000 $873,253 $0 Bike/Ped. Clinton/Inverness Dr. W.

Local 23433Arapahoe $4,750,000 $0 $2,375,000 $2,375,000High Plain Trail/ Cherry Creek Connection

Local 23564Arapahoe $2,000,000 $1,380,000 $320,000 $300,000I-25 Dry Creek SB On-ramp

Local 23512Aurora $4,126,250 $3,301,000 $825,250 $0High Line Canal Trail: East Colfax to I-70

Local 23594Aurora $5,457,500 $4,366,000 $1,091,500 $0Multi-use Trail E. Colfax & I-70

CDOT 23157Broomfield $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $0SH7 Boulder to Brighton Preliminary Engineering

Local 23484Castle Rock $5,281,250 $4,225,000 $1,056,250 $0SH 86/5th St & Founders/Ridge Rd Op Improvements

Local 21556Denver $30,000,000 $24,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000Alameda and Platte River Drive

Local 23353Denver $796,786 $635,029 $158,757 $0Bluetooth Expansion76





R1 Local 23354Denver $786,000 $629,000 $157,000 $0 FY 20 VMS Installation

Local 23422Denver $3,623,626 $3,000,000 $623,626 $0 Transit Speed & Reliability on Federal Blvd.

CDOT 25991Douglas County $10,000,000 $0 *$10,000,000 $0 I-25 South Gap *Revenue Contract

State 23467Jefferson County $20,500,000 $0 $10,250,000 $10,250,000SH 6 Tunnel 1 to Huntsman Gulch

Local 23437Lakewood $5,281,250 $4,225,000 $1,056,250 $0SH 86 & 5th Street & Founders/ Ridge Road Op Improvements

Local 23371Northglenn $8,746,250 $6,997,000 $1,749,250 $0120th Avenue Improvements Washington St. to York St.

Local 22946Westminster $8,500,000 $5,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000Sheridan Blvd. Underpass & Lane Balancing

77





R2 Local 23329Canon City $850,647 $740,250 $146,397 $0CMAQ 8th & Bridge Street

Local 18525Colorado Springs $2,040,985 $1,689,731 $351,254 $0 Tejon Roundabout

Local 19946Colorado Springs $3,611,837 $2,990,239 $621,598 $0 Signal Upgrades

Local 21130Colorado Springs $9,436,380 $7,812,379 $1,624,001 $0 Platte Ave. Bridge over Sand Creek

Local 23058Colorado Springs $1,288,919 $1,031,135 $257,784 $0 MMT Route 8

Local 21233 El Paso County $1,207,875 $1,000,000 $207,875 $0Northgate-Struthers PWQ Pond

Local 22445El Paso County $830,000 $496,740 $333,260 $0SH 115 Pedestrian Improvements

R3 Local 22047Montrose $1,455,000 $1,164,000 $291,000 $0Amendment to extend contract for Blossom Road Bridge Project78





R4 Local 23378Boulder $4,400,000 $0 $2,200,000 $2,200,000Table Mesa Connection

Local 23380Boulder $950,000 $760,000 $190,000 $0SH7 Multimodal Improvements

Local 23508Boulder $5,700,000 $4,560,000 $1,140,000 $028th Street BAT Lanes

Local 21966Fort Collins $3,992,896 $2,412,371 $80,525 $1,297,500US 287 and Trilby Intersections

Local 23381Lafayette $4,400,000 $2,605,000 $541,515 $0SH 7 & 119th Improvements

Local 23379Longmont $3,000,000 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000St. Vrain Greenway

79





R4 CDOT 23387Louisville $950,000 $0 $475,000 $475,000104th Street Trail

Local 23393Louisville $1,253,750 $1,003,000 $250,750 $0SBR Crossing Improvement

Local 21991Loveland $1,000,000 $827,900 $172,100 $0CNG Station

CDOT 23388Nederland $1,500,000 $0 $750,000 $750,000Downtown Sidewalks

Local 21855Weld County $1,994,880 $0 $1,994,880 $0 SH52 & WCR37

Local 23044Weld County $1,318,780 $1,091,818 $226,962 $0Weld CR 19 Bridge

80

2829 W. Howard Place, 4th Floor, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9525 www.codot.gov

Purpose This memorandum provides proposed objectives for the safety goals areas of Policy Directive 14 for review by the Transportation Commission. Staff will provide objectives for the asset management and mobility goal areas at a future Transportation Commission Workshop. After review by the Commission, the final Policy Directive 14 with the approved goal areas and objectives will be submitted for adoption. An additional topic for Commission review is a potential target adjustment for National Performance Measure (NPM) pavement targets. Staff will provide an overview of the current target this month and then brief on the proposed target change at the April Commission workshop. Action Using the framework and alignment of priorities discussed at the January 2020 Transportation Commission workshop, staff has developed a list of proposed, measurable, objectives in the safety goal area for review by the Transportation Commission. Staff will revise the objectives based on Commission feedback for adoption in a revised Policy Directive 14 at a future Commission meeting. No action required on NPM target adjustments for this month. Background Policy Directive 14 Staff presented a framework for annual review of Policy Directive 14, which will incorporate goals from the Department’s Wildly Important Goals (WIGs), the Transportation Commission Principles, the Governor’s “Bold Four” goals, and objectives required under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015.

Performance and Asset Management Branch 2829 W. Howard Place, 4th Floor Denver, CO 80204-2305

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: REBECCA WHITE - DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TIM KIRBY - MULTIMODAL PLANNING BRANCH MANAGER MANJARI BHAT – PERFORMANCE & ASSET MANAGEMENT BRANCH MANAGER DARIUS R. PAKBAZ - PERFORMANCE DATA MANAGER DATE: MARCH 18, 2020 RE: POLICY DIRECTIVE 14.0 – PROPOSED OBJECTIVES FOR SAFETY & NATIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURE

TARGET ADJUSTMENTS

81

2829 W. Howard Place, 4th Floor, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9525 www.codot.gov

This framework creates a cadence of review of the objectives in the policy directive to allow for continuous improvement of the main goals of the department, inform funding decisions and projects, and measure the success of these initiatives. Using this framework, and input provided by the Commission at the January 15, 2020 Transportation Commission workshop, staff has developed a list of proposed Policy Directive 14 objectives in the safety goal area for review. National Performance Measures As a requirement of the Fixing American’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015, State DOTs were required to set targets and report on measures for safety, infrastructure condition, and system performance goal areas. The infrastructure condition metrics are set for a four-year performance period, starting in 2018, with the option of adjusting targets at the mid-point of the performance period. Any adjustments to any target is required by May 20, 2020. Details Policy Directive 14 – Proposed Safety Objectives Staff has proposed the following objectives for the Safety Goal Area, which combines objectives from the Department’s soon to be published Strategic Transportation Safety Plan (STSP), objectives required under the FAST Act of 2015, and the Department’s “Wildly Important Goals”:

National Performance Measures – Pavement Metrics The required metrics for measuring pavement condition differ from the current measure the Department uses for investment decisions and for PD-14, Drivability Life. When the initial targets for this 4-year performance period were set, data was limited, with some information not compatible for use in the FHWA methodology. Since the initial targets were set, the Department has collected data to determine current condition. The NPM pavement standard only measures condition on the Interstates and non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS), including locally owned (off-system) NHS roadways. Staff will provide recommendations at the next Commission workshop on potential pavement target adjustments. Next Steps

● Proposed, measureable, objectives presented for the Asset Management & Mobility Goal Areas for review – April/May 2020

● Review and adoption of target adjustments for NPM pavement condition metrics – April 2020 ● Adoption of revised Policy Directive 14 with Commission approval of the goal areas and

objectives – June 2020 ● Reporting 2019 data and condition of objectives in revised Policy Directive 14 – September 2020 ● Evaluation of PD-14 goals and objectives and refresh of the policy directive (if necessary) –

October 2020 ● Consideration of PD-14 objective performance in preparation for FY22 annual budget process –

November 2020

Attachments ● Attachment A: PD-14 Briefing – Safety Proposed Objectives & National Performance Measures

82

Policy Directive 14 BriefingProposed Objectives for Safety

March 10, 202083

PD-14 Goal Areas & ObjectivesAlignment with Budget/Planning Structure & Objective Topics

March 10, 2020 Policy Directive 14 Proposed Objectives - Safety 2

Safety

Infrastructure Condition

System Performance

Maintenance

Asset Management

Safety

Mobility

Previous Goal Areas Proposed Goal Areas OBJECTIVE TOPICS

• Vehicle Crashes

• Fatalities

• Serious Injuries

• Vulnerable Users

• Bridges

• Pavement

• Other CDOT Assets

• Maintenance

• Transit Assets

• Reliability & Congestion

• Sustainability

• ?

Focus for March’s Meeting

84


Safety Goal AreaCurrent Goal & Objectives

SAFETY – Moving Colorado toward zero deaths by reducing traffic-related deaths and serious injuries by one-half by 2030.

85

Safety Goal AreaProposed Goal & Objectives


SAFETY – The future of Colorado is zero deaths and serious injuries so all people using any transportation mode arrive at their destination safely.

OBJECTIVE

NEW - Improve the safety of Colorado’s Transportation System by reducing the vehicle crash rate by 2% each year.

MODIFIED - Reduce rate of traffic fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled by 15% over the next four years, with an aspirational goal of zero.

MODIFIED - Reduce the rate of traffic related serious injuries per 100 million vehicle miles traveled by 15% over the next four years, with an aspirational goal of zero.

MODIFIED - Reduce the number of traffic fatalities and serious injuries involving vulnerable users (pedestrians and bicyclists) by 15% over the next four years, with an aspirational goal of zero.

NEW – Lead by example in establishing a culture of safety at CDOT in reducing vehicle crashes, traffic-related fatalities, and traffic-related serious injuries involving CDOT employees.

FEEDBACK AREAS: • Are there additional areas the Commission would like to set objectives around?• Is there an interest in tracking performance in rural and urban areas separately?• Agreement to remove “economic impact of crashes measure?”

Safety goal area, objectives, and targets will align with Colorado Strategic Transportation Safety Plan (STSP).

Goal statement aligns with STSP Vision

Aligns with Dept. WIGs

Align objectives with STSP

Employee Safety

86


Next Steps

• Proposed Objectives for Commission Review – March-May 2020

• Adoption of Revised PD-14 with new objectives and goal areas – June 2020

• Reporting 2019 data and condition of new objectives – September 2020

• Evaluation of PD-14 Goals and Objectives and Refresh of PD (if necessary) – October 2020

• Consideration of PD-14 objective performance in preparation for FY22 annual budget process – November 2020

Department Goals

Department WIGSTC Guiding Principles

Governor’s “Bold Four”National Perf. Measures

Update Policy Directive 14

Funding decisions, Planning

Process, and Projects

Track Outcomes

PD-14 Report Card

Evaluate and Refresh

87

National Performance MeasuresProposed Target Adjustments

March 10, 202088

Overview

March 10, 2020 NPM - Adjustment of 4-Year Targets 7

• The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015 required state DOTs to set targets and report on metrics to FHWA on the following subjects:

• Safety• Infrastructure Condition• System Performance

• Measures for Infrastructure Condition are set on a 4-year performance period, with the option to adjust the 4-year targets at the mid-point of the performance period. Adjustments are due on May 20, 2020.

• Based on current analysis and modeling of data, the Department is proposing to adjust the 4-year National Performance Measure targets for Pavement:

• Percentage of Interstate pavements in Good Condition• Percentage of Interstate pavements in Poor Condition• Percentage of non-Interstate National Highway System pavements in Good Condition• Percentage of non-Interstate National Highway System pavements in Poor Condition

• These metrics differ from the current measures used for pavement investment decisions and Policy Directive 14 – Drivability Life.

89

Current Four-Year Poor Target (2022) 1%

47%Current Four-Year Good Target (2022)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022% of Pavement Rated Good 44.74% 44.30% 46.06%% of Pavement Rated Fair 54.95% 53.23% 51.20%% of Pavement Rated Poor 0.31% 2.47% 2.74%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Interstate Pavement Condtion SummaryNational Performance Metric Methodology

Interstate Pavement ConditionActuals(2017-2018) & 2019 Estimate


Estimate

Actuals

Four-Year Performance Period90

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022% of Pavement Rated Good 42.56% 42.32% 41.24%% of Pavement Rated Fair 56.45% 54.65% 55.32%% of Pavement Rated Poor 0.99% 3.03% 3.45%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement Condition SummaryNational Performance Measure Methodology

Current Four-Year Poor Target (2022) 2%

51%Current Four-Year Good Target (2022)

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement ConditionActuals(2017-2018) & 2019 Estimate


Estimate

Actuals

Four-Year Performance Period91

Interstate & NHS Pavement2018 Condition Map

NPM - Adjustment of 4-Year Targets 10March 10, 202092

Next Steps


• Review of new pavement targets options for national performance measures in conjunction with review of Asset Management goal area for Policy Directive 14 in April.

• Resolution of adoption for adjusted pavement targets in April.

• Adjusted targets for pavement condition reported to FHWA on May 20, 2020.

93

Transportation Commission of Colorado Statewide Plan Committee

Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 18, 2020

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO

Rebecca White, Director

Division of Transportation Development

• Introductions – 5 Minutes – Karen Stuart, Chair

• 10-Year Strategic Pipeline of Projects - 20 minutes - Regional Transportation Directors • 10-Year Strategic Pipeline of Projects Document Review - 20 minutes - Rebecca White

and Tim Kirby• Adjourn

THE AGENDA MAY BE ALTERED AT THE CHAIR’S DISCRETION

Karen Stuart (Chair)

District 4

Shannon Gifford

District 1

Vince Rogalski

Chairmen of STAC

Sidny Zink

District 8

Don Stanton

District 2

Kathleen Bracke

District 5

94

4201 E. Arkansas Ave., Room 262, Denver, CO 80222-3400 P 303.757.9525 F 303.757.9656 www.coloradodot.Info

Purpose The Division of Transportation Development has two key topics to bring before the Statewide Plan Committee this month. Action Requested Discussion only. Background Over the last year, staff has sought input from the Transportation Commission’s Statewide Plan Committee to inform the development of the statewide transportation plan. This month, two related topics will be presented: 1) update on refinement to the 10-year project list and 2) a draft Details 10-year Project List: Last month the Committee reviewed the first draft of the project list for the final six years (2025-2030) of the 10 year “project pipeline.” Over the last month, the regions have continued to work with their TPRs and MPOs to refine the list. The Regional Transportation Directors will provide a briefing on those changes. Commission is not being asked to take any action on this list this month; only to provide feedback so that staff may incorporate this input into the next version of the document. Draft Vision Document: Staff has developed a summary document of the 10-year plan, with a focus on what the plan achieves for the state in terms of safety, mobility, pavement condition, etc. This month, staff will present the draft of this document and ask for the Commission’s input. Next Steps Staff will bring elements of the statewide plan to this committee over the next several months with the intent to deliver a final document in June.

2829 West Howard Place Denver, CO 80204

TO: Statewide Planning Committee, Transportation Commission FROM: Rebecca White, Director, Division of Transportation Development Tim Kirby, Manager, Multi-modal Planning Branch DATE: March 18, 2020 RE: Statewide Plan Committee Topics

95

VISION FOR COLORADO’S TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEM

1 0 -Y E A R S T R AT E G IC P R O J E C T P I P E L I N E

In May 2019, the Colorado Department

of Transportation (CDOT) embarked on

an effort to refresh our transportation

plan and priorities based on firsthand

input from residents across the state.

Our goals were simple: to hear directly

from Coloradans about what they need from

our transportation system; to ensure that

we are prioritizing precious taxpayer dollars

in ways that best deliver on those needs;

and to energize an ongoing statewide

conversation about the vitality of

transportation in connecting our

daily lives.

—continued on page 2

L E A R N M O R E YourTransportationPlan.com | [email protected]

T H E L AT E S T O N

T R A N S P O R TAT I O N

P L A N N I N G

Spring 2020 YourTransportationPlan.comS TAT E W I D E P L A N I N F O R M AT I O N

Grand Avenue Bridge ribbon-cutting ceremony in Glenwood Springs

DRAFT

96


2

CDOT’s outreach efforts — the most

expansive in the history of the Department

— revealed a compelling vision about the

future of transportation in Colorado. This

vision was conceived in the chambers

of county commissions from Cortez

to Julesburg, outside of public libraries

in Gunnison, grocery stores in Fort

Morgan, recreation centers in Salida, and

on the sidewalks of main streets across

Colorado. Throughout these conversations,

CDOT’s team has been struck both by the

uniqueness of each community, and by the

common themes that emerge when talking

about our transportation challenges.

—continued from page 1

Northwest

Upper Front Range

Central Front Range

PikesPeakArea

Intermountain

North Front Range

Eastern

SoutheastPueblo Area

San Luis Valley

Southwest

Gunnison Valley

Grand Valley

Greater Denver Area

South Central

Road Condition & Safety

Growth & Congestion

Lack of Travel Options

Freight

Road Condition & Safety

Growth & Congestion

Lack of Travel Options

Freight

Source: 2019 Your Transportation Plan MetroQuest Online Survey, County Meetings,Transportation Planning Region Meetings, Stakeholder Meetings, Telephone Town Halls

Altogether, CDOT received thousands of comments that collectively point to three compelling needs:

• Improving the condition and safety of our roads

• Reducing congestion• Providing more travel options

BUILDING A 10-YEAR VISION

Transportation Planning:

• Identifies future needs for

our transportation system

• Establishes a transportation vision

and goals for the state and the types

of projects and investments that will

help achieve these goals

• Connects current and future

funding realities to deliver an

effective and efficient transportation

system that works for Colorado

today and in the future.

DRAFTDRAFT

97


3

UNFUNDED

FUNDED

FundedYears 1–4

$1.6 Billion

UnfundedYears 5–10

$3.2 Billion

STARTING 2020

Through the infusion of SB 262, SB 1, and SB 267, CDOT revenues for capital construction will remain elevated until 2024. These funding infusions allow the department to make critical investments across the state.

However, these legislative measures are temporary and will eventually run out. If future funding is available, CDOT has a plan — a plan developed from the voices of everyday Coloradans, local elected officials, and key stakeholder groups.

After the additional legislative funding runs out, CDOT will be forced to return to focusing on maintaining the system we have rather than pursuing much needed expansion and improvement projects.

The following pages complete this journey with a 10-year vision of achievable projects. Each section describes what projects are funded with new legislative dollars and which are currently unfunded and require additional dollars to achieve.

Funding and project timing are subject to change — this graphic is for illustrative purposes only.

CDOT’s Use of Additional Legislative Funding

10-Year StrategicProject Pipeline

BUILDING A 10-YEAR VISION

$500 M

$400 M

$300 M

$200 M

$100 M

$0FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030

Funded Unfunded

This first set of funded projects provide the initial steps toward delivering a better, safer transportation system for Colorado — but there is more that needs to be done.DRAFT

DRAFT

98


4

During the spring and summer of 2019, CDOT

spoke to residents in communities across the state.

The common thread in all of those conversations

was safety. Colorado’s transportation vision is for a

future with zero deaths and serious injuries so all

people using any transportation mode arrive

at their destination safely.

One in every 33 Colorado drivers

will be in a crash this year.

Along with safety improvements throughout Colorado, the 10-Year Strategic Project Pipeline will pursue projects that align with what we heard from Coloradans. CDOT has placed the projects in the following categories:

WE HEARD YOU

Types of Safety Improvements:

• Intersection improvements

• Passing lanes

• Highway widening

• Shoulder widening

• Wildlife fencing

• Slow vehicle / truck pullouts

• Roundabouts

• Signal improvements

• Bottleneck reductions

• Pedestrian, bicycle, and bus

stop safety improvements

Colorado Fatalities 2009–2018However, crash rates and traffic fatalities are at concerning levels. A number of factors contribute to this, including:

• Colorado’s population has grown rapidly, adding several hundred thousand people to our roads

• Speeding, impaired driving and distracted driving

• Lack of seat belt use

No number of fatalities can ever be OK. CDOT works to integrate safety into everything we do, focusing on both driver behavior and the built environment. The 10-Year Strategic Project Pipeline will focus on safety improvements both large and small such as installing new guardrails, rebuilding intersections, and constructing new sections of passing lanes.

IMPROVING OUR INTERSTATES

This category includes any highway or transit improvements located on a Colorado interstate.

These projects address:• Growth & Congestion

RELIEVING TRAFFIC

This category includes any highway or transit projects that contribute to the alleviation of congestion in Colorado’s metropolitan areas.

These projects address:• Growth & Congestion• Lack of Travel Options

IMPROVING RURAL ACCESS STATEWIDE

This category includes any highway or transit projects that provide travel access within and between Colorado’s rural areas.

These projects address:• Growth & Congestion • Lack of Travel Options• Freight

RURAL PAVING

This category includes any highway or transit projects that improve the quality of rural roads.

These projects address: • Road Condition & Safety• Freight

ROAD CONDITION AND MAINTENANCE

This category includes any highway or transit projects that will return our system to a “state of good repair.”

These projects address: • Road Condition & Safety• Freight

700

650

600

550

500

450

4002009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Num

ber

of F

atal

itie

s

Year

DRAFTDRAFT

99


5

WE HEARD YOU

Funded Projects Highlight

X number of projects totaling $1.65 billion — based on four years of new revenue provided by the state legislature.

Includes largest investment in rural pavement in CDOT history.

Leverages other CDOT funding sources to accomplish large projects like rebuilding I-270 and the first phase of Floyd Hill on I-70. First set of projects will go to construction in Spring of 2020.

Unfunded Projects Highlight

X number of projects totaling approximately $3.2 billion.

Includes six years of projects, completing CDOT’s 10-year plan.

Projects selected based on public input and prioritized by local government officials, transportation planning experts across the state, and CDOT.

Funded or partially-funded project Unfunded project Projects have multiple benefits. A complete listing of projects is included on pages 18–24.DRAFTDRAFT

100


6

Colorado’s interstates are the backbone of our

transportation system. They are key to Colorado’s

economy — connecting goods and people across

our state and region.

However, as Colorado’s population and economy continue to grow, our interstates are feeling the pinch. I-25 and I-270 are crippled by congestion for long stretches of the day. Along I-70 West, worsening traffic — especially on the weekends — aligns with a host of concerns about extreme weather and accommodating passenger vehicles, freight, bicyclists and wildlife safely amidst geologically tough conditions. I-70 East and I-76 — key freight routes for the state — are in need of major pavement improvements due to years of deferred maintenance.

The 10-Year Strategic Project Pipeline invests $1.2 billion (37.5 percent of all funding) into improving the condition and efficiency of these corridors. That means rebuilding pavement on I-70 East and I-76, delivering extra capacity and options on I-25 North, and tackling congestion bottlenecks across I-70 West.

Every year, the average commuter in Colorado:

• Spends 2 days sitting in traffic

• Loses $900 due to delays

• Burns an extra 19 gallons of gas


I-70 at Floyd Hill

25 percent of Colorado’s greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector.

188 million hours of lost time for

commuters and travelers and delivery delays for businesses and

shipping companies.

38 million gallons of fuel wasted

that represent direct costs to travelers

and the environment.

XX%

XX%

XX%

XX%

Traffic congestion — just the extra travel time and wasted fuel in slow

conditions — costs Colorado $3.6 billion each year.

DRAFTDRAFT

101


7


Nearly 40 percent of funds targeted toward corridor-wide modernization of I-25, which carries roughly 85 percent of the state’s population.

Other major capacity projects include a down payment towards fixing Floyd Hill, a well-known choke-point on I-70, a long overdue rebuild and widening of I-270, and a first phase of reconstruction along I-25 in Pueblo.


$1.2 billion (or 38 percent) of the total unfunded project list dedicated to the improvement of Colorado interstates.

Continues work on our most congested corridors while also reconstructing pavement along rural stretches of I-70, I-25 and I-76. Many sections of these interstates haven’t seen significant work since they were first opened to the public decades ago.

Funded or partially-funded project Unfunded project


Projects have multiple benefits. A complete listing of projects is included on pages 18–24.DRAFTDRAFT

102


8

More people are using our transportation system

than ever before and the number is projected

to keep rising.

Our state population grew by 1.59 million over the last 20 years and is on track to grow another 1.69 million over the next 20 years. As the population increases, so to does the distance many Coloradans need to travel between home and work — resulting in more vehicle travel. Today, Colorado ranks 37th in the nation for traffic congestion, approaching the status of states commonly associated with the worst delays in the nation. At the same time, there is growing recognition that Colorado cannot simply build its way out of congestion.

Grand Junction

Parachute

Glenwood Springs

RifleGlenwood Springs

Maintenance Facility

EagleVail

Frisco

Idaho Springs

Kremmling

Hot Sulfer Springs

Granby

Fraser

Winter Park Maintenance Facility

Downtown Denver

Federal Center

New Bustang Service

The solutions in this plan include a mixture of highway capacity improvement and transit expansion projects in urban areas. This includes projects that would improve intersections and expand highway capacity at strategic locations along with investments in new mobility hubs that increase access to transit and carpooling.

RELIEVING TRAFFIC

Legend

Existing Parking or Station

Proposed Station by SB 267

Existing Station Expanded by SB 267

Bus Stop Improvement by SB 267

Lincoln Station

Fort Collins Downtown Transit Center

Pueblo Downtown Transit Center

Monument Park-N-Ride

Fountain Mobility Hub

Colorado Station

Thornton Park-N-Ride

CO 119 Mobility Hub

Harmony Road Park-N-Ride

Berthoud Mobility Hub

SH 7 Mobility Hub

Denver Union Station

Project Name TBD

Larkspur Mobility Hub

Briargate Mobility Hub

Colorado Springs Downtown Transit Center

Unfunded Mobility Hubs

Funded Microtransit DRAFTDRAFT

103


9


RELIEVING TRAFFIC


Mix of projects that help move vehicles while helping improve access to options beyond the single occupant trip.

Rebuilds a number of interchanges known to back-up traffic and lead to accidents and widens our interstates along most congested segments.

Includes new buses for Bustang (CDOT’s transit service), and new mobility “hubs” where commuters can catch the bus or connect with a carpool.


$1.65 billion (or 53 percent) of the unfunded project list would be dedicated to providing needed congestion relief.

Continues the strategic investment in both road and transit infrastructure along the interstates while addressing roads like US285 that are feeling the impact of overflow congestion from I-70.


104


10

Rural Colorado might not have population density,

but it does face significant transportation challenges.

Whether it is freight movements on the Eastern Plains or recreation tourism in the Rocky Mountains, Colorado’s rural highways are in need of improvement. Throughout the outreach process CDOT consistently heard about the importance of adding passing lanes to provide safe passage in mountainous terrain; particularly along corridors with high numbers of freight trucks. We also heard a lot about the need for more options for senior citizens and veterans to reach basic amenities and medical care.

To address these issues, the 10-Year Strategic Project Pipeline proposes an investment of roughly $600 million in projects that would add passing lanes, improve intersections, expand CDOT’s Bustang and Bustang Outrider services and provide more revenue to local transit operators.

Photo caption

66,000

The number of veterans

who live in rural Colorado.


Roadways in Colorado’s rural communities

carried 309.7 million tons

of critical products and parcels valued

at $150.3 billion in 2019.

30 percent of all freight tonnage in

the state and 19 percent of freight

by value traveled on roadways in

Colorado’s rural communities in 2019.

By 2045, the number of those 65 and older

will increase by 29 percent. That means the

need for mobility services — such as

local transit and regional/statewide

transit such as Bustang — will

increase.

DRAFTDRAFT

105


11



Expands CDOT’s Outrider service to include communities of Lamar, Fort Lyon, Las Animas, La Junta, Swink, Rocky Ford, Manazanola, and Fowler.

Improves Outrider connections in Durango, Mancos, Cortez, Dolores, and Rico.

Adds new sections of passing lanes in high priority areas.

Completes reconstruction of SH13 and SH9.


$619 million (or 20 percent) of the unfunded project list would be dedicated to providing mobility options to rural Coloradans, including seniors and veterans.

Dozens of new passing lanes and intersection improvements.

ADA and pedestrian improvements and construction of the Southern Mountain Loop Trail in SE Colorado.

Projects have multiple benefits. A complete listing of projects is included on pages 18–24.


DRAFTDRAFT

106


12

Over the course of CDOT’s

outreach effort we heard

from rural communities across

Colorado about the need

to improve the condition of rural

roads, and about the importance

of freight routes to take products

from farm to market.

We also heard frustration that, because their roads carry less volume than urban areas, CDOT’s pavement models rarely direct scarce resources towards lasting rural road repairs. Recent data indicates that those frustrations are valid. In August 2019, a report by the Reason Foundation showed that Colorado has slipped to 47th in the nation when it comes to the condition of our rural pavement.

The first four years of this plan allocates 25 percent of all dollars (over $300 million) — to rural pavement condition — the largest single investment in CDOT’s recent history. CDOT proposes maintaining this focus throughout the decade, with a total of $1.3 billion going toward rural roads between 2020 and 2030. This would repair 1,300 miles of rural pavement across the state. Many of these roads haven’t been repaved since the 1970s.

Between 2020 and 2030, approximately $1.3 billion

will go towards rural roads.

FIXING RURAL ROADS

Photo caption

47thColorado ranking

of rural road conditions

according to the

Reason Foundation

DRAFTDRAFT

107


13


FIXING RURAL ROADS


Largest investment in Colorado’s rural road network in recent history.

41 rural road projects totaling $337 million will make investments in more than 500 miles of Colorado’s rural roads, some of which have not been comprehensively treated since the 1970s.


$646 million (or 20 percent) of the unfunded project list would be dedicated to improving crumbling rural roads.


108


14

Colorado’s infrastructure is as diverse as the state.

Bridges span majestic canyons and rivers. Miles of

pavement traverse our expansive plains and tunnels

bore through the Rocky Mountains connecting east

to west. Hundreds of thousands of culverts, retaining

walls, rockfall fences, traffic signals, and cameras

make the whole system work.

Even though the majority of CDOT’s typical budget is devoted to maintaining these resources, the state has an extensive backlog of repair needs. Returning our system to a “state of good repair” would require an additional $200 - $300 million per year.

CDOT’s 10-year plan would devote

approximately 50 percent of new funding received

toward improving the condition of our roads, bridges and

other assets.Similar to a home, it is much less expensive to maintain a transportation system in good condition than one in a state of decline. CDOT’s 10-year plan would devote approximately 50 percent of new funding received toward improving the condition of our roads, bridges and other assets. These investments would return hundreds of miles of pavement to good condition, extend the life of bridges around the state and bring culverts, guardrail, and walls up to standard.

IMPROVING THE CONDITION OF OUR ROADWAY SYSTEM

$148 million

Amount invested in other assets

such as culverts, tunnels,

and traffic signs

$209 million

Amount invested in critical

bridge repairs statewide

NEED HIGH RESOLUTION PHOTO

DRAFTDRAFT

109


15


IMPROVING THE CONDITION OF OUR ROADWAY SYSTEM


CDOT will restore the department’s focus on fixing the basics. CDOT heard clearly from residents that we need to do a better job taking care of the roads across our expansive system. More than half of the funds will help fix roads in both urban and rural areas.


$2.15 billion (or 70 percent) of the unfunded project list would be dedicated to preserving and improving roadway assets.

Includes reconstruction of segments of rural interstates for the first time in decades.


110


16

ACCOUNTABILITY

Just as important as establishing a pipeline of projects

is creating transparency and accountability structures

that let the public see the progress on these projects

and how dollars are being spent.

These measures include:

• An online dashboard that tracks spending and timelines for every project in this plan.

• New spending targets capping overhead costs so that more money is spent on the road — where the public can see and feel our work.

• Making CDOT’s budget more transparent and our internal management controls as strong as possible.

• Spending every dollar — across the Department — as wisely as possible by cutting discretionary costs within CDOT.

DRAFTDRAFT

111


17

TRANSPARENCY

Insert text about website and PMO project tacking

WEBSITE IMAGE

DRAFTDRAFT

112


18

FUNDED PROJECTS (YEARS 1–4)

STIP Allocation

Statewide Significance

Congestion Relief

Mobility Options

Rural Paving

Road Conditions & Maintenance

HighwayI-25 Gap $252 M ü ü ü

I-70 WB PPSL $45 M ü ü ü

I-25 South Gap Package 3 $26 M ü ü ü

I-270: Widening from I-76 to I-70 $200 M ü ü ü

I-25 Valley Highway Phases 3 & 4 $60 M ü ü ü

I-70 West: Floyd Hill $100 M ü ü ü

I-70 Peak Period Shoulder Lanes (PPSL) - Year Two 267 Commitment $35 M ü ü ü

Urban Arterial Safety Improvements (Urban Arterial Safety Improvements in Region 1) $25 M

US50A Pueblo West Purcell Interchange $1.6 M ü

US 50 and Purcell Drive Interchange $37 M ü

SH 21 and Research Parkway Interchange $44 M ü ü

I-25 and SH 94 Safety and Mobility Improvements $34 M ü ü ü

US 287 (A-Park Street South) - Lamar Downtown Concrete Paving $18 M ü ü

I-25 Raton Pass Safety and Interchange Improvements $13 M ü ü ü

SH 115 – Safety and Paving improvements from MM 20-39 $42 M ü ü ü

US 285/CO 9 Intersection Improvement with Bridge Widening $7 M ü ü

I-25 Colorado Springs Ramp Metering Phase 2 $6 M ü ü

I-25 Paving and Mobility– Fillmore to Garden of the Gods $43 M ü ü ü

I-25 through Pueblo New Freeway $60 M ü ü ü

US 287 Bridge Preventative Maintenance Phases 1 & 2 $5 M ü

M-22-AY Bridge Repair on CO 109 over US 50B in La Junta $3 M ü

Bridge Preventative Maintenance: CO 12, CO 194, and I-25 C $2.5 M ü

Bridge Preventative Maintenance on I-25, CO 16 & CO 24 in Colorado Springs (4 bridges) $5.5 M ü

SH 9 Frisco North $9.5 M ü ü

SH 13 Rio Blanco $18.3 M ü ü

SH 13 Wyoming South $32.2 M ü ü

US 50 Windy Point/Blue Creek Canyon $18.5 M ü ü ü

SH 9 Iron Springs to Main Street $6 M ü

SH 13 Fortification Cree $10.8 M ü ü

US 6 Fruita to Palisade Safety Improvements $36 M ü

SH 13 Garfield County M 11.3 to 16.2 $16.5 M ü ü

US 550 Montrose to Ouray County Line Safety Improvements $6 M ü

I-70 Auxiliary Lane East Frisco to Silverthorne $24 M ü ü ü

US 50 Grand Junction to Delta Repairs $15 M ü

SH 92 Rogers Mesa to Hotchkiss $8 M ü ü

I-70B East of 1st to 15th Street $16 M ü

I-70 West Vail Pass Safety Improvements - Phase 1 $13.5 M ü ü

Intersection Improvements at SH 50/550 $3.5 M ü ü

US 50 Passing Lanes Blue Mesa $6 M ü

I-70 Replacing Failing Pavement $58.1 M ü ü ü ü

I-25 Seg. 5 & 6 $115.2 M ü ü ü

I-25 North: Segment 7 & 8 - Express Lanes on permanent EIS alignment (CO 402 to CO 14) $230 M ü ü ü

I-25 North: Segment 5 & 6: BUILD Grant Funding Commitment Express Lanes on permanent EIS alignment (CO 56 to CO 402) $50 M ü ü ü

CO 119: Safety / Mobility Improvements $30 M ü

US 550/160 Connection $60.7 M ü

US 160 Towaoc Passing Lanes $9 M ü ü

US 50/285 Intersection Reconstruction (Round-a-bout) $5.4 M ü ü

US 550 Pacochupuk South Roadway Mobility and Safety Improvements $1.7 M ü ü ü

US 160 McCabe Creek Major Structure Replacement $5 M ü ü

US 550/160 Connection (Interchange Completion) $7.9 M ü ü

TransitDenver Area Arterial Street Pre-BRT and BRT Elements $26 M ü

Castle Rock and/or Ridgegate Transit Station(s) $22.5 M ü

Denver Heavy Maintenance Facility $7 M ü

Burnham Yard $5 M ü

Idaho Springs Park-n-Ride $2 M ü

Bustang Fleet Purchases (DRCOG) $5 M ü

Bijou Street Storage and Maintenance Facility $3 M ü

Colorado Springs Transit Center $8 M ü

Woodmen Road Mobility Hub $6 M ü

Monument Park-n-Ride $500 K ü

Bustang Improvements at Tejon Park-n-Ride $80 K ü

North Pueblo Mobility Hub $3.5 M ü

Mus moluptatur reicilit, sam, core vende vit, invelicit, cus essite

dolupta ipsanimaio et am iuriae ligenda esequide nos aut accaerum

facepud icatur sitempe magnime nim quam dolut dolorerferem cum ra

volorrum re arum nobitatur, quodit exerit ipistiur?

CE

NT

RA

LC

EN

TR

AL

SO

UT

HE

AS

TN

OR

TH

WE

ST

NO

RT

HE

AS

TS

OU

TH

WE

ST

SO

UT

HE

AS

T

DRAFTDRAFT

113


19

STIP Allocation


Congestion Relief

Mobility Options

Rural Paving


Outrider Improvements at Pueblo West $80 K

CRISI Grant Match (PACOG) $50 KOutrider Improvements at Lamar, Fort Lyon, Las Animas, La Junta, Swink, Rocky Ford, Manazanola, and Fowler $600 K ü

Cripple Creek Administration and Operations Facility $120 K ü

Fairplay Mobility Hub $4 M ü

Outrider Improvements at Canon City and Cotopaxi $160 K ü

South Central Storage and Maintenance Facility $2.6 M ü

CRISI Grant Match (SCCOG) $300 K ü

Potential Bus Stop Improvements at Colorado City Corners, Walsenburg and Aguilar $200 K ü

Arterial Transit and Bike/Pedestrian Improvements on I-70 Business/US 6 Corridor $1.5 M ü

Outrider Improvements at Grand Junction $80 K ü

Winter Park Maintenance Facility $200 K ü

Outrider Improvements at Fraser, Granby, Kremmling and Hot Sulphur Springs $300 K ü

Western Slope Storage and Maintenance Facility $2.7 M ü

Crested Butte Storage Facility $1.5 M ü

Outrider Improvements at Montrose, Delta and Gunnison $250 K ü

Outrider Improvements at Placerville, Ridgway and Telluride $250 K ü

RFTA Aspen Maintenance Facility Fuel Tanks $1 M ü

Summit County Transit Operations Center $425 K ü

Frisco Transit Center - Phase 2 $4.2 M ü

Longmont/Firestone/Weld County Mobility Hub (interim configuration $6 M ü

SH 119 BRT Elements $10 M ü

Bus stop Improvements at Lochbuie $80 K ü

Bustang and Outrider Fleet Purchases $2.5 M ü

Centerra-Loveland Mobility Hub $6 M ü

Berthoud Mobility Hub $5 M ü

Northern Colorado Maintenance Facility $3 M ü

Harmony Road Park-n-Ride Expansion $500 K ü

Bus Stop Improvements at Sterling $80 K ü

Bus Stop Improvements at Brush, Fort Morgan and Hudson $240 K ü

Outrider Improvements at Durango, Mancos, Cortez, Dolores, and Rico $400 K ü

Poncha Springs Welcome Center $502.4 K ü

Outrider Improvements at 3 locations between Alamosa and Buena Vista $250 K ü

Rural PavingSH 116 - US 287 to Kansas Border $13.8 M ü

SH 69A Westcliffe to Fremont County $6.5 M ü

US 50 Texas Creek East $9 M ü

SH 96 East of Ordway to Arlington $10 M ü

SH 109 - SH 160 to Otero County Line $15 M ü

US 160 from Springfield to SH 100 and SH 100 $6.56 M ü

SH 96 near Eads to Sheridan Lake $11.58 M ü

SH 67 from SH 96 to Florence $5.77 M ü

SH 194A Surface Treatment and Drainage Improvements $5.77 M ü

SH 92 Crawford East $7.8 M ü

SH 64 Meeker West $8.8 M ü

SH 34 Grand Lake $11.5 M ü

SH 139 Douglas Pass North $8.4 M ü

SH 149 Lake City North $12.1 M ü

SH 300 Leadville West $2.5 M ü

SH 24 Leadville South $5.8 M ü

SH 318 Browns Park East $9.5 M ü

SH 114 Parlin West $4.5 M ü

SH 125 Walden North $1 M ü

SH 14 Grizzly Ranch North $7 M ü

SH 139 Dinosaur Diamond $2.2 M ü

SH 92 Hotchkiss to Crawford $3.5 M ü

US 6 Merino to Atwood $6.13 M ü

CO 59 Seibert to Cope $17.12 M ü

CO 138: Sterling North (Part 2) $2 M ü

SH 385: Phillips/Yuma County Line South $7.1 M ü

SH 52 Resurfacing Prospect Valley (Phase 1) $4.15 M ü

I-76: Highway 144 West Westbound Diamond Grind & Slabs $8.24 M ü

I-76: US 34 East Both Directions $11.47 M ü

US 385 North of Cheyenne Wells $14.83 M ü

CO 52 Resurfacing Prospect Valley (Phase 2) $5.11 M ü

I-76: East of Sterling $8.24 M ü

SH 141&145 Slickrock & Redvale $16 M ü

SH 17 MP 84.5 to 118.5 $12 M ü

SH 149 Paving and Shoulders North of Creede $16 M ü

SH 114 Paving and Shoulders $12 M ü

SH 141 North of Naturita $12 M ü

US 50 North of 285 Resurfacing $3.5 M ü

US 550 Billy Creek Resurfacing $6.5 M ü

SH 370 Resurfacing $2 M ü

US 160 Aztec Creek MP 0-8 $4 M ü

SO

UT

HE

AS

TS

OU

TH

EA

ST

NO

RT

HW

ES

TN

OR

TH

WE

ST

NO

RT

HE

AS

TN

OR

TH

EA

ST

SO

UT

HW

ES

TS

W

NOTE: Safety is fundamental to every project, so while a specific category has been hidden from the table, safety always applies.

DRAFTDRAFT

114


20

CENTRAL PROJECTSSTIP

Allocation Statewide

SignificanceCongestion

ReliefMobility Options

Rural Paving


Highway – Region 1Speer and 23rd Construction $25 M ü ü ü

Valley Highway Phases 3 and 4 (Burnham) $200 M ü ü

I-25 North: 84th - 104th Early Action $70 M ü ü ü

SH7/I-25 Interchange Mobility Hub (Early Transit Infrastructure -Parking/Slip Ramps) $5 M ü ü ü

I-25 & Belleview Phase I $22 M ü ü ü

Floyd Hill WB $100 M ü ü ü

I-70 & Kipling ROW $30 M ü ü

I-70 Bakerville to EJMT Climbing Lane $25 M ü ü ü

EJMT Prioritized Maintenance $50 M ü

Escape Ramp Improvements Along I-70 $5 M ü

Vasquez Early Action Items $10 M ü ü

US 6 & Wadsworth $70 M ü ü

US 85: Sedalia to Meadows $37 M ü ü

US 285 to Pine Junction/Bailey $60 M ü ü

SH 7 Priority Intersection Improvements $15 M ü ü

C-470: Wadsworth to I-70 Phase I $56 M ü ü

SH 30 Improvements: Quincy to Airport Rd $25 M ü ü

Urban Arterial unfunded list/ DRCOG Vision Zero High Injury Network priorities $10 M

Bottleneck Reduction $25 M ü ü

Regionwide Signal Cabinet Upgrades $5 M ü

Regionwide Signal Upgrades $12 M ü

Noise Wall Maintenance $10 M ü ü

Grade Separating Trail Improvements/Crossings $10 M ü

Regionwide bridge rehabilitation and maintenance $45 M ü

Transit – Region 1I-25 North 84th - 104th: Early Action $40 M ü ü ü

SH7/I-25 Interchange Design/ROW $5 M ü ü ü

SH 7 Priority Intersection Improvements $5 M ü ü

Region 1 Arterial Transit $70 M ü

DTC Mobility Hub $10 M ü ü

Morrison / Dinosaur Parking Lot Mobility Hub $20 M ü ü

SOUTHEAST PROJECTSSTIP




Rural Paving


Highway – Region 2US 24 Shoulder Widening $10 M ü

US 50 Passing Lanes East of Salida $8.5 M ü ü

SH 67 Passing Lanes $10.5 M ü ü

SH 69 Improvements $10 M ü ü

SH 96 Shoulder Widening $10.5 M ü

SH 115 Widening and Passing Lanes, Shoulder and Intersection Improvements between Cañon City and Florence $10.5 M ü ü

I25C & US160 Intersection Improvements $4 M ü ü ü

US 160 Freight and Safety Improvements $18 M ü ü

Proposed US350 shoulder widening $5.5 M ü

Bike/Pedestrian: Southern Mountain Loop Trail $10 M ü ü

ADA ramps & Sidewalk Improvements in La Veta and Trinidad $1 M ü ü

SH 69 Improvements $6.2 M ü ü

More US50B Passing Lanes $15 M ü ü

Realign US50B as a part of US287 Relieve Route project $34.2 M ü ü

CO 160 Curve Alignment $1 M ü

Passing lanes on US 385 $5 M ü ü

Proposed SH 10 Shoulder Widening project $10 M ü

SH 71 Passing Lanes $4 M ü ü

Intersection Improvements at CO 96/CO 71 & CO96/CO71/CR G $800 K ü

US 24 East Widening from Garrett Rd to Stapleton Rd $50 M ü ü

US 24 West (Pedestrian Crossing over Ridge Road) $16 M ü

SH 21 and Airport Rd DDI Interchange construction $45 M ü ü

SH 21 and Dublin Blvd (Construct a grade separated Interchange) $45 M ü ü

Corridor Studies (SH 94, SH 83, SH 115, and US 24 between Manitou and Divide) $4 M ü

High-Capacity Corridor Improvements (NEPA/Design/Engineering) $850 K ü

UNFUNDED PROJECTS (YEARS 5–10)

NOTE: Safety is fundamental to every project, so while a specific category has been hidden from the table, safety always applies.

DRAFTDRAFT

115


21

STIP Allocation


Congestion Relief

Mobility Options

Rural Paving


BNSF Corridor Purchase (For multimodal corridor, non-motorized transportation, or BRT) $1.1 M ü

I-25 Improvements (Phase of NPF -13th Street to US 50 B) $28 M ü ü ü

I-25 Exit 108 (Replace Single Box Culvert Crossing Under I-25) $11 M ü ü

Dillion Drive E. of I-25 Frontage Road (Construct a new 2-lane facility in addition to constructing a Round-about at Exit 104) $3 M ü ü

US 50C Drainage Improvements (drainage improvements at 36th lane) $5.5 M ü

SH 45 North Extension Study $1 M ü

SH 47 (four lane extension to US 50 B) $8 M ü

SH 96A West of Pueblo (shoulder widening, bridge rail replacement, bike lane and other safety improvements) $11.5 M ü

Transit – Region 2Transit Transfer Facilities For Regional Services (Cripple Creek, Cañon City, Woodland Park) $390 K ü

New Regional Fixed-Route Transit Service in Teller County (including Lake George, Florissant, Evergreen Station, and others) $600 K ü

New Golden Shuttle Fixed-Route Service in Fremont County (Cotopaxi and outlying areas) $1.33 M ü

Expanded Local Fixed-Route Service between Florence-Penrose- Cañon City $760 K ü

Cripple Creek Administration & Operations Facility $2.05 M ü

Westcliffe Vehicle Housing $460 K ü

Mobility Management and Expansion of UAACOG $100 K ü

New Inter-regional Transit Service between Cañon City-Florence-Colorado Springs $840 K ü ü

Kim Transit Garage $500 K ü

Expanded Regional Transit Service between Kim-Branson-Baca County $600 K ü

Expanded Regional Transit Service between Walsenburg-La Veta-Gardener-Cuchara $1.4 M ü

Expanded Regional Transit Service between Trinidad and SH 12 Communities $2 M ü

La Junta Multimodal Transit Center $4 M ü

La Junta to Fowler Fixed-Route Service $600 K ü

City of La Junta Bus Barn Rehabilitation $200 K ü

Expand Deviated Fixed Route Services in La Junta $400 K ü

Prowers Area Transit Bus Barn Expansion $150 K ü

Baca County Bus Facility $400 K ü

Kiowa County Bus Storage Facility $200 K ü

Expand Crowley County Transit Service in Crowley County and Sugar City $400 K ü

Expanded Regional Kiowa County Transit Service $400 K ü

New Regional Transit Service between Campo and Lamar; Expanded Baca County Demand Response Services $500 K ü

Need-Based Transit Sidewalks and Bus Stop Improvements (Bus stop improvements made in response to customer need and request.) $2.8 K ü

Academy Boulevard/Hancock Expressway Transfer Center (Multimodal improvements such as: new transit transfer center, roadway reconfigurations, installing a full-movement traffic signal that will aid transitoperations and traffic circulation, and curb, gutte , sidewalk, trail, and median improvements)

$3 M ü

Fixed-Route Service Increase - Stage 1 (Weekday headway improvements, full weekday evening and Saturday service, etc.) $7.8 M ü

Systematic Bus Stop Access Improvements (Systematic Bus Stop Access Improvements - Routes 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 16) $1.4 M ü

Bus Stop Amenity Program (Ddd benches, shelters and bike lockers at bus stops that don’t currently have them, enhancing the customers riding experience and other improvements) $1 M ü

Fixed Route Bus/Vehicle Replacement $7.24 M ü

Rural Paving – Region 2RRST US50A -MP 289.8-296.2 $9.14 M ü ü

RRST 115A - MP- 0-14.1 $8 M ü ü

RRST 285 - MP 220-228.8 $6.84 M ü ü

RRST 24A - MP 225.6-239 $7.14 M ü ü

RRST 24A - MP 239-258.6 $9.82 M ü ü

RRST 24A - MP 258.6-264.4 $3.29 ü ü

RRST 24A - MP 264.4-275.1 $5.13 M ü ü

RRST 67B - MP 11.5-15.7 $1.99 M ü ü

RRST 120A - MP 0-7.2 $2.89 M ü ü

RRST I-25C - MP 0-4 $2.83 M ü ü ü

RRST US 160 - MP302.7-305.4 $1.92 M ü ü

RRST SH 10 - MP 0-18 $7.84 M ü ü

RRST SH 12 - MP 0-5.7 $2.81 M ü ü

RRST SH 12 - MP 60.6-70.8 $6.26 M ü ü

RRST US 160 -MP 285.4-290.4 $3.54 M ü ü

RRST US 160 - MP 305.5-306.4 $638.9 K ü ü

RRST SH 389 - MP 0-12.8 $5.28 M ü ü

RRST 10A - MP 43-46.5 $1.56 M ü ü

RRST 101A - MP 0-21.4 $9.82 M ü ü

RRST 160C - MP 423.3-450.6 $11.72 M ü ü

RRST 350A - MP 46.7-63.3 $7.54 M ü ü

RRST 385 - MP 127.7-135.4 $4.96 M ü ü

RRST 385A - MP 95-122.9 $13.19 M ü ü

DRAFTDRAFT

116


22

NORTHWEST PROJECTSSTIP




Rural Paving


Highway – Region 3US 50 North of Montrose $15 M ü ü ü

US 50 East of Gunnison Safety $15 M ü ü ü

SH 92: Safety Improvements $25 M ü ü ü

GVTPR Shoulder Impv $13.6 M ü

I-70: Glenwood Canyon Critical Asset Repair $11 M ü ü

I-70 West: Dowd Canyon Interchange $14 M ü ü ü

I-70 West: Exit 203 Interchange Improvements $30 M ü ü

I-70 West Vail Pass Auxiliary Lanes, NHPP 0701-240 $50 M ü ü ü

I-70 Exit 105 $15 M ü ü

SH 24 Minturn to Leadville Safety Improvements $9.6 M ü ü ü

US 40 Fraser to Winter Park $20 M ü ü

US 40 West. of Kremling Shoulder Improvements $21 M ü ü

Hwy 34 and Hwy 40 Roundabout $5 M ü ü

US 40 Passing Lanes W. of Kremling $8.7 M ü ü ü

US 40 Passing Lanes Craig to Stmbt $8 M ü ü

Downhill Drive / US40 Intersection $6.5 M ü ü

I-70B First to 15th $18 M ü ü ü

I-70B 32Rd to I-70 $5 M ü ü ü

I-70B East of Main $14 M ü ü ü

US 6 Mesa County $13 M ü ü

SH 141B Mesa County $15 M ü ü

SH 340 Redlands $9 M ü ü

Mesa County Shoulder Improvements $1.5 M ü

Transit – Region 3New Regional Transit Service between Montrose and Telluride $1.2 M ü

New Regional Transit Service between Montrose and Delta $200 K ü

New Inter-regional Service between Montrose and Grand Junction $200 K ü

New Hinsdale County Demand Response Human Services Transportation $150 K ü

Vail Intermodal Site $15 M ü

Snowmass Transit Center ($11) $4 M ü

Bustang Outrider Program Frisco/GJ through NWTPR $400 K ü

Expand Steamboat Springs Transit Fleet - 4 hybrid buses $2.4 M ü

Steamboat Gondola Transportation Center redesign and build - Phase I $2.3 M ü

BRT Routes and Remote lots - Planning Study $250 K ü

Bus replacement $2 M ü

Transit System Enhancements (ie transit- related infrastructure, ITS) $1.24 M ü

Maintenance Facility (potential to partner with CDOT for Bustang Maintenance Facility) $1.5 M ü

CNG Storage/Production $540 K ü

Rural Paving – Region 3US 50 Delta South $5.16 M ü

US 50 Olathe South $4.06 M ü

US 50 Olathe Business Loop $1.12 M ü

SH 65 to Eckert $5.67 M ü

SH 65 Grand Mesa $6.63 M ü

SH 90B Montrose $3.63 M ü

SH 90B Montrose $775.7 K ü

SH 92 Austin $2.4 M ü

SH 135 South of Crested Butte $6.81 M ü

SH 348 Olathe $802.5 K ü

SH 348 West of Olathe $1.76 M ü

SH 9 South of Green Mtn Reservoir $7.64 M ü

SH 9 Green Mtn Reservoir Ph 1 $7.17 M ü

SH 9 Green Mtn Reservoir Ph 2 $5.74 M ü

US 40 East of Hayden Ph 1 $5.71 M ü

US 40 East of Hayden Ph 2 $4.86 M ü

US 40 Tabernash West $7.14 M ü

SH 64 East of Rangely $4.5 M ü

SH 125 Walden North $5.54 M ü

SH 139 Douglas Creek $6.78 M ü

SH 139 South of Rangely $7.09 M ü

SH 125 Cowdrey $6.42 M ü

SH 318 (Far) West of Maybell $6.74 M ü


DRAFTDRAFT

117


23

NORTHEAST PROJECTSSTIP




Rural Paving


Highway – Region 4I70: Arriba Rest Area $2 M ü

I70 Bridges near Limon $4.28 M ü ü

I70 Sibert to Stratton $28.72 M ü ü ü

I76: Morgan County Line to Neb $26.48 M ü

I76: Sterling East Part 2 Slabs and Diamond Grind $8.25 M ü ü ü

I76 - Atwood $270 K ü ü

US40/US287 $2 M ü

US40 Wild Horse $820 K ü

287 / 40/ 94 $1.68 M ü

US385: Burlington $170 K ü

US385: Idalia North $10 K ü

SH59 Bridges $1.29 M ü

SH59: Siebert to Cope $1.18 M ü

SH71: Limon Structures $620 K ü

SH86: I25 to I70 $2 M ü

Sandy Creek Bridge $5.42 M ü

Six Mile Creek $380 K ü

I76: Fort Morgan to Brush Ph 4 $45 M ü ü ü

US85 Frontage Rd $10 M ü

US287 Ted’s Place to WY $20 M ü

SH71- Stoneham $140 K ü

Big Beaver Creek $4.78 M ü

North I25 Segment 5 - Express Lanes $196.4 M ü ü ü

US36/28th St & SH93/Broadway $10.12 M ü

US85 Corridor Improvements $6.1 M ü

US287: US36 to SH66 $25 M ü

SH7 Boulder to Brighton $9 M ü

SH42 Safety & Intersections $14 M ü

SH66: Corridor Improvements $10 M ü

SH119 BRT / Managed Lanes $20 M ü

I25 Interchange at SH14 $30.5 M ü ü ü

US 85 and US 34 Interchange $33 M ü ü

Transit – Region 4Essential Bus service Limon to Denver -2 days a week $1.08 M ü ü

Essential Bus service Burlington to Denver - 3 days a week $2.42 M ü ü

North I25 Transit- Fort Collins to Cheyenne $1.55 M ü ü

Local Fixed Route Service - Fort Morgan $1.55 M ü

Trolley Barn - Estes Park $320 K ü

Trolley Electric Charging Station - Estes Park $10 K ü

Estes Park Transit Stops Installation $150 K ü

Public Restrooms at Manford P & R in Estes Park to attract transit riders $400 K ü

Design Visitors' Center / Transit Center Parking Lot $1.04 M ü

SH7 Boulder to Brighton $6.3 M ü

US36/28th St & SH93/Broadway $5 M ü

US287: US36 to SH66 $5 M ü

SH119 BRT / Managed Lanes $4.88 M ü

Front Range Mobility Hubs R4 $6 M ü

Bustang (off the top) $5.4 M ü ü

Loveland to Greeley Service $13.2 M ü

Rural Paving – Region 4US385: Cheyenne CL to Neb $35.28 M ü ü ü

US385: Sand Creek to Near CR 29 $14.69 M ü ü

US385: South of Cheyenne Wells $12.32 M ü ü

US385: Julesburg South $11.55 M ü ü

SH59 Safety Improvements & Assets $29.26 M ü ü

SH71 Limon to Nebraska $27.38 M ü ü

SH71- SH14 South $24.13 M ü ü

SH71- Brush North $3.48 M ü ü

DRAFTDRAFT

118

SOUTHWEST PROJECTSSTIP




Rural Paving


Highway – Region 5US 550: Shoulder Improvements, Deer Fencing and Animal Underpasses between Uncompahgre River and Colona (Billy Creek) $30.57 M ü

Multi-modal project. Sawpit/Placerville, Norwood, Rico. $5 M ü ü

US 24 Buena Vista Intersection Improvements $8 M ü ü

US 50 and SH 291 Intersection and Ped Improvements $2.5 M ü ü

US 50/285 improvements in Poncha Springs $2 M ü

US 160: Trinchera Safety Mitigation $15.95 M ü ü

US 160 Rio Grande River Bridge to SH 17 Improvements $8.8 M ü ü

US 160 / Pike Avenue, Alamosa County $3 M ü

US 285: Safety and Mobility Improvements between Center to Saguache (Widen Shoulders) $33.68 M ü

US 285 Town of Saguache Multi-modal Improvements $750 K ü ü

SH 112 Pedestrian Crossing in Center $750 K ü

US 160 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Infrastructure (La Plata, Archuletta, and Mineral counties) $3.56 M ü

US 160: Elmore's East $34.53 M ü ü

US 160/Main Street Pagosa Reconstruction and Multi-Modal Improvements $13.67 M ü ü

US160 and CR 30.1 Intersection at Phil's World $1.5 M ü ü

US160 Wildlife Mitigation $2.88 M ü

US 160/ CR225 Intersection Improvements $5 M ü ü

US160 /Piedra Road $300 K ü

R5 Shoulder Projects $18.72 M ü

Transit – Region 5New Regional Transit Service between Montrose and Telluride $2.12 M ü

Alamosa Transit Center $2.8 M ü

One-Stop Shop for Transportation for San Luis Valley (One-Call/One-Click - call center/website/app) $1 M ü

Northeast San Luis Valley Transit Service $560 K ü

Pagosa Springs Transportation Center $1.35 M ü

Pagosa Springs to Durango (Proposed Outrider Service) $2.69 M ü

Rural Paving – Region 5SH 141 Naturita North and SH 97 (DEVOLUTION) $10.38 M ü

US 24 Buena Vista to R3 $10.38 M ü

SH 15 La Jara West $6 M ü

SH 17 West of Antonito $10.38 M ü

SH 136 La Jara East $2 M ü

SH 371 Entire Length $2.38 M ü

SH 151 Ignacio to Arboles $10.38 M ü

SH 172 New Mexico to Ignacio $10.38 M ü


Closing statement and for more information...


DRAFT 119

Transportation Commission Workshop

Agenda March 18, 2020

David Krutsinger, Director

Division of Transit and Rail

2020 Consolidated Call for Capital Projects (CCCP)

Informational Items

o Bustang Quarterly, including Snowstang & DTC

o Outrider Quarterly

o Transit Grants Quarterly

o SB 228 Quarterly

o SB 267 Quarterly

o Southwest Chief & Front Range Passenger Rail Commission

Update

CDOT / Auditorium 2829 W. Howard Place

Denver, CO 80204

120

DATE: March 18, 2020

TO: Transportation Commission

FROM: Sophie Shulman, Chief, Office of Innovative Mobility

David Krutsinger, Director, Division of Transit & Rail

Qing Lin, Programmint Unit Manager, DTR

Ken Mooney, Capital Program Specialist, DTR

Audrey Dakan, Transit Program Specialist, DTR

SUBJECT: Recommendations from 2020 Consolidated Call for Capital Projects

Purpose Inform the TC of the projects recommended for funding under DTR’s 2020 Consolidated Call for Capital Projects (CCCP), including Senate Bill 267 and Settlement Programs. Action Information and feedback only. Background DTR conducted its annual Consolidated Call for Capital Projects (CCCP), with a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) sent statewide on September 30, 2019. DTR announced the availability of over $34 M in Federal, State, and private funds, and received 55 applications in response, requesting over $46.7 M from 41 different organizations. DTR is recommending awards totaling $32 M. The remaining $2 M in un-awarded funds from the Settlement Program will be made available in the next CCCP. Many smaller transit agencies needed more time to be able to pursue electric buses. The requests and awards are outlined below. Details Regarding the 55 applications, many applications included more than one “request,” e.g. one application requested the replacement of 7 vehicles. In DTR's 2020 CCCP, there were 35 applications for 85 vehicle replacements, totaling over $15.7 M. DTR is proposing to award 80 of them with $10.9 M. Vehicles were scored based on their age and mileage, with special consideration given to documented special conditions. DTR received applications for “other capital projects,” a category which includes expansion vehicles, facilities (acquisitions, design/engineering, and construction), planning studies, and equipment. These applications were reviewed and evaluated by a committee of six members from different CDOT offices, including DTR, DTD, policy and EEO. There were 20 requests for "other capital" projects, totaling over $21.4M. DTR is proposing to fund 14 of those projects, awarding $11.5M. The requests and awards are as follows:

Ten expansion vehicles were requested, while 7 were funded, totaling $1.9M;

Seven facilities (including acquisition, D/E, and construction) projects were requested, while six were funded with SB 267 funds, totaling $12M;

Six planning studies and equipment projects were requested, while four were funded, totaling $0.5M. Four applicants requested 11 electric buses from the Settlement Program; six buses were awarded to three applicants for $2.9M; the remaining $2.1 M available was not awarded and will roll forward to the next call for projects. One applicant received a failing score but was willing to accept diesel buses; those two diesel buses were awarded. The eligibility for use of Settlement funds is set by a spending plan known as the Beneficiary Mitigation Plan (BMP), which is the product of a partnership between CDOT, CDPHE, the Colorado Energy Office, and the Regional Air Quality Council. These applications were reviewed and evaluated by a team made up of experts from those partnering State agencies.

2829 W. Howard Place

Denver, CO 80204-2305

121

The three large urbanized area transit operators who receive FASTER set-aside funds will receive $2.9M for the replacement of 33 buses, while another $1M for RTD has been provided to DRCOG for awards to specialized operators in a separate call for projects. Key Benefits Concurrence with the recommendations of DTR staff will enable it to proceed with the award and contracting processes. Award of these funds will increase its contribution towards rural infrastructure projects and greatly enhance Colorado transit systems’ progress towards alternative fuel usage. Options and Recommendations (if applicable) DTR is recommending the selection of the attached projects and believes it has followed its internal policies and the evaluation criteria set forth in the Notice of Funding Availability. The TC can concur with all awards through the Mobility Committee discussion. Alternately, the TC could be provided a resolution to enumerate the specific SB 267 awards, as an addendum to the December 2019 decisions. Next Steps (if applicable) Once final award decisions are made, DTR staff will notify applicants of its decisions, including reasons for not awarding funds, and begin the contracting process for those who were awarded funding. Attachments The attached table lists all requests as well as awards.

122

Agency Name # Repl Vehs Rqstd

# Repl Vehs

Awarded

Other Capital Request Type: Project Title

AmountRequested

Amount Awarded

Comments

Planning: Transit Station Next Steps Study 320,000$ -$ Did not receive a passing score

7 4Settlement Program: Seven (7) Electric Buses 3,648,050$ 2,084,600$

Settlement funding: Awarded 4 of 7 buses requested

Requested Seven (7) equivalent "base" buses for its Settlement Buses 322,800$ 322,800$

Awarded 1 equivalent "base" bus for the Settlement award

Colorado Springs, City of (Mountain Metro Transit) 2 2 700,000$ 700,000$ FASTER set-aside for large urbanized area

Community Options (Montrose) 2 2 95,525$ 95,520$

Cripple Creek, City of 2 2 231,248$ 231,248$

Daybreak (Woodland Park) 1 1 78,714$ 69,512$ Removed retarder option of $9,200

Disability Services, Inc. (Colorado Springs) 4 4 230,606$ 230,592$

Discover Goodwill (Colorado Springs) 4 4 213,832$ 213,824$

DRCOGSwap of RTD's FASTER set-aside funds for local awards 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$

These funds were awarded through a CDOT/DRCOG joint call for projects for the Denver area

Durango, City of 1 1 65,844$ 65,844$

Eagle County 5 4 2,000,000$ 1,600,000$ One bus denied based on geographic equity

East Central COG 1 1 49,331$ 49,328$

Easter Seals (Loveland) 1 1 62,213$ 62,208$

Envision (Greeley) Construction: Van Loading Zone 20,040$ -$ WITHDRAWN by applicant

1 1Settlement Program: One (1) Electric Bus 652,200$ 652,200$ Settlement funding awarded

Request to use set-aside for One (1) equivalent "base" bus for its Settlement bus 200,000$ 200,000$

FASTER set-aside for large urbanized area to be used for equivalent "base" bus from Settlement Program

Greeley, City of 2 2 Expansion: Two (2) Buses 1,043,130$ 1,043,128$

Gunnison Valley Rural Transp Auth. (Gunnison) Expansion: One (1) Bus 604,800$ 604,800$

Huerfano/Las Animas Area COG (Trinidad) 1 1 66,800$ 66,800$

Inspiration Field (La Junta) 1 1 42,412$ 42,412$

Laradon Hall (Denver) 4 4 199,500$ 199,500$ This award was made as the result of an FTA "swap" of 5339(b) funds with RFTA

Mesa County RTPO 6 4 1,260,788$ 733,248$

Montrose Co Senior Citizens (All Points Transit) 1 1 61,625$ 61,600$

Mountain Express (Crested Butte) 2 1 320,000$ 160,000$

Equipment: 1. Gondola 35K Hr High-Speed Conveyor Rebuild 220,000$ 220,000$

Equipment: 2. Gondola 25K Hour Driveline Rebuild 100,000$ 100,000$

Equipment: 3. Gondola cabin bike rack purchase 64,000$ -$ Did not receive a passing score

Construction: 4. Gondola Public Restroom Repl, Exp 280,000$ -$ Did not receive a passing score

NECALG 8 8 374,472$ 374,448$

Neighbor to Neighbor Volunteers (Chaffee Co.) 1 1 35,454$ 35,448$

Equipment: Trip Discovery Software Project 32,000$ 32,000$

Expansion: ADA Van for 60+ Ride 40,258$ 40,256$

1 1 60,220$ 60,220$

Construction: Bus Barn Office Extension 105,502$ 105,500$ SB 267 funding awarded

DRAFT 2020 CCCP Recommended Funding 3/5/20

Mountain Village, Town of

North Front Range MPO

Fort Collins, City of

Prowers County

Boulder, City of

123

Agency Name # Repl Vehs Rqstd

# Repl Vehs

Awarded

Other Capital Request Type: Project Title

AmountRequested

Amount Awarded

Comments

2 0* 160,000$ -$ *This request was instead funded by FTA in 5339(b) "swap" with Laradon Hall

10 5 4,400,000$ 2,200,000$ Three buses denied based on geographic equity

Construction: GMF P4 Demolition, Earthwork, Retaining Walls 2,976,000$ 2,834,500$

SB 267 funding awarded: reduced based on available funding, geographic equity

Rocky Mt Health Care Svcs 3 3 256,380$ 256,380$

30 30 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$ FASTER set-aside for large urbanized area

Construction: Central Corridor Track and Switch Replacement 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$ SB 267 funding awarded

1 1 60,528$ 60,528$ Request was for ineligible non-ADA van, SMART accepted offer of ADA van

1 1 258,758$ 258,756$

Expansion: One (1) Montrose Vanpool Expansion Vehicle 41,600$ -$

Request was for ineligible non-ADA van, SMART declined offer of ADA van

3 3 Expansion: Three (3) Cutaways 270,696$ 270,696$

Acquisition: Purchase of Existing Real Property for SMART Admin & Maintenance Facility 2,160,000$ 2,160,000$

SB 267 funding awarded, conditioned on working out suitable scope

Silver Key Senior Svcs (Colorado Springs) 3 3 173,730$ 173,712$

2 0** 160,568$ -$ **Withdrawn. These buses were funded by FTA 5339(b)

Design/Engineering: Mall Transit Station Design 300,000$ 300,000$

SB 267 tentatively awarded, pending confirmation of MMOF award

Southeastern Developmental Svcs (Lamar) 3 3 174,695$ 174,680$

SRDA (Pueblo) 2 2 110,664$ 110,664$

2 0Settlement Program: Two (2) Electric Buses 1,133,100$ -$

Settlement funding requested, didn't receive a passing score

0 2Applicant willing to accept diesel buses if not awarded electric 705,936$ 705,936$ Awarded 2 diesel buses

Town of Avon 2 2 1,600,000$ 800,000$ Requested electric buses, but awarded diesel based on analysis of readiness

Town of Telluride 1 1 81,443$ 81,440$

Upper Arkansas Area COG 1 1 40,938$ 40,900$

7 7 522,960$ 522,944$ Request for 2 ineligible, non ADA-compliant vans switched to ADA vans

Expansion: Two (2) Buses 299,673$ -$ Did not receive a passing score

1 1Settlement Program: One (1) Electric Cutaway Bus 167,143$ 167,140$ Settlement funding awarded

Requested One (1) equivalent "base" bus for its Settlement Bus 78,442$ 78,442$

Awarded 1 equivalent "base" bus for the Settlement award

Equipment: Multi-Camera Security Systems in All Vehicles 556,920$ 151,132$

2 2 898,276$ 898,272$

Construction: Transit Operations Facility 8,000,000$ 2,600,000$

SB 267 awarded, at the amount remaining in NW TPR allocation

FASTER Local Match

Nine agencies requested FASTER funds to match 80% of their local match to FTA funds 425,673$ 45,904$

FASTER match awarded to SCCOG, Montrose Co Seniors, Prowers County, UAACOG. FASTER match denied to City of Greeley, NECALG, Silver Key, SRDA, Via Mobility

NOTE: The Settlement Program provides funding for up to 110% of the difference between the cost of an electric vehicle and a conventionally-fueled vehicle of like size, capacity, and class (the "incremental cost"). Applicants may also request funding for the conventionally-fueled "base" vehicle cost and/or request a conventionally-fueled vehicle in lieu of an electric vehicle if not awarded Settlement funds.

Snowmass Village, Town of

Winter Park, Town of

Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA)

San Miguel Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) (Telluride)

Via Mobility Services

RTD

Summit County

124



FROM: Sophie Shulman, Chief - Office of Innovative Mobility

David Krutsinger, Director - Division of Transit & Rail

Mike Timlin, Manager - Bus Operations

RE: Bustang Quarterly Update - FY2019-20 Q2 and Year to Date Report

Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to provide the Transportation Commission the FY 2019-20 second quarter Bustang update

on operational and performance measures.

Action

No action is required.

Background

The Bustang interregional express bus service went into operation in July, 2015. PD 1605 requires the Division of

Transit & Rail (DTR) to report operational and performance measures on a quarterly basis. This quarterly update

covers the second quarter of FY 2019/20, October 2019 through December 2019 as well as fiscal year-to-date. This

update also includes the Denver Tech Center (DTC) service.

Details

2829 W. Howard Pl

Denver, CO 80204

Q2 Oct - Dec

2018

Q2 Oct - Dec

2019

Q2:Variance

2018 vs 19 %

FY Jul 2018-

Dec 2018

FY Jul 2019-

Dec 2019

YTD Variance

2018/19 vs

2019/20 % Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-20

Bustang System

Revenue riders 57,973 64,361 6,388 11% 117,471 130,553 13,082 11% 21,689 20,121 22,551

Revenue 615,588$ 750,601$ 135,013$ 22% $1,272,642 $1,468,314 $195,672 15% $245,011 $246,798 $258,792

Cumulative Avg. Fare 10.04$ 11.66$ 1.62$ 16% $10.83 $11.25 $0.41 4% $11.30 $12.27 $11.48

Load Factor 63% 55% -8% -13% 58% 58% 0% 0% 52% 55% 58%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 63% 54% -9% -15% 60% 57% -3% -5% 59% 49% 53%

South Route

Revenue riders 19,383 17,153 (2,230) -12% 38,662 37,005 (1,657) -4% 6,033 5,530 5,590

Revenue 193,770$ 178,893$ (14,877)$ -8% $388,662 369,089$ ($19,573) -5% $63,736 $58,494 $56,663

Cumulative Avg. Fare 10.00$ 10.43$ 0.43$ 4% $10.05 $9.97 ($0.08) -1% $10.56 $10.58 $10.14

Load Factor 48% 46% -2% -5% 44% 47% 3% 7% 46% 45% 46%


North Route

Revenue riders 22,923 27,178 4,255 19% 48,852 54,686 5,834 12% 10,043 8,729 8,406

Revenue 191,962$ 239,532$ 47,570$ 25% $416,916 474,821$ $57,905 14% $88,624 $77,261 $73,647


Load Factor 59% 68% 9% 15% 42% 71% 29% 69% 71% 68% 65%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 73% 76% 3% 5% 72% 67% -5% -7% 81% 75% 73%

West Route

Revenue riders 15,667 18,232 2,565 16% 29,939 35,218 5,279 18% 4,946 5,279 8,007

Revenue 261,846$ 319,916$ 58,070$ 22% $498,832 600,171$ $101,339 20% $88,880 $106,828 $124,208


Load Factor 75% 78% 3% 4% 75% 78% 3% 4% 71% 76% 88%


DTC

Revenue riders 18 1,798 1,780 9889% 18 3,589 3,571 19839% 667 583 548

Revenue 162$ 14,589$ 14,427$ 8906% $162 30,248$ $30,086 18572% $6,100 $4,215 $4,274

Cumulative Avg. Fare 9.00$ 8.11$ (0.89)$ -10% $9.00 $8.43 $8.43 -6% $9.15 $7.23 $7.80

Load Factor 0% 15% 15% #DIV/0! 0% 15% 15% 0% 16% 15% 13%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 4% 19% 15% 375% 4% 19% 15% 375% 20% 19% 18%

Second Quarter 2019-20 Operating Comparison

N/A

125

Unlike this sme period last year when CDOT was forced to cancel two North Line and two West Line daily scheduled

runs due to CDL driver shortages, this winter season service launched with the full compliment of schedules causing

ridership to continue growing, while reaching a couple of ridership milestones.

Highest system monthly ridership to date– 22,551 unlinked riders (December 2019)

Highest West Line monthly ridership to date – 8,007 unlinked riders (December 2019) beating previous high

of 6,973 in March 2019 by 1,034 riders.

Highest North Line ridership and first line to surpass 10,000 riders in month 10,043 unlinked riders October

2019.

Colorado Springs – DTC Route reached 20% farebox recovery in October 2019 for the second month in a

row.

RamsRoute – The Fall semester ridership continued to be strong due to the additional stops at Wagon Road RTD

Station in Westminster and Arapahoe at Village Center Station in Greenwood Village not served on the normal Bustang

North Line.

SNOWSTANG – Snowstang launched on December 14, 2019 and operates to three resorts, Loveland Ski Area, Arapahoe

Basin, and Steamboat Ski Corp/Howelsen Hill. Loveland and A-Basin are day trips operating for 40 days between

December 14 and April 19 including MLK Jr. Day and Presidents Day. Steamboat is an overnight 2 day trip with an

additional trip on Sundays before MLK Jr. Birthday and Presidents Day holidays.

For the initial three weekends in December Farebox recovery exceeded the 40% recovery goal with A-Basin just off

the pace.

Bustang to Broncos – This season Bustang to Broncos operated 1 bus each between Fort Collins/Loveland and

Empower Field at Mile High as well as Colorado Springs/Monument and Empower Field at Mile High for two pre-

season and eight regular season games plus the last Rocky Mountain Showdown at Empower Field. Again fare box

recovery was nearly 100%.

Total Season

# of Revenue Trips 21

Revenue riders 817

Revenue $24,510

Avg. Fare $30

Load Factor 76%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 96%

Bustang to Broncos

Loveland A-Basin Steamboat Total Season

# of Revenue Trips 12 12 6 30

Revenue riders 298 217 95 610

Revenue 3,725$ 2,713$ 1,900$ 8,338$

Avg. Fare 12.50$ 12.50$ 20.00$ 13.67$

Load Factor 49% 35% 31% 40%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 44% 35% 24% 34%

Snowstang December 2019

Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19

Totals Fall

2019

Semester

# of Revenue Trips 1 9 8 8 7 33

Revenue riders 50 356 323 313 226 1,268

Revenue 450$ 3,204$ 2,907$ 2,817$ 2,034$ 11,412$

Cumulative Avg. Fare 9.00$ 9.00$ 9.00$ 9.00$ 9.00$ 9.00$

Load Factor 98% 78% 79% 77% 63% 73%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 192% 103% 97% 95% 88% 102%

* Note - not included in Bustang statistics.

RamsRoute

126

Quarterly Safety/Collisions – Ace Express Coaches had 10 incidents/collisions, with 5 rated as non-preventable for

a accident frequency rate of of 2.44 collisions per 100,000 miles. All were very minor causing little or no damage.

This is 1.44 collisions above the goal of 1 collision per 100,000 miles. However if the non-preventable collisions were

factored out the rate dropped over first quarter to 1.67. After review with Ace Express’ Safety Manager we

determined that this was primarily due to the number of new hires entering revenue service. I have asked the Ace

Safety team to come up with a new safety improvement campaign.

Date Bus# Location Comment Preventable (Y/N)

10/20 38007 Wewatta & Park Ave., Denver Construction fence made contact with bus N

11/14 38002 Colorado Springs Bijou bus yard. Bus backed into a post Y

11/15 38002 Arapahoe & 18th, Denver Semi hit bus mirror N

11/25 38006 I-25 & Lincoln, Lone Tree Stopped vehicle rolled backward into bus N

11/27 38009 Denver Bus Center Bus made contact with dock pillar Y

12/2 38009 I-25 & US 34, Loveland Semi hit bus mirror N

12/6 38001 Denver Bus Center Hit temp light pole Y

12/7 38011 Denver Bus Center Hit temp light pole Y

12/17 38021 Monument Park & Ride Bus hit snowbank leaving Park & Ride Y

12/30 38011 22nd & Curtis, Denver Car made contact with front bumper N

On Time Performance – Departures departing less that 10 minutes late are considered “On-Time”

Quarterly On-Time Performance –Departures:

System – 95.8%

West Line – 92.3%

North Line – 96.2%

South Line – 94.6%

DTC - 95.4%

The frequent winter weather issues experienced caused the lower on-time performance.

INIT Intelligent Transportation Project- The INIT system is a hardware and sofware package which enables real-time

passenger information (stop announcements, web-based bus location), on-board passenger counting by stop, and

vehicle diagnostics reporting. The User Acceptance Test for this system is complete. RTD is replacing the Cradlepoint

Routers with Sierra Routers. The INIT launch will begin when all RTD tasks are completed, and the launch will begin

with the North Line.

2020 Estes Park Service – We Are going to run Estes Park service this summer on weekends only plus Memorial Day

and Labor Day for 40 days between May 23, 2020 and September 27, 2020. The fare will remain at $10.00 round trip

with Children 11 and under free when traveling with a responsible adult. Sames stops as 2019 but will add a new

stop in Boulder. Boulder County and Town of Estes Park have committed $10,000 each toward operations and

maintenance of the service.

DTC New Stop May 17, 2020 – On May 17, 2020 the Bustang DTC service will add a new stop at the Sky Ridge RTD

Station located at Trainstation Circle and Sky Ridge Ave in Lone Tree. This stop will easy walking access to 6,700

employees at the Charles Schwab campus (4,000 employees) and Sky Ridge Medical Center (2,700 employees). To

the east the new Kiewit Regional headquarters will add another 1,200-1,800 to the area when completed.

127

Customer Comments

More service to Estes Park

Add a stop at the Jefferson County Government Center

Service to Denver International Airport

Add Snowstang Service to Keystone and Breckenridge

Is EcoPass good on Bustang?

Complaints on the web site

Social Media Update:

Next Steps

Continue planning for future Castle Rock and and Longmont Park and Rides.

Complete RTD/INIT Intelligent Transportation System Integration. Set schedule for corridor corridor launch

of INIT system.

Begin Service planning for FY2020-2021 needs

Launch Estes Park Service May 23

Add Sky Ridge stop on the DTC line May 17

Attachments

Bustang operational measure graphs.

Month/Year Jan-2019 Feb-2019 Mar-2019 Apr-2019 May-2019 Jun-2019 Jul-2019 Aug-2019 Sep-2019 Oct-2019 Nov-2019 Dec-2019

Website hits/day - avg 2532 2579 2650 2204 2160 2352 2594 2860 2833 2576 2812 3567

Twitter Followers - total 1283 1329 1442 1476 1491 1498 1516 1532 1546 1609 1673 1729

FB Post Reach - avg (organic only) 43 521 269 256 167 206 209 334 202 104 1660 233

FB Likes - total 3137 3176 3239 3272 3305 3322 3395 3541 3616 3643 3824 3899

Average FB rating (1-5 stars) 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.8

Twitter Impressions 133,000 103,000 233,000 134,000 903,000 909,000 954,000 941,000 884,000 873,000 997,000 1,030,000

*Post reach only accounts for organic reach and does not include paid ads **Twitter impressions = total times our tweets were viewed each month

2532 25792650

2204 21602352

2594

2860 2833

2576

2812

3567

12831329 1442

1476 1491 1498 1516 1532 1546 16091673 1729

43

521

269 256167 206 209

334202

104

1660

233

3137 3176 3239 3272 3305 3322 33953541 3616 3643

3824 3899

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Jan-2019 Feb-2019 Mar-2019 Apr-2019 May-2019 Jun-2019 Jul-2019 Aug-2019 Sep-2019 Oct-2019 Nov-2019 Dec-2019

Social Networking

Website Hits Twitter FB Reach FB Likes

128

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

2015-16 3,695 7,083 7,719 7,969 8,027 9,039 8,957 9,383 10,949 9,707 9,596 10,379

2016-17 10,509 12,940 12,234 12,248 12,324 13,125 13,800 13,154 15,013 12,984 13,693 13,840

2017-18 13,687 15,976 14,868 16,495 15,548 15,232 17,495 15,812 18,288 16,680 16,845 17,138

2018-19 18,779 21,170 19,549 20,601 18,813 18,559 21,184 20,596 20,548 19,731 19,416 19,189

2019-20 22,382 22,329 21,481 21,689 20,121 22,551

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000BUSTANG SYSTEM RIDERSHIP BY MONTH


2015-16 1,435 2,954 3,247 3,519 3,051 3,252 3,339 3,448 4,147 3,812 3,806 4,394

2016-17 4,037 4,891 4,763 4,801 4,726 4,490 4,597 4,603 5,336 4,830 5,207 5,025

2017-18 4,911 5,733 5,198 5,785 5,431 5,162 5,540 5,082 6,024 5,659 5,895 5,955

2018-19 6,047 6,918 6,332 7,034 6,521 5,828 6,289 6,109 6,059 6,541 6,396 6,221

2019-20 6,965 6,644 6,243 6,033 5,530 5,590

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000 SOUTH ROUTE RIDERSHIP COS - DEN

129


2015-16 1,587 2,992 3,457 3,506 3,609 3,497 3,321 3,752 4,476 4,193 4,184 4,385

2016-17 4,443 5,699 5,370 5,376 5,299 5,089 5,374 5,040 5,659 5,304 5,896 6,093

2017-18 5,821 7,287 6,949 8,019 7,404 6,345 7,650 6,871 8,027 8,281 8,277 8,133

2018-19 8,332 9,265 8,332 9,054 7,642 6,227 7,565 7,642 7,516 8,385 8,526 8,022

2019-20 9,030 9,158 9,320 10,043 8,729 8,406

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000NORTH ROUTE RIDERSHIP FTC - DEN


2015-16 673 1,137 1,015 944 1,367 2,290 2,297 2,183 2,326 1,702 1,606 1,600

2016-17 2,029 2,350 2,101 2,071 2,299 3,546 3,829 3,511 4,018 2,850 2,590 2,722

2017-18 2,955 2,956 2,721 2,691 2,713 3,725 4,305 3,859 4,237 2,740 2,673 3,050

2018-19 4,400 4,987 4,885 4,513 4,650 6,504 7,330 6,845 6,973 4,805 4,494 4,946

2019-20 5,835 5,864 5,287 4,946 5,279 8,007

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000 WEST ROUTE RIDERSHIP GJC/GWS/VAIL-DEN BY MONTH

Q1 Jul-Sep2015

Q2 Oct-Dec 2015

Q3 Jan-Mar 2016

Q4 Apr-Jun 2016

Q1 Jul-Sep2016

Q2 Oct-Dec2016

Q3 Jan-Mar 2017

Q4 Apr-Jun 2017

Q1 Jul -Sep 2017

Q2 Oct -Dec 2017

Q3 Jan-Mar 2018

Q4 Apr-Jun 2018

Q1 Jul-Sep2018

Q2 Oct -Dec 2018

Q3 Jan-Mar 2019

Q4 Apr-Jun 2019

Q1 Jul -Sep 2019

Q2 Oct -Dec 2019

System 22% 24% 26% 32% 37% 31% 40% 39% 42% 44% 45% 50% 54% 55% 52% 55% 58% 55%

South 19% 21% 22% 26% 30% 29% 32% 33% 42% 40% 36% 40% 44% 43% 41% 41% 47% 46%

North 33% 26% 29% 33% 40% 38% 40% 44% 45% 48% 49% 63% 70% 59% 52% 62% 71% 68%

West 48% 54% 74% 54% 60% 56% 49% 39% 45% 45% 45% 49% 52% 76% 73% 69% 62% 78%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

LOAD FACTOR BY ROUTE

130

Q1 Jul-Sep 2015

Q2 Oct-Dec 2015

Q3 Jan-Mar2016

Q4 Apr-Jun 2016

Q1 Jul-Sep 2016

Q2 Oct-Dec 2016

Q3 Jan-Mar2017

Q4 Apr-Jun 2017

Q1 Jul -Sep 2017

Q2 Oct -Dec 2017

Q3 Jan-Mar2018

Q4 Apr-Jun 2018

Q1 Jul-Sep 2018

Q2 Oct -Dec 2018

Q3 Jan-Mar2019

Q4 Apr-Jun 2019

Q1 Jul -Sep 2019

Q2 Oct -Dec 2019

System 28% 38% 42% 42% 54% 51% 54% 52% 53% 56% 53% 61% 60% 67% 60% 54% 57% 54%

South 21% 28% 32% 32% 44% 35% 43% 42% 40% 50% 41% 51% 56% 56% 48% 45% 42% 46%

North 32% 39% 39% 42% 54% 51% 54% 60% 58% 52% 61% 63% 72% 68% 66% 64% 67% 76%

West 41% 60% 70% 62% 72% 68% 67% 56% 66% 71% 63% 74% 58% 75% 72% 56% 58% 59%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO

JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

2018-19 18 221 189 203 322 365 443

2019-20 552 608 631 667 583 548

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

MO

NTH

LY R

IDER

S

DTC MONTHLY RIDERSHIP

131



FROM: Sophie Shulman, Chief - Office of Innovative Mobility


Mike Timlin, Bus Operations Manager - Division of Transit & Rail

Jeff Prillwitz, Bus Operations Coordinator - Division of Transit & Rail

RE: Bustang Outrider Quarterly and Fiscal Year End Update; Q2 FY2019-20

Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to provide the Infrastructure & Mobility Committee a quarterly Bustang Outrider update

on operational and performance measures, with data ending December 31, 2019.

Action

Informational only - no action is required.

Background

The Bustang Outrider rural regional bus service began operation in On January 2, 2018, with a Lamar- Pueblo route

operated by Senior Resource Development Agency of Pueblo, Inc. Outrider uses a different funding source, FTA

5311(f), rather than state FASTER funds, and is generally contracted as a pass-through grant agreement rather than

as a direct operational agreement with specific requirements. FTA rules allow local cash match to be replaced by

“in-kind” contributions from private intercity bus unsubsidized miles operated or Transportation Development

Credits (TDC) from FHWA “toll credits” flexed to FTA projects.

Outrider provides essential service transportation from rural to an urban community services center as well as a

connection to the national intercity bus network. Outrider is considered as, and is marketed as an “offspring” brand

to the parent Bustang system. For these reasons, a separate Outrider update accompanies the quarterly Bustang

update.

The Phase II routes in Operation are:

Lamar – Colorado Springs in revenue service Monday through Friday except major holidays and operated by

Senior Resource Development Agency of Pueblo, Inc. (SRDA)

Alamosa – Salida -Pueblo is in revenue service daily and is also operated by SRDA.

Gunnison – Salida- Denver is operating in revenue service daily and is operated by Alpine Express Shuttle.

Durango – Grand Junction has transitioned to Outrider from Roadrunner operating in revenue service daily

by Southern Colorado Community Action Agency (SoCoCAA, formerly SUCAP)

Denver – Salt Lake City – is a collaborative service between Utah DOT and CDOT, operated by Greyhound

Lines, Inc. While this service is a FTA section 5311(f) project and because of the multi-state nature of its

operation it is not currently being operated with Outrider branding.

2829 W. Howard Pl. 4th Floor

Denver, CO 80204

132


2018 37 33 62 68 69 54 52 61 53 75 85 126

2019 141 169 200 200 196 198 225 236 192 186 204 267

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Lamar - Pueblo-Colorado Springs


2018 1654 1467 1184 1196 1269 1390

2019 1204 949 1216 864 1241 1434 1647 1685 1332 1185 1239 1617

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Gunnison - Denver


2018 282 401 499 510

2019 569 452 400 429 308 528 530 550 596 491 433 631

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700Durango - Grand Junction

Details

RIDERSHIP

TICKET SALES PLATFORM – The Masabi ticket platform contract is under review by the Governor’s Office of

Information Technology. One feature of this platform is other transit properties will be able to piggy-back off this

procurement. The advantage to customers is the ability to pay for tickets in advance, by credit card, and have

information stored on mobile devices, similar to the airline industry.

PHASE III PLANNING- The final four proposed routes have been presented to the Transportation Commission in

December 2019 (discussion), and received approval in January 2020. The four Outrider routes that will be

implemented in 2021 are:

Sterling –Greeley via I-76 & US 34

Trinidad – Pueblo via I-25

Grand Junction – Telluride via US 550

Craig – Denver via US 40 & I-70 West

In additon the recent San Luis Valley Study indicated that there is considerable support to relocate the Alamosa –

Salida portion of the Alamosa – Pueblo route from CO 17 via Moffatt, to US 285 via Monte Vista, Center, and Saguche.

Discussions were held internally and with San Luis Valley TPR which resulted in the decision being made to retain

the current routing due to scheduling issues and the possibility of excessive D.O.T. hours. Stakeholders in the San

Luis Valley will explore local solutions to expanding transit in their area and serving CO 17 another way.

Next Steps

Determine operators for Phase III routes. Prepare Requests for Proposals (RFP) as needed.

Telluride to Grand Junction and Craig to Denver will necessitate the purchase of 4 Van Hool CX35 over the

road transit coaches. Trinidad to Pueblo and Greeley to Sterling will be serviced with smaller, cutaway

style, buses.

Order buses and procure other materials & equipment for the new routes (wraps, routers, fareboxes, etc).

Award Calendar Year 2021 Grants for Outrider.

Outreach to communities which will be serviced by the Phase III routes to confirm sign installation locations.

133


TO: Transit & Intermodal Committee



Qing Lin, Programming Unit Manager

Brodie Ayers, Project Coordination Unit Manager

SUBJECT: Transit Grants Quarterly Report

Purpose

The memo provides the Transit & Intermodal Committee (T&I) a quarterly update on the Transit Grants Program,

with data reflective of the quarter ending Dec 31, 2019.

Action

For information only. No action needed.

Background

Policy Directive 704 states that the T&I Committee shall review quarterly reports submitted by DTR which contain

the expenditures and status of all FASTER funded projects and the reconciliation of FASTER funding. FTA Circular

5010.1E requires that CDOT, as a recipient of FTA funds, provide Federal Financial Reports (FFR’s) and

Milestone/Progress Reports (MPR’s). This information is assembled by members of the Division of Transit & Rail

(DTR), the Business Office within the Division of Acounting and Finance (DAF), and the Office of Financial

Management & Budget (OFMB). This same information is being shared with TRAC as well.

Details

Table 1 provides a summary of all projects and the status of contracting and spending, by year of funding.

Table 1: Financial Trends from Budget to Expenditure

Funding Source

& Year

Annual

Budget

Total Available

Including

Roll-Over

%

Contracted

Last Qtr

9/30/2019

%

Spent

Last Qtr

9/30/2019

% Contracted

This Qtr

Ending

12/31/2019

% Spent

This Qtr

Ending

12/31/2019

FASTER SFY 2015-16 $15 M $20.7 M 100% 94% 100% 96%

FASTER SFY 2016-17 $15 M $17 M 100% 93% 100% 93%

FASTER SFY 2017-18 $15 M $17 M 84% 70% 84% 70%

FASTER SFY 2018-19 $15 M $18.5 M 100% 11% 100% 65%

FTA FFY 2015-16 $17.2 M $17.9 M 100% 98% 100% 100%

FTA FFY 2016-17 $18.1 M $18.9 M 100% 92% 100% 97%

FTA FFY 2017-18 $20.7 M $22.6 M 100% 73% 100% 82%

FTA FFY 2018-2019 $21.9 M $25.1 M 100% 44% 100% 70%

Notes:

Budgeted and Total Available Amounts here do not include local matching dollars.

SFY = State Fiscal Year July 1 – June 30, FFY = Federal Fiscal Year October 1 – September 30.

2829 W. Howard Place, 4th Floor

Denver, CO 80204

134

Project Assistance / Lessons Learned

PD 704 asks DTR to regularly identify projects that are experiencing significant changes to scope, schedule, or

budget. Once identified, DTR staff then can apply more project management controls, offer more technical

assistance, or it can serve as an advance notice to the TRAC and T&I Committee that some projects may be subject

to PD 703’s rules regarding budget changes. Table 2 presents the highlights for relevant projects and agencies.

Table 2: Projects Experiencing Significant Changes

Project Change being Experienced Description / Response

Mountain Metro – Bus Stop Shelter Replacements – 2014 FASTER - $225,000

Delay in the project due to lack of documentation from MMT, the project is complete, final documentation is all that is needed

Project was complete in August 2019, and MMT has not yet submitted final reimbursement or closeout paperwork.

City of Greeley – 2017 5310 Funds $104,206 One BOC Replacement

Delay in the project due to timeliness of the City of Greeley to order the replacement vehicle. Agreement has been extended twice to accommodate the City of Greeley, current contract expiration is 3/31/2020

Vehicle is delayed from the manufacture and is slated to be delivered in late February 2020. CDOT Staff is working with the City of Greeley and the vehicle Vendor to ensure timely delivery.

Trinidad Multimodal Station - FASTER Funds 2011 - FASTER Funds 2013 - $330,920

The project was withdrawn from the City of Trinidad in Oct. 2016. A scaled-down passenger shelter will be completed with Amtrak to close the mitigation obligations incurred by CDOT when I-25 was reconstructed. The cost is expected to be significantly less than the original version.

CDOT has begun negotiating a pay-out option to close this project and environmental obligation for CDOT. Amtrak would then replace the shelter on their own schedule in coordination with the host railroad, BNSF Railway.

Transit Grant Contracting & Invoicing Performance

Table 3 below summarizes the year-over-year progress, showing significant, sustained improvement. Figure 1

provides graphic representation of the timely contracts goal. The dashed line (empty markers) is the target trend

line. The solid line (solid markers) is 2019 progress from January 1 through December 31, 2019. The 2019 total was

294 contracts delivered vs. forecast 225 contracts forecast for the year.

Next Steps

The next quarterly report will be available in May for the January – March, 2020 period.

Attachments:

None

135

Table 3: Summary of Grant Contracting & Invoicing Performance

Goal Area Results

Timely Contracts

Normal Year: 175 to 200 Grant Agreements, Contracts, & Extensions 2015 Goal: 210 contracts & extensions by Thanksgiving. Met goal. Completed 228 total. 2016 Goal: 235 cont. & ext. 4 wks earlier than 2015. Achieved 2 wks earlier, 246 total. 2017 Goal: 185 contracts & extensions met, 224 total for calendar 2017. 2018 Goal: 198 contracts & extensions met, 290 for calendar year 2018. 2019 Goal: 225 contracts & extensions met, 294 for calendar year 2019. 2020 Goal: 290 contracts & extensions forecast during calendar 2020.

Timely Payments (Average Days ≤ 30 Days)

45 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2013 – Jun 30 2014 35 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2014 – Jun 30 2015 29 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2015 - Jun 30 2016 26 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2016 – Jun 30 2017 25 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2017 – Jun 30, 2018 32 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2018 – Jun 30, 2019 32 days to payment, average for SFY July 1 2019 – Dec 31, 2020, year-to-date.

No Statutory Violations

12 Statutory Violations occurred in 2014 (6 of 12 were inherited from fund transfer) 2 Statutory Violations in calendar 2015 2 Statutory Violations in calendar 2016 1 Statutory Violation in calendar 2017 (June 2017; 14 mo trend without a S.V.) 1 Statutory Violations in calendar 2018 (July 2018; 12 mo trend without a S.V.) 1 Statutory Violation in calendar 2019 (March 2019; 7 mo trend without a S.V.) 0 Statutory Violations in calendar 2020.

Figure 1: Timely Contracts Tracking, Goal vs. Actual for Calendar Year 2019

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

12/2

8/20

18

1/4/

201

9

1/11

/201

9

1/18

/201

9

1/25

/201

9

2/1/

201

9

2/8/

201

9

2/15

/201

9

2/22

/201

9

3/1/

201

9

3/8/

201

9

3/15

/201

9

3/22

/201

9

3/29

/201

9

4/5/

201

9

4/12

/201

9

4/19

/201

9

4/26

/201

9

5/3/

201

9

5/10

/201

9

5/17

/201

9

5/24

/201

9

5/31

/201

9

6/7/

201

9

6/14

/201

9

6/21

/201

9

6/28

/201

9

7/5/

201

9

7/12

/201

9

7/19

/201

9

7/26

/201

9

8/2/

201

9

8/9/

201

9

8/16

/201

9

8/23

/201

9

8/30

/201

9

9/6/

201

9

9/13

/201

9

9/20

/201

9

9/27

/201

9

10/4

/201

9

10/1

1/20

19

10/1

8/20

19

10/2

5/20

19

11/1

/201

9

11/8

/201

9

11/1

5/20

19

11/2

2/20

19

11/2

9/20

19

12/6

/201

9

12/1

3/20

19

12/2

0/20

19

12/2

7/20

19

Nu

mb

er

of

Sho

pp

ing

Car

ts I

nit

iate

d

Week of the Year (Dates are end-of-week Fridays)

2019 Transit Grants, Agreements, & Contracts

2019 Target 2019 Actual

Data Source: SAP Shopping Cart Monitor, Updated through 12/27/2019

8 Capital from 2018

Finish 29

FASTER/228 Capital

Aug

17

th

Jun

15

th

Finish55 A&O

Sep

28th

15 Planning70 Bustang/5311(f)& 15 Extend/Amend

Nov

2nd

Finish 34 FTA Capital

136





Sharon Terranova, Planning Manager, Division of Transit & Rail

SUBJECT: Senate Bill 228 Status Report

Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on SB 228 transit projects approved for Years 1, 2, and 3 through

the reporting period ending December 31, 2019.

Action

Informational only, no action required.

Background

Senate Bill 228 (SB 228) provided CDOT with $200 M in new revenue in FY 2016, $79 M in FY 2017, and $79 M in FY

2018. At least 10% (approximately $35.8 M = $20 M + $7.9 M + $7.9 M) must be dedicated to transit. The SB 228

program must be used for strategic projects with statewide or regional significance, that have been approved by the

Transportation Commission.

In August 2016, the Transportation Commission approved $20M in commitments toward a list consisting mainly of

Park-n-Ride investments around the state, and bus purchases for Bustang Outrider rural regional services. Two of

the projects were withdrawn and the funds will be re-programmed in future years.

In November 2017, the Commission approved $9.9M in projects which consisted of bus purchases, match for rail

improvements, and funds for local agency capital purchases ($7.9M Year 2 funds, +$2.0M re-programmed from Year

1 funds). In August 2018, the Commission approved $10.9M in projects which consisted of bus purchases, local agency

capital purchases, and Park-n-Ride investments.

In March 2019, the Transportation Commission committed the final $2.5M in funds to the Bustang Fleet replacement

fund.



Denver, CO 80204

137

Details

SB 228 Project Update

The following table provides a brief description of each project and its current status. A more detailed schedule is

included as an attachment.

SB 228 YEAR 1

Project Description Status

Program and

Construction

Management

($2.0 M)

Consultant assistance for project

development and program/construction

management for the SB 228 transit

projects.

Executed contract with AECOM, the

program/construction management

consultant retained by Bridge Enterprise for

technical assistance. Contract is active until

all projects are completed.

Winter Park

Express Platform

($1.5 M)

Project to construct the Winter Park

Express platform and related railroad

improvements. CDOT partnered with Winter

Park Resort, Amtrak and the UP.

COMPLETED Project completed in

partnership with Region 3. The official

opening service was on January 6th, 2017.

Bus Purchases

($2.5 M)

Purchase of branded over-the-road coaches

for Outrider.

COMPLETED Six coaches were delivered in

March 2018.

Centerra-Loveland

Mobility Hub

($5.0 M)

Part of a much larger project to build

managed lanes from Loveland to Ft. Collins.

Includes a center median Bustang station

and a new Park-n-Ride at Kendall Parkway

and I-25. The station is now known as the

Centerra-Loveland Mobility Hub.

Design of the transit station is nearly

complete. Construction of the transit

station and the corresponding roadway

segment (design-build contract) started in

July 2019 and is scheduled to be completed

in December 2021.

Woodmen Road

Park-n-Ride

Replacement

($3.0 M)

Relocation and construction of the primary

Bustang bus stop and Park-n-Ride in

Colorado Springs.

WITHDRAWN Negotiations with the property

owner of the identified site failed. CDOT

will explore other methods to increase

parking capacity of the existing site. The

funds were re-programmed for Year 3

projects.

San Miguel County

Park-n-Ride

($1.5 M)

Design and construction of a new Park-n-

Ride outside of Telluride that will serve

local and regional transit services.

COMPLETED Partnership with Region 5 and

local agency partners. Construction was

completed in December 2018.

Frisco Transit

Center – Phase 1

($2.5 M)

Rehabilitation and expansion of a transit

center in Frisco which serves local routes,

Bustang, Greyhound, and private car rental

businesses.

Partnership with Region 3 and local agency

partners. Project was awarded and

construction has begun.

Rifle Park-n-Ride

($2.0 M)

Relocation and expansion of a Park-n-Ride

to better serve local and regional transit,

and future Bustang service.

WITHDRAWN City officials encountered

obstacles in working with the property

owner of the preferred site and providing

funds for off-site improvements associated

with the Park-n-Ride. The funds were re-

programmed for Year 2 projects.

138

SB 228 YEAR 2


Bus Purchases

($2.4 M)

Four coaches to expand Bustang service to

Grand Junction and meet system demand in

other parts of the state.

COMPLETED Delivered in May 2018.

TIGER 9 Match

($1.0 M)

CDOT portion of local matching funds for

TIGER 9 Southwest Chief for route

restoration and repair.

The TIGER 9 application was successful. The

environmental clearance (CatEx) was

approved by FRA on March 4th. CDOT and

other partners on the project are working to

complete contracting agreements.

Local Agency

State of Good

Repair

($6.5 M)

Funds available for local transit agency

capital needs (bus replacements, transit

stops, etc.).

To date, $3.8 M has been awarded to local

capital projects. The remaining funds will

be drawn down over a five-year period, with

approximately $2.5 M more in awards later

in March.

SB 228 YEAR 3


Bus Purchases

($3.2 M)

Five coaches to expand Bustang service.

Two for the Bustang West line, one for the

Bustang North line, and two in support of

the South I-25 Gap Project.

COMPLETED Delivered in May 2019.

Local Agency

State of Good

Repair

($3.5 M)

Funds available for local transit agency

capital needs (bus replacements, transit

stops, etc.). Funds will be drawn down over

a two-year period.

Capital call for projects in future years will

release these funds, beginning with the call

in spring 2020. These funds are paired with

the $6.5M in Year two, with a five-year

overall draw-down.

Pueblo Park-n-

Ride - Design

($0.5 M)

A Park-n-Ride in North Pueblo to

accommodate intercity, regional, and local

transit services.

Region staff are working on right-of-way

plan for authorization. Design will be

completed in April 2020.

Tejon Park-n-Ride

($0.5 M)

Minor improvements to CDOT owned Park-n-

Ride to better accommodate intercity and

local transit services.

DTR and R2 staff currently discussing

schedule.

Bustang Fleet

Replacement Fund

($2.5 M)

Funds Bus Replacement budget for

approximately 2 years.

TC approved funding in May 2019.

Program and

Construction

Management

($0.7 M)

Consultant assistance for project

development and program/construction

management for the SB 228 transit

projects.

Executed contract with AECOM, the

program/construction management

consultant retained by the Bridge Enterprise

for technical assistance.

Next Steps

DTR will continue to advance the approved SB 228 projects and provide quarterly progress updates to the

Transportation Commission and the Transit & Rail Advisory Committee.

Attachments

Strategic Transit Projects (SB 228) – Transit Program Roadmap

139

Senate Bill 228: Year 1 Allocation ($15.0M Total, $6.2M Complete)

$2.0 M Program and Construction Management All$1.5 M Winter Park Express Platform 3$2.5 M Bus Purchases Var$5.0 M Centerra-Loveland Mobility Hub 4$0.0 M Woodmen Road Park-n-Ride Replacement 2$1.5 M San Miguel County Park-n-Ride 5

$2.5 M Frisco Transit Center - Phase 1 3

$0.0 M Rifle Park-n-Ride 3

Senate Bill 228: Year 2 Allocation ($9.9M Total, $4.0M Complete) *Includes $7.9M from Year 2 plus $2.0M from Year 1

$2.4 M Bustang Capital Needs Var$1.0 M TIGER 9 Match 2$6.5 M Local Agency State of Good Repair Var

Senate Bill 228: Year 3 Allocation ($10.9M Total, $3.1M Complete) *Includes $7.9M from Year 3 plus $3.0M from Year 1

$3.2 M Bus Purchases Var$3.5 M Local Agency State of Good Repair Var

$0.5 M Pueblo Park-n-Ride - Design 2

$0.5 M Tejon Park-n-Ride (Schedule TBD) 2$2.5 M Bustang Fleet Replacement Fund Var$0.7 M Program and Construction Management All

Planning

Design / Environmental Clearance / ROW Acquisition

Procurement

Construction / Delivery

Cash Contribution

Program Management Activities

Quarterly TC Meeting Report

Bar Charts: Unprogrammed

Bar Charts: Unbudgeted

Bar Charts: Unexpended

Allocation Project Description Region2020 2021 2022 2023



Jan-Mar Apr-Jun

Oct-Dec

Oct-DecJul-Sep Oct-Dec

Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-SepJul-Sep

COMPLETEDCOMPLETED

WITHDRAWN

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun

Jan-Mar Apr-JunOct-Dec

Legend

Oct-DecJan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-MarCOMPLETED

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec

Jul-Sep Oct-Dec

COMPLETEDIN PROGRESS

Apr-JunJan-Mar

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun

COMPLETEDWITHDRAWN

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep

Jul-Sep Oct-Dec

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep

Jul-SepApr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec

IN PROGRESS

Strategic Transit Projects (SB 228) - Transit Program Roadmap

Senate Bill 09-228 (SB-228) provided $35.8M for transit projects starting in Fiscal Year2015-16.

This program roadmap allows the Division of Transit and Rail to see remaining keydependencies between major milestones, communicate the linkage between the strategyand the planned prioritized work, and provide a high-level view of upcoming milestonesand decision points. Project locations are displayed on the Bustang and Outriderproposed system map to the right.

Programmed ($18.0M)$15.0 M $14.1 M

$6.2 M

$ M

$2 M

$4 M

$6 M

$8 M

$10 M

$12 M

$14 M

$16 M

Programmed Budgeted Expended

Year 1 (FY 2015-16)

$9.9 M

$7.2 M

$4.0 M

$2.7 M

$5.9 M

$ M

$2 M

$4 M

$6 M

$8 M

$10 M


Year 2 (FY 2016-17)

$10.9 M

$6.6 M

$3.1 M

$4.3 M

$7.8 M

$ M

$2 M

$4 M

$6 M

$8 M

$10 M

$12 M


Year 3 (FY 2017-18)

Budget Actuals Through 12/31/2019March 2020 140





Sharon Terranova, Planning Manager, Division of Transit & Rail

SUBJECT: Senate Bill 267 Status Report

Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on SB 267 transit projects approved for Years 1-4 through the

reporting period ending December 31, 2019.

Action

Informational only, no action required.

Background The state legislature provided new transportation funding through Senate Bill 17-267 (SB 267). SB 267 provides $192M

for strategic transit capital projects over four years beginning in FY 2019. SB 267 gives authority to the Colorado

Transportation Commission to designate and select projects, and requires that a minimum of 25% of SB 267 funds be

spent in rural counties with fewer than 50,000 residents.

The strategic transit project portfolio, including project type, location, match requirements, etc., and the project

selection criteria and ratings, were presented to the Transit and Rail Advisory Committee, the Statewide

Transportation Advisory Committee and the Transportation Commission in 2019. The Transit and Rail Advisory

Committee and Transportation Commission also provided guidance on the project portfolio comparison, favoring a

mix of CDOT and partner capital projects, while still providing enough funding through the Capital Call for local

agencies to make strategic investments to their transit infrastructure.

A list of proposed strategic transit projects covering Years 1 through 4 was presented to the Statewide Transportation

Advisory Committee, the Transit and Rail Advisory Committee and the Transportation Commission in October and

November 2019. This list included several previously approved projects, proposed CDOT and partner transit facility

projects (50% match required), and allocations for remaining funds to be distributed to local agencies through

upcoming Capital Calls (20% match required). On December 19, 2019 the Transportation Commission approved the

complete SB 267 Transit Program for Years 1-4, totaling $192M.

Senate Bill 267 provides four years of funding totaling $192M for strategic transit investments, however, the funding

is made available by the Legislature on a year-by-year basis. Through Q4 2019, Year 1 funds totaling $42M had been

received. CDOT anticipates receiving an additional $50M for Year 2 in late March / early April 2020, increasing

available funding to $92M. Funding for Years 3 and 4, an additional $50M each, is anticipated, although uncertain.

The Transportation Commission, voted to approve all four years of SB 267 projects for planning purposes, to ensure

that funding is distributed throughout the state, and to identify high priority projects for future SB 267 funding.

Details

CDOT’s Region and Division staff, as well as partner and local agency staff, will continue to advance the approved

SB 267 projects. Progress resulting from this collaborative effort will be reported to the Transit & Rail Advisory

Committee and the Transportation Commission throughout the duration of the program.



Denver, CO 80204

141

Next Steps

The Division of Transit and Rail will schedule internal coordination meetings with:

1. CDOT Regions and the Facilities Division to determine project schedules, and resource availability and needs

for the construction phases of SB 267 facility projects. (Early assumptions are that the Regions will manage

the construction phase of horizontal projects and Facilities will manage vertical construction.)

2. CDOT Region staff to coordinate planning and environmental processes

3. Division of Project Support to develop design standards

4. Project Management Office to transition external-facing SB 267 program and project reporting

Attachments

Strategic Transit Projects (SB 267) – Transit Program Roadmap

142

`

Senate Bill 267: Year 1 Allocation ($43.2M Total) *Includes $1M from 7th Pot funds

$2.50 M $0.5 M $2.0 M Denver Area Arterial Street Pre-BRT and BRT Elements (Year 1) 1$3.04 M $0.34 M $2.7 M Castle Rock and/or Ridgegate Transit Station(s) (Preconstruction) 1$0.95 M $0.11 M $0.8 M Denver Heavy Maintenance Facility (Preconstruction) 1$5.00 M $0.00 M $5.0 M Burnham Yard (Contribution) 1$2.00 M $0.40 M $1.6 M Idaho Springs Park-n-Ride (Preconstruction & Construction) 1$3.00 M $0.60 M $2.4 M Bijou Street Storage and Maintenance Facility (Construction) 2$0.81 M $0.09 M $0.7 M Woodmen Road Mobility Hub (Preconstruction) 2$0.50 M $0.05 M $0.5 M Monument Park-n-Ride (Preconstruction) 2$0.08 M $0.02 M $0.1 M Bustang Improvements at Tejon Park-n-Ride (Preconstruction & Construction) 2$3.50 M $0.70 M $2.8 M North Pueblo Mobility Hub (Construction) 2$0.08 M $0.02 M $0.1 M Outrider Improvements at Pueblo West (Preconstruction & Construction) 2

$0.12 M $0.01 M $0.1 M Cripple Creek Admin & Operations Facility (Design) 2$4.00 M $0.80 M $3.2 M Fairplay Mobility Hub (Preconstruction & Construction) 2

$0.36 M $0.04 M $0.3 M South Central Storage and Maintenance Facility (Preconstruction) 2

$0.08 M $0.02 M $0.1 M Outrider Improvements at Grand Junction (Preconstruction & Construction) 3$0.20 M $0.02 M $0.2 M Town of Winter Park Design of new Transit Maintenance Facility 3

$0.36 M $0.04 M $0.3 M Western Slope Storage and Maintenance Facility (Preconstruction) 3$0.20 M $0.02 M $0.2 M Crested Butte Storage Facility (Preconstruction) 3

$0.43 M $0.04 M $0.4 M Summit County Transit Operations Center Design and Engineering 3

$0.2 M

$0.2 M

$0.9 M$0.10 M

$0.12 M

$0.03 M

$0.04 M

$0.06 M

$0.05 M

$0.05 M

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec2020

RegionProject DescriptionAllocationIndirects/

Const. Mgmt2021 2022 2023

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-DecPrecon/

Construction

$1.00 M RFTA Aspen Maintenance Facility Improvement Stage 9 (Fuel Tank Replacement) 3

$0.25 MOutrider Improvements at Montrose, Delta and Gunnison (Preconstruction &Construction)

3

$0.25 MOutrider Improvements at Placerville, Ridgway and Telluride (Preconstruction &Construction)

3

$0.30 MOutrider Improvements at Fraser, Granby, Kremmling and Hot Sulphur Springs(Preconstruction & Construction)

3$0.2 M

$0.16 MOutrider Improvements at Canon City and Cotopaxi (Preconstruction &Construction)

2

$0.20 MPotential Bus Stop Improvements at Colorado City Corners, Walsenburg andAguilar (Preconstruction & Construction)

2$0.2 M

$0.60 MOutrider Improvements at Lamar, Fort Lyon, Las Animas, La Junta, Swink, RockyFord, Manazanola, and Fowler (Preconstruction & Construction)

2$0.5 M

$0.1 M


Senate Bill 17-267 (SB-267) provided up to $188 M for transit projects starting in Fiscal Year2018-19, with an additional $4M available due to bond sale proceeds. As of this report, the firsttwo fiscal years ($92 M) have been released.

This program roadmap allows the Division of Transit and Rail to see remaining keydependencies between major milestones, communicate the linkage between the strategy andthe planned prioritized work, and provide a high-level view of upcoming milestones anddecision points. Project locations are displayed on the Bustang and Outrider proposed systemmap to the right.


`

Senate Bill 267: Year 1 Allocation ($43.2M Total) *Includes $1M from 7th Pot funds

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec2020

RegionProject DescriptionAllocationIndirects/

Const. Mgmt2021 2022 2023

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-DecPrecon/

Construction


Senate Bill 17-267 (SB-267) provided up to $188 M for transit projects starting in Fiscal Year2018-19, with an additional $4M available due to bond sale proceeds. As of this report, the firsttwo fiscal years ($92 M) have been released.

This program roadmap allows the Division of Transit and Rail to see remaining keydependencies between major milestones, communicate the linkage between the strategy andthe planned prioritized work, and provide a high-level view of upcoming milestones anddecision points. Project locations are displayed on the Bustang and Outrider proposed systemmap to the right.

4

$0.08 M $0.02 M $0.1 M Bus stop Improvements at Lochbuie 4$7.00 M $1.20 M $5.8 M Centerra-Loveland Mobility Hub (Construction)* 4$0.70 M $0.07 M $0.6 M Berthoud Mobility Hub (Preconstruction) 4$0.41 M $0.05 M $0.4 M Northern Colorado Maintenance Facility (Preconstruction) 4$0.50 M $0.05 M $0.5 M Harmony Road Park-n-Ride Expansion (Preconstruction) 4$0.08 M $0.02 M $0.1 M Bus Stop Improvements at Sterling (Preconstruction & Construction) 4

Planning


Procurement


Cash Contribution






$3.1 M

$0.2 M

$0.3 M

$0.5 M

$0.2 M

$0.04 M

$0.05 M

$0.08 M

$0.05 M

$0.05 M$0.25 MOutrider Improvements at 3 locations between Alamosa and Buena Vista(Preconstruction & Construction)

5

$0.50 M Poncha Springs Crossroads Welcome Center Improvement Project (Construction) 5

$0.40 MOutrider Improvements at Durango, Mancos, Cortez, Dolores, and Rico(Preconstruction & Construction)

5

$0.24 MBus Stop Improvements at Brush, Fort Morgan and Hudson (Preconstruction &Construction)

4

$3.10 MLongmont/Firestone/Weld County Mobility Hub (interim configuration)(Preconstruction)

Legend

Programmed ($18.0M)

$43.2 M

$10.1 M

$33.1 M

$43.2 M

$ M

$5 M

$10 M

$15 M

$20 M

$25 M

$30 M

$35 M

$40 M

$45 M

$50 M

Allocated Budgeted Expended

Year 1 (FY 2018-19)


`

Senate Bill 267: Year 2 Allocation ($49.8M Total)

$4.19 M $0.84 M $3.35 M Denver Area Arterial Street Pre-BRT and BRT Elements (Year 2) 1$2.50 M $0.00 M $5.00 M Bustang Fleet Purchases (Year 2) 1$8.00 M $1.60 M $6.40 M Colorado Springs Transit Center (Preconstruction & Construction) 2$5.19 M $1.11 M $4.08 M Woodmen Road Mobility Hub (Construction) 2$0.05 M $0.00 M $0.05 M CRISI Grant Match (PACOG) (Contribution) 2$2.27 M $0.49 M $1.79 M South Central Storage and Maintenance Facility (Construction) 2$0.30 M $0.00 M $0.30 M CRISI Grant Match (SCCOG) (Contribution) 2

$2.34 M $0.50 M $1.84 M Western Slope Storage and Maintenance Facility (Construction) 3$1.30 M $0.28 M $1.02 M Crested Butte Storage Facility (Construction) 3$4.20 M $0.42 M $3.78 M Frisco Transit Center - Phase 2 (Construction) 3

$4.30 M $0.93 M $3.37 M Berthoud Mobility Hub (Construction) 4$4.00 M TBD TBD 2020 CCCP Non-Rural Projects Var$8.00 M TBD TBD 2020 CCCP Rural Projects Var

Senate Bill 267: Year 3 Allocation ($50.0M Total) Pending Approval

$19.31 M $3.86 M $15.45 M Denver Area Arterial Street Pre-BRT and BRT Elements (Construction) 1$6.06 M $1.30 M $4.76 M Denver Heavy Maintenance Facility (Construction) 1$2.50 M $0.00 M $5.00 M Bustang Fleet Purchases (Year 3) 1

$9.13 M TBD TBD Non-Rural Projects Var$12.50 M TBD TBD Rural Projects Var

Senate Bill 267: Year 4 Allocation ($50.0M Total) Pending Approval

$19.46 M $4.16 M $15.30 M Castle Rock and/or Ridgegate Transit Station(s) (Construction) 1

$2.50 M $0.00 M $2.50 M Bustang and Outrider Fleet Purchases (Year 4) 4$10.00 M $2.00 M $8.00 M SH 119 BRT Elements 4$2.60 M $0.56 M $2.04 M Northern Colorado Maintenance Facility (Construction) 4$2.44 M TBD TBD Non-Rural Projects Var$12.50 M TBD TBD Rural Projects Var

Oct-DecJul-Sep

$0.40 M

Precon/Construction

Precon/Construction

$0.40 M

$0.10 M

Indirects/Const. Mgmt

Project Description Region

2023

$0.10 M

AllocatedIndirects/

Const. MgmtProject Description Region

2020 2021 2022 2023

Precon/Construction

$0.40 M

Allocated Project Description RegionIndirects/

Const. Mgmt2020 2021 2022

$2.16 M

Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun

$0.50 MArterial Transit and Bike/Pedestrian Improvements on I-70 Business/US 6 Corridor(Year 4)

3$0.10 M

Allocated


3

$2.70 MLongmont/Firestone/Weld County Mobility Hub (interim configuration)(Construction)

4$0.54 M


3

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jan-Mar Apr-JunJul-Sep Oct-DecJul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun2020 2021 2022 2023

Jul-Sep Oct-DecApr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-SepJan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-DecJul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-DecJan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun


Senate Bill 17-267 (SB-267) provided up to $188 M for transit projects starting in Fiscal Year2018-19, with an additional $4M available due to bond sale proceeds. As of this report, thefirst two fiscal years ($92 M) have been released.

This program roadmap allows the Division of Transit and Rail to see remaining keydependencies between major milestones, communicate the linkage between the strategyand the planned prioritized work, and provide a high-level view of upcoming milestones anddecision points. Project locations are displayed on the Bustang and Outrider proposedsystem map to the right.


`


Senate Bill 17-267 (SB-267) provided up to $188 M for transit projects starting in Fiscal Year2018-19, with an additional $4M available due to bond sale proceeds. As of this report, thefirst two fiscal years ($92 M) have been released.

This program roadmap allows the Division of Transit and Rail to see remaining keydependencies between major milestones, communicate the linkage between the strategyand the planned prioritized work, and provide a high-level view of upcoming milestones anddecision points. Project locations are displayed on the Bustang and Outrider proposedsystem map to the right.

Planning


Procurement


Cash Contribution






Legend

Programmed ($18.0M)

$37.8 M

$12.0 M

$49.8 M $49.8 M

$ M

$10 M

$20 M

$30 M

$40 M

$50 M

$60 M


Year 2 (FY 2019-20)

$35.1 M

$14.9 M

$50.0 M $50.0 M

$ M

$10 M

$20 M

$30 M

$40 M

$50 M

$60 M


Year 4 (FY 2021-22)

$28.4 M

$21.6 M

$50.0 M $50.0 M

$ M

$10 M

$20 M

$30 M

$40 M

$50 M

$60 M


Year 3 (FY 2020-21)


DATE: March 18, 2020 TO: Transportation Commission FROM: Randy Grauberger, Project Director, SW Chief and Front Range Passenger Rail Commission RE: Update from the Southwest Chief and Front Range Passenger Rail Commission Purpose This memo provides an update on the activity related to the Study of Front Range Passenger Rail Action For Information Only Background The SW Chief & Front Range Passenger Rail Commission was created by SB 17-153 in 2017. There are 11 voting members of the Commission (MPOs, Class I Freight railroads, passenger rail advocates, local leaders) and three non-voting members (CDOT, Amtrak and Wyoming rep.). The Rail Commission has two purposes: 1) facilitate the development of passenger rail along the greater I-25 corridor, 2) ensure existing Amtrak Southwest Chief service remains in SE Colorado. Details Southwest Chief & Front Range Passenger Rail Commission Meetings The Rail Commission held its most recent monthly meeting in Berthoud on February 28. The March meeting will be on the 27th in Denver and the April 24 meeting will be held in Pueblo. Meetings of the Commission occur on the 4th Friday of each month. The Rail Commission and CDOT Transportation Commission met for a lunch on February 20th. There was excellent dialogue between the members of the two Commissions and all participants expressed interest in meeting together in this fashion about twice a year. Activity related to Ensuring the Amtrak Southwest Chief Service Remains in Colorado Work related to successful 2018 TIGER and CRISI grant applications continues. A Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant of $9,157,600 was awarded for the design, installation and testing of positive train control (PTC) wayside technology on 179 miles of track between Dodge City, KS and Las Animas, CO. Sub agreements with the funding agencies are being developed and pre-award authority for BNSF to begin designing the system is being provided. Also, a TIGER 9 Grant of $16,000,000 was awarded for track upgrades to the Southwest Chief’s route between Hutchinson, KS and Las Animas in addition to improvements to New Mexico’s route carrying New Mexico’s Rail Runner commuter service. The Commission was notified on February 27th that it had been awarded a 2019 CRISI grant for a Southwest Chief Thru-car Service to Colorado Springs Feasibility Study. This $450,000 Study will look at the feasibility of extending the existing Southwest Chief service from La Junta to Pueblo and from Pueblo to Colorado Springs. In

2829 W. Howard Place, 4th Floor

Denver, CO 80204

147

addition to the $225,000 award, matching funds of $225,000 for this study were provided by the Rail Commission, CDOT, Pueblo County, La Junta and ColoRail. Activity to Facilitate the Development of Passenger Rail Along the Greater I-25 Corridor The Rail Commission is in the process of reviewing a Draft bill to create a Front Range Passenger Rail District that is to sponsored by State Senate President Leroy Garcia. Comments are to be provided to Senator Garcia on March 9th. Round 2 of Segment Stakeholder Coalition meetings were held for the Service Development Plan and pre-NEPA work of the Front Range Consultant Team. These meetings occurred in:

- Loveland – January 21

- Denver –January 22

- Pueblo – January 24

A third round of these important stakeholder engagement meetings are anticipated to be held April 7 – 9. These will be followed by a Second Corridor Coalition meeting near the end of April. In addition, individual stakeholder interviews (approximately 30 along the Front Range) continue to take place gauging interest and issues related to Front Ranger Passenger Rail. The Project Vision for the Front Range Passenger rail project is:

Developing passenger rail service that serves Front Range communities from Pueblo to Fort Collins is a critical component of Colorado’s future. Front Range Passenger Rail (FRPR) will provide a safe, efficient, and reliable transportation option for travel between major population centers along the Front Range and create a backbone for connecting and expanding rail and transit options in the state.

The Commission’s federal partners in the project (FRA, FHWA, and FTA) have indicated that this Vision will provide a foundation for the eventual Purpose and Need as project proceeds into NEPA near the end of this calendar year. A third meeting of the Project team and the three federal partners has been scheduled for April 2. The Project team has been working with CDOT’s modeling staff to provide inputs into the travel demand model which will be projecting rail ridership for the various proposed alignments.

148

TC Mobility Systems Committee | DTR UpdateMarch 18, 2020

1

149

2020 Capital Call & Awards

150

2020 Consolidated Capital Call for Projects (CCCP)

• DTR released the notice of funding availability (NOFA) for the 2020 Consolidated Call for Capital Projects (CCCP) on 9/30/19

• $34M in Federal and State funds available• $46M in Federal and State funds requested• $32M in Federal and State funds awarded

151

Available Funding Sources

FEDERAL PROGRAMS

FTA Section 5310: Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities

Rural 5310 (all areas outside of urban areas) $253,000

Small Urban 5310 (Boulder, Grand Junction, Greeley, Longmont, Lafayette/Louisville/Erie, and Pueblo) $557,000

FTA Section 5311: Rural Public Transit (all areas outside of urban areas) $1,000,000

FTA Section 5339 Formula Program: Bus and Bus Facilities

Rural 5339 (all areas outside of urban areas) $3,649,000

Small Urban 5339 (Boulder, Grand Junction, Greeley, Longmont, Lafayette/Louisville/Erie, and Pueblo) $1,660,000

FEDERAL SUBTOTAL $7,119,000

STATE PROGRAMS

FASTER

Local Competitive $4,100,000

Urban Area Set-Asides (Denver, Colorado Springs, Ft. Collins) $3,900,000

Senate Bill 228 $2,000,000

Senate Bill 267 (Rural and Urban) $12,000,000

Settlement Program $5,000,000

STATE SUBTOTAL $27,000,000

FEDERAL AND STATE TOTAL $34,119,000

152

Base Program FTA & FASTER Awards

$ Amount in Millions

Description

$10.9 80 of 85 replacement vehicle requests were funded based on age & mileage criteria

$ 2.0 7 of 10 expansion vehicle requests were funded based on demonstrated need

$ 0.5 4 Equipment Projects were funded

------------

$13.4 Total

153

Proposed “Local” SB 267 Awards

Other Capital (Facilities, Planning Studies & Equipment)

Agency Name Project Type Project TitleTotal

Project Cost

Request Amt

SB267 Awarded Notes

Prowers County Construction Bus Barn Office Extension $131,878 $105,502 $105,500

RFTA Construction GMF P4: Demo, Earthwork Retaining Walls $3,720,000 $2,976,000 $2,834,500 *Amount includes CDOT

project management

RTD Construction Central Corridor Track & Switch Replacement $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000

SMART Acquisition SMART Administrative & Maintenance Facility $2,700,000 $2,160,000 $2,160,000 *Conditional award

Snowmass Village Design & Engineering Mall Transit Station design $650,000 $300,000 $300,000 *Tentative award; pending

MMOF award confirmationTown of Winter Park Construction Winter Park Transit Operations Facility $25,000,000 $8,000,000 $2,600,000 *Amount includes CDOT

project management

• 6 Construction/Pre-Construction projects are proposed to be funded with SB267 totaling $12,000,000

154

Proposed Settlement (EV) Awards

Settlement Program

Agency Name Request Amt Total Awarded

Boulder, City of $3,648,050 $2,084,600

Fort Collins, City of $652,200 $652,200

Summit County $1,133,100 $0

Via Mobility $167,143 $167,140

• 11 Electric Buses were requested through the Settlement Program

• 6 were funded totaling $2,903,940

155

2020 CCCP Next Steps

• Once award decisions are finalized, applicants will be notified, including those not awarded

• Award Letters will be issued and the contracting process will begin

156

Brief Program Highlights

157

Q2 Bustang Information


2015-16 3,695 7,083 7,719 7,969 8,027 9,039 8,957 9,383 10,949 9,707 9,596 10,379

2016-17 10,509 12,940 12,234 12,248 12,324 13,125 13,800 13,154 15,013 12,984 13,693 13,840

2017-18 13,687 15,976 14,868 16,495 15,548 15,232 17,495 15,812 18,288 16,680 16,845 17,138

2018-19 18,779 21,170 19,549 20,601 18,813 18,559 21,184 20,596 20,548 19,731 19,416 19,189

2019-20 22,382 22,329 21,481 21,689 20,121 22,551

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000BUSTANG SYSTEM RIDERSHIP BY MONTH

• Bustang served 102,503 riders the 1st year, 155,860 the 2nd year (+52%), 194,434 the 3rd year (+25%), and 238,229 for yr 4. (+23%)• Bustang served 130,553 riders July - December of 5th yr, up +11% over July - December of the previous year.• Bustang has served over 819,550 passengers since its opening in July 2015.• Highest Daily System Ridership & first time daily system ridership exceeded 1,000 passengers in a day - January 6, 2020 - 1,096

unlinked riders. (matched again on January 7)158

Snowstang

Loveland A-Basin Steamboat Total Season

# of Revenue Trips 12 12 6 30

Revenue riders 298 217 95 610

Revenue 3,725$ 2,713$ 1,900$ 8,338$

Avg. Fare 12.50$ 12.50$ 20.00$ 13.67$

Load Factor 49% 35% 31% 40%

Farebox Recovery Ratio 44% 35% 24% 34%

Snowstang December 2019

159

Bustang to Estes Park

Proposed 2020 Service• Sponsorships from DTC, Boulder, Estes Park,

and possibly others• Expanded Service:

• May 23 – September 27• Continue weekend day service only

• Expanded Stops: DTC, Boulder

160

2829 W. Howard Place, Suite 562, Denver, CO 80204 P 303-757-9772 F 303-757-9656 www.codot.gov

MEMORANDUM

DATE: Wednesday, March 18, 2020 TO: The Transportation Commission FROM: John Lorme, Director, Maintenance and Operations

Sophie Shulman, Director, Innovative Mobility SUBJECT: Advance Traffic Management System Upgrade Purpose

The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize and inform the Transportation Commission about the Operation Centers Advance Traffic Management System (ATMS), and to request a decision regarding options to move forward.

Action Requested

The staff seeks support from the TC to upgrade the ATMS through a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process. The RFP is in process and needs to move forward, with expected funding from FY 20 Roll Forward funds (remaining balances in programs after year-end, available for reallocation), FY 21 Innovative Mobility Program funds, and savings from the final close out of remaining RoadX projects.

Background

An Advanced Traffic Management system is the backbone system for the Operation Centers. It controls and integrates the public message functions (e.g. CoTrip, 511, Text/Email Notifications), and operates the roadside devices (e.g. Cameras, Variable Message Boards, Managed Lane and Corridor Management Devices).

The current system, Colorado Traffic Management System (CTMS), is over 17 years old. The functionality and business model are outdated. Comprehensive Situational Awareness, Computer Aided Dispatch, and Innovative Mobility integration are not included. When the Panasonic contract was awarded and considered the future, all investments into CTMS were stopped, so there is a significant current maintenance and enhancement backlog. The contract to support CTMS expires in September, 2021.

Market Research

A formal Request for Information (RFI) for ATMS systems was completed, which engaged private industry and provided the department with a foundational market understanding. There is a strong competitive market, able to provide current and future functionality/operational improvements, with an anticipated lower cost and shared development/enhancement business environment.

Options

Option 1 – Do Nothing

• Public Messaging and Operations Functionality will be lost when Systems fail in one to three years. The problem will be amplified, and emergency and significant resources would be needed to correct.

Option 2 – Sole Source to Current Vendor

• Continues outdated System with current functionality (operations and resiliency). Anticipated maintenance and enhancement costs at over $1.55M/year in FY21 and beyond.

Option 3 (Recommended) – Upgrade through Competitive RFP

• Increased Operational Efficiencies, Integrated Future/Emerging Technology, and shared development/enhancement costs.

• Funding Request of $3M, with expected funding from FY 20 Roll Forward funds (remaining balances in programs after year-end, available for reallocation), FY 21 Innovative Mobility Program funds, and savings from the final close out of remaining RoadX projects.

• Anticipated lower maintenance costs, so system will pay for itself over time.

Attachments

Real-time Operations ATMS Presentation

161

Real-time Operations –Advanced Traffic Management System

March, 2020162

PRESENTATION SUMMARY

Agenda:• What is it?• ITS Importance• Innovative Mobility Connection• Existing System Background• Market Research/Analysis• Alternatives• Recommendation/Discussion

163

Advanced Traffic Management System

• What is it?

• The Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) field is a primary subfield within the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) domain.

• The ATMS view is a top-down management perspective that integrates technology primarily to improve the flow of vehicle traffic and improve safety.

• Real-time traffic data from cameras, speed sensors, etc. flows into a Transportation Management Center (TMC) where it is integrated and processed (e.g. for incident detection), and may result in actions taken (e.g. traffic routing, DMS messages) with the goal of improving traffic flow.

164

• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) - ITS as a system, is the information and communication technologies that are applied in the transportation infrastructure and highway system.• A new ATMS will enable future automation, edge computing and

machine learning.• In return, we will respond to situation in an efficient and

expeditious manner, minimizing the reliance on humans to make every tactical decision and action.• EX: Fog detected, automatically posting onto Variable

Message Boards - “Fog may exist ahead”


165

• Innovative Mobility Connection• ATMS is the backbone system for Communicating with the Public with

technologies such as:• Connected vehicle technologies – a modern ATMS system offers

greater flexibility to integrate connected vehicle technologies and connected infrastructure. Use cases may include: spot weather, queue, smart work zone and many others

• Greater ability to operationalize our current and future mobility data • Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence• ATMS will be the operational user interface


166

• Background: • 17+ year old system. • Backbone System of the Centers

• CoTrip, VMS, Public Messaging, • Cameras, Managed Lanes, • and Corridor Management Devices.

• Primary Concerns:• Functionality is out dated:

• No Comprehensive Situational Awareness• No Computer Aided Dispatch (Center to Field, Center to Center)• No Connected vehicle/infrastructure technology capability

• The Contract to support the System expires September, 2021.• Cost to maintain the current system is $$$ and these systems do not

allow flexibility for integration of newer devices/software architecture.


167

• Market Research: Formal RFI Completed• Operational Efficiencies Future/Emerging Functionality• Lower and Shared Costs• High Cost/Benefit Ratio: Between 10:1 to 26:1

• Analysis:• Option 1 – Do Nothing

• Functionality Lost in Couple Years; Problem Amplifies• Option 2 – Sole Source Current Vendor.

• Outdated and Cumbersome• $1.55M Additional FY21 and Beyond

• Option 3 – Upgrade through Competitive RFP• $3M Cost for Implementation and Enhancements


168

• Recommendation:• Option 3 – Hire New Company through Competitive RFP

• $3M for Implementation and Enhancements• Anticipated Lower Maintenance Costs, so System will Pay

for itself over time.

• Funding Proposal:• Innovative Mobility $1.5M FY21• Maintenance Roll Forward –

• #1 request - $1.5M


169

Transportation Commission of Colorado Small Business & Diversity Committee Agenda

Thursday, March 19, 2019 2829 W Howard Place; Auditorium

Denver, Colorado 80204

KATHY HALL Chairwoman

EULA ADAMS GARY BEEDY

BARBARA VASQUEZ Committee Members

STEVE HARELSON

Chief Engineer

GREG DIEHL, KRISTI GRAHAM-GITKIND Directors, CRBRC & HR

The Chairwoman may change the item sequence or timing

1. Call to order 2. Approve minutes from December meeting 3. Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) Update

a. Transportation Workforce At-A-Glance b. CDOT EDI Priorities c. Key EDI Initiatives for 2020

4. Proposal for Changes to Emerging Small Business (ESB) Program a. Workshop desired summer 2020

5. Adjourn

170

Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion (EDI) Update CDOT’s Human Resources (HR) Division and Civil RIghts & Business Resource Center (CRBRC) have collaborated to provide a more comprehensive Departmental approach to EDI that considers both internal employee demographics as well as contractor and labor workforce demographics. Both CDOT’s internal and external diversity teams are faced with a workforce shortage that requires the development of a Departmental culture that fosters EDI to ensure strong recruiting and retention practices across the transportation landscape CDOT Internal Diversity Snapshot (Human Resources)

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 2305

171

CDOT External Labor Workforce Diversity Snapshot (Civil Rights)

172

CDOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Diversity Snapshot (Civil Rights)

CDOT EDI Priorities

173

1. Identify opportunities to align CDOT internal workplace operations and culture with EDI priorities 2. Establish consistent mechanisms for measuring and monitoring external (contractor) EDI 3. Continue to engage key stakeholders (both internal and external) on ways to better foster EDI

Key EDI Initiatives for 2020

● See Attachment: CDOT 2020 EDI Initiatives 4. Proposal for Changes to Emerging Small Business (ESB) Program CRBRC is requesting a full Commission Workshop during summer 2020 to discuss the ESB program and proposed changes to the Program Rules. Policy Directive 606.0, Fostering Small Business Capacity (adopted unanimously in March 2018), codifies the Department’s commitment to supporting small businesses in Colorado and allocating appropriate resources to do so; CDOT’s Emerging Small Business Program is the mechanism by which the Department delivers PD 606.0, and it is under the purview of the Commission per the Colorado Revised Statutes. According to Federal Regulation, there are two types of DBE participation: Race Conscious and Race Neutral. Race Conscious refers to DBE participation achieved via subcontracting goals, and Race Neutral refers to DBE participation outside of (or above and beyond) the DBE subcontracting goal, and is the preferred method of achieving DBE participation. Race neutral participation is often achieved through programmatic efforts that remove barriers and increase opportunities for DBEs to compete for contracts on their own merit without needing to leverage the contract goal. The largest gap in our race neutral participation efforts is DBE primes; in the last 3 federal fiscal years, we have awarded only 2 DBE prime contracts for a total of just over $2M. Because contract goals are always subcontracting opportunities, race conscious participation efforts will never lead directly to a DBE being awarded a prime contract. Therefore, the focus of the ESB program must be on developing prime capacity not just for ESBs, but with the ideal audience being dual-certified firms so as to simultaneously bolster race neutral DBE participation. Further, competition for CDOT construction projects has declined, resulting in a need to foster prime contractors more holistically to keep the cost of construction reasonable to taxpayers. CRBRC has contracted with Subject Matter Experts to review CDOT rules and processes for opportunities to improve the ESB program and better position it to help increase competitive capacity in Colorado by fostering the development of new prime contractors. The recommendations from these SMEs will be presented in a Workshop to the full Transportation Commission during summer 2020.

174

December 2020 Meeting Minutes: Small Business Diversity Committee (Greg Diehl) – Commissioner Hall is Chair

• Civil Rights Program Overview, Achievements and Opportunities o Oversees Contract Compliance with:

Prompt Payment Certified Payroll Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) On-the-Job Training (OJT)

o Supportive Services to: Resources to Improve & Support Employment (RISE) Connect2DOT

• Commissioner Adams – Civil Rights is an antiquated term – think Equity is a more current term – the right thing to do – vs. a compliant thing to do.

• Greg – agreed – need to consider if DBE was not required for Federal funds, how integrate the right thing in CDOT’s daily business for small businesses and workforce development.

• Commissioner Adams – likelihood contractor meets minimal requirement. Has concerns – How much of this project stays in our community and are diverse (defined in a lot of ways), Kiewitt taking back to Nebraska.

• Central 70 Workforce Development Program o Molly Bly – Goals: o Achievements include: 13 zip codes of project area with 720,000 hours.

Local Hire Pilot Program to: recruit, train, and place of 20% of C70 workforce from neighboring zip codes. Progress to date includes: 16.1% (craft) of workforce placed, and 428 local individuals. 38 % towards hours goal.

What mix of jobs are local – across the board – 760,000 all levels - not just entry level – but all levels.

On the Job Training – (OJT) – equity lens – goal 200,000 hours – large goal – last year at 40%. At 38% of total goal also. $28.50 for each goal hour net met as disincentive.

Work Now – Launched Feb. 2017, and 167 contractors employees have used Work Now. CDOT FHWA ladder of opportunity grant - $400,000 in funds to support WORKNOW.

Add other Central 70 Slide information here. Other achievements for I-70 Workforce development program were outlined

and an opportunity for RISE (Statewide Workforce Development Program) and increasing Disadvantages Business Enterprise (DBE) participation was outlined.

Can bring back data on what has been a success and what has not is part of work plan.

o Nondiscrimination (Title VI/CDOT PD 604.0) oversight $85 million Curb Ramps Program First-of-its-Kind Data Collection System

175

Successful cross-collaboration between disciplines and Regions o ADA compliance Program – 2.5 years into that program – curb ramp compliance another

future workshop. o Policy Directive 606.0: Fostering Small Business Capacity was also covered. State

program is emerging small business program o Adams – capital is a big issue – revolving fund – working capital – does the state of

Colorado have anything like this. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment????

o Partnering – there subcontracting – US DOT and SBA primarily. o Scott – successes? – Overall goal – 10 and 13% - hit 90% in last ten years. Get us metrics

and share data with TC. What % of people who need this help are getting it. o Vasquez – demographics of the state against SBE goals. o Commissioner Adams – not just interested in contracts – but what does CDOT look like

externally. – with regards with everything we do. What does CDOT’s employment look like in terms of diversity for program. EEO program (old term again) – HR.

o Partnerships bring in HR too per Molly. o ED Lew – evaluating CDOT – is a valuable exercise to conduct.

• See the TC packet for more details. Commissioner Vasquez – any core data for salary range? Can get later. Average is $19.70 entry level. See data before we meet again.

• Commissioner Hall – we will have more meetings this is important.

176

Goal Foster a culture of supportive employee experiences,

aka Inclusive Excellence, at CDOT

Internal EDI: Human Resources

Goal

Align with Colorado

Department of Personnel

& Administration (DPA)

initiatives on EDI

Proposed Executive Order on EDI

Anticipated signature end of March

Become an early adopter of DPA’s EDI practices and principles

In process

2020 Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Initiatives

177

Goal

Educate all contractors

on Davis-Bacon and

Related Acts as it

pertains to prevailing

wages, fringe benefits,

and certified payroll

Host a Colorado Construction Workforce conference in collaboration with LCPTracker (the system of record for

certified payroll), other public entities, and in partnershipwith local EDI organizations in the construction space

(e.g., Hispanic Contractors of Colorado, Black Construction Group, and the Council for Minority Transportation Officia

Currently securing venue; conference to be held in November

Goal Develop a contractor workforce pipeline that prepares workers to become

trainees and apprentices on CDOT construction contracts

Host a 3-week introductory construction training program in collaboration with the Ute Mountain Ute tribal nationMarch and April

Establish CDOT’s Resources to Improve and Support Employment (RISE) program in the 4 Corners area to support workforce EDI on the upcoming US 550/160 Design Build projectIn process

Establish CDOT’s RISE program in Pueblo to support workforce EDI on upcoming US 50 and I-25 construction projectsIn Process

External EDI: Civil Rights & Business Resource Center

Goal Develop a contractor workforce pipeline that prepares workers to become

trainees and apprentices on CDOT construction contracts

Identify and map critical compliance processes to

ensure all roles and responsibilities are clearly documented

In Process

Create resources to help ensure all stakeholders understand their roles

and responsibilities within compliance processes

In Process

Collaborate with industry to vet the resources and

obtain feedbackJune - September

178

The Transportation Commission (TC) Workshops were Wednesday, February 19, 2020 and the regular meeting was Thursday, February 20, 2020 at the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Headquarters at 2829 W. Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204.

Documents are posted at https://www.codot.gov/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html no less than 24 hours prior to the meeting. The documents are considered to be in draft form and for information only until final action is taken by the Transportation Commission.

Transportation Commission Workshops Wednesday, February 19, 2020 12:00 pm – 5:45 pm Attendance: All Commissioners: Bill Thiebaut, Irv Halter, Barbara Vasquez, Kathleen Bracke, Karen Stuart, Donald Stanton, Gary Beedy, Eula Adams, Sidny Zink, Shannon Gifford, and Kathy Hall were present.

Transportation Commission Working Lunch Colorado Association of Transit Agencies (CASTA) Presentation- Transit Around the State: Working Lunch for Commissioners (Ann Rajewski, Executive Director, Colorado Association of State Transit Agencies) Ann Rajewski provided an overview of Transit in Colorado based on information from her organization, the Colorado Association of Transit Agencies (CASTA).

An overview of CASTA with Transit funding sources was presented.

The Roaring Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) is one of the larger providers of transit in Colorado, but is considered a rural entity. As a result, Colorado has a comparatively large rural transit agency representation due to the mountain resort areas that provide transit service.

An overview of La Junta Transit was presented (they are going to only offer curb to curb service – no longer any fixed route service).

Some considerations for electric bus Service in Colorado were outlined that included: o The cost of EV buses are a potential obstacle to transition with large buses costing

approximately $1 million (with 12-15 year life) and small buses costing double the cost of diesel vehicles with only a five year life.

o Other considerations are the cost of electricity in terms of electricity production, EVs operation in inclement weather and length of operation, and if energy is from a renewable source.

o It is anticipated that some agencies may need to replace one bus with two. o Generally speaking, it takes 12-17 years to turn over a transit fleet, and there is not much

reliable data on vehicle longevity. o Agencies don’t have the technical knowledge in-house to do an electric bus procurement,

especially, the small agencies. For many rural agencies, going electric does not seem practical yet...due to issues described above.

David Averill, Executive Director of SMART, provided an overview of the San Miguel Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) based in Telluride, Colorado. He expressed his concerns with EV buses regarding their cost, and other characteristics associated with being feasible for operation for smaller rural transit agencies anytime in the near future.

Discussion

o Commissioner Hall noted that transit is particularly important to elderly populations in rural areas of the state

o Commissioner Adams commented to consider seriously the Uber/Lyft type/TNC service as an option for transit providers.

o Commissioner Bracke supported tailored solutions for various rider types is key. But a concern is increased VMT in urban areas of the state. Free Transit is a national trend being discussed.

o Commissioner Beedy commented that federal funding restrictions (all ADA compatible vehicles) for a given transit fleet is a challenge for smaller rural transit agencies. Ann Rajewski explained 179

https://www.codot.gov/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html

that the possibility to dispatch the correct vehicle to on-demand/call for ride services can be an alternative to needing to purchase all American with Disabilities Act (ADA) vehicles. Transit agencies just need to demonstrate they are not discriminating against riders.

o Commissioner Vasquez suggested considering energy savings when EV buses are not in use to lessen demand on utility companies.

FHWA Presentation on Technology and the Future of Mobility (Automated Vehicle Technology) (Carl Andersen, Technical Director of the Office of Operations Research and Development, FHWA) John Cater of FHWA kicked-off the presentation and welcomed Carl Anderson to the meeting. A detailed overview of Infrastructure Investment Implications of Automated Vehicle (AV) Technology was presented to the TC members over their lunch hour. Key takeaways related to transition to Automated Vehicle Technology outlined included:

The Transition to AVs will be long (20-30 years out) o Infrastructure improvements could include high-quality road surfaces, clear lane markings, and

connectivity.

Concepts such as ownership that is individual or public, types (passenger or freight), single occupancy vehicles (SOVs) or shared occupancy, light or heavy-duty vehicles will influence AV adaptation rates and traffic patterns.

A description of the cooperative research occurring with various entities in the private and public sectors.

o There are currently 97 connected vehicle (CV) locations in the United States (including 57 operational projects 40 planned projects), all of which rely on the 5.9 GHz Safety Band.

o CARMA is an FHWA initiative, achieves the benefits of cooperative driving automation (CDA) through collaboration using open-source tools.

Other research occurring was overviewed and an FHWA Automation Readiness Strategy was described. Discussion:

Commissioner Vasquez asked about additional information on infrastructure development and research. More specifically the cost differential for Supreme Concrete. Steve Harelson, CDOT Chief Engineer, responded that Supreme Concrete has a cost factor of 20 times above traditional concrete.

Concerns arose from Commissioners about the security of data in the event of a cyber incident for AVs.

Commissioner Thiebaut thanked Carl Andersen for the presentation.

Funding, Finance & Budget Workshop FY 20 Budget Workshop/Supplements/Amendments (Jeff Sudmeier) Purpose: To review the seventh amendment to the FY 2019-20 Annual Budget in accordance with Policy Directive (PD) 703.0. Action: The Division of Accounting and Finance (DAF) is requesting TC review and approval of the seventh amendment to the FY 2019-20 Annual Budget. The seventh amendment includes two items resulting in the increase of Bustang’s budget by $1.2 million and a reallocation of $4.6 million funds to the Snow and Ice Control. Discussion:

No substantial comments were raised by the TC members.

FY 21 Budget Workshop (Bethany Nicholas) Purpose: To review the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget, set for adoption in March 2020.

180

Action: The Division of Accounting and Finance (DAF) requested that the TC review the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget Allocation Plan, and provide feedback to the Department in preparation for the March 2020 meeting when the FY 2020-21 Final Annual Budget will be presented to the TC for adoption. Discussion:

A couple of Commissioners raised the topic of hiring more full-time employees, vs. retaining consultants for tasks. Commissioner Adams requested information regarding the status of consultants currently on-board and how many are working 2,000 hour annually. CDOT staff explained that cases of consultants working full-time are not very common.

CDOT Staff also explained that no FTE limit is established by state law, but PD 703.0 is where TC establishes policy for number of FTE.

CDOT Executive Director, Shoshana Lew, commented that the reality is that at times there were policies in place to restrict FTE count growth. We are looking into some of these policies now. We will be coming to you with further updates on this subject in the next few months. In order to conduct more work in-source it would require the FTE number to increase and to change policy. This approach can cut costs if done properly. It is a cost benefit analysis that CDOT should conduct.

Jeff Sudmeier, CDOT Chief Financial Officer, explained that 3,300 FTE positions is essentially what we have, but normally only about 2,900 people are working at one point in time due to turnover.

Maintenance Level of Service (MLOS) was discussed in detail. CDOT Executive Director Shoshana Lew noted that in terms of context for MLOS, it captures

maintenance and maintenance equipment during weather events and other ancillary functions to take care of CDOT property along the roads. Reason for budget issues with maintenance is in the past maintenance projects have been grouped with other types of work when being funded, such as fixing walls, culverts, and technology upkeep as part of asset management. These decisions are made four years in advance. Some assets can be decided to hold off for a year, but snow and ice/avalanche response can’t wait. We are correcting that situation now.

Jeff Sudmeier requested the TC members to look for approving the FY 20 budget amendment and the FY 21 budget next month.

PD 703.0 (Jeff Sudmeier) Purpose: To provide information and background on Policy Directive (PD) 703.0 and broadly outline essential updates needed to align the directive with current policies, procedures, and requirements. Action: This review is for informational purposes and no action was requested this month. Staff seeked TC input in order to finalize updates to PD 703 in preparation for an in depth review at the March TC workshop and formal adoption at the April TC meeting. Discussion:

The Commission Chair Thiebaut noted this is the opportunity to decide on appropriate monetary ranges for TC approval; staff can provide a redlined version of the PD 703 and highlight options for the TC to consider.

Jeff Sudmeier requested TC members when reviewing changes to consider clarifications and/or exemptions, as for some budget changes/edits, staff only is required to report them to the TC with no discussion needed.

Commissioner Gifford suggested discussing in more detail the contract hires vs. more FTE at CDOT when discussing PD 703.

Commissioner Adams noted that raising the monetary limits for TC approvals is not prudent, while Commissioner Halter stressed the importance of trusting staff to make decisions, where no choice is really an option (and not required by state statute to bring forward to the TC for approval) such as funds for snow/ice removal and avalanche/rockfall response type decisions. Commissioner Beedy expressed comfort with the existing threshold of $1 million and Commissioner Gifford noted that some evolving/new programs need more oversight.

181

Commissioner Zink noted that the TC is not intended to go into the weeds, but how we define weeds is an important consideration. We have seen why projects go over budget, and if there are lots of those, that indicates a problem as it suggests the whole process is a problem. TC needs to understand the rationale for budget changes and why they are needed.

Herman Stockinger, Deputy Executive Director and TC Secretary, noted that PD 703 is the most important policy for TC, and that the proposed changes under consideration are not substantial.

Statewide Plan Committee (Rebecca White) Statewide Transportation Plan (SWP) Committee Members include: Commissioners Stuart (Chair), Gifford, Zink, Stanton, Bracke, and the STAC Chair, Vince Rogalski. All 11 Commissioners were present. Purpose: The Division of Transportation Development has several topics to bring before the Statewide Plan Committee this month. Also included on the agenda are items requested by the Chair. 2045 SWP 10-year Pipeline of Projects Update Discussion

Commissioner Stuart, the SWP Committee Chair, kicked-off the discussion noting that the 10-year pipeline of projects was developed employing a collaborative method.

Rebecca White, Director of the Division of Transportation Development, explained that the CDOT Regional Transportation Directors (RTDs) will highlight key projects included on the pipeline of projects for their areas. The TC already approved the first four years of the list based on SB 267 funds. The list discussed today is for the out years 5-10, which are not fiscally constrained and would only be implemented if new funding was identified for the projects. You all confirmed the transit allocation for the pipeline. We also took off 10 percent of transit for Bustang service funding.

It was assumed $500 million annually for the pipeline out years. This list was developed with public and planning partner input, TC guiding principles, and other funding parameters.

Tim Kirby, CDOT Multimodal Planning Branch Manager, presented an overview of the types and numbers for the Pipeline of Projects. Projects are 75% interstate and urban, and $25% are in rural areas.

Commissioner Vasquez asked about the wildlife crossing issues and if any projects on the list include these types of improvements. Region 3 RTD, Mike Goolsby noted staff considered maximizing and leveraging Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) dollars we have. We would incorporate that when money is available.

Commissioner Beedy commented that all of I-76 East is indicated as a project, which is not correct. Rebecca White responded that I-76 maps still need to be revised to become accurate.

It was explained that the list includes over 150 projects at a cost of over $2 billion (these are not funded/fiscally constrained yet, but can be implemented only if new money comes in).

Rebecca White welcomed and introduced the RTDs to provide information on the key projects in the project pipeline for their respective Regions. For more details on the project pipeline, see the TC packet at: https://www.codot.gov/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html.

Each Regional Transportation Director provided an overview of the key projects included in the 10-year pipeline for years 5-10 for their Regions.

Commissioner Bracke asked to see transit projects together in an overlay on a map to have available at a glance a holistic transit and highway project map, and how will the project list be used?

CDOT Executive Director, Shoshana Lew, explained that CDOT still needs to determine the particulars of how to engage the legislature and use the list. This list achieves definition and describes what we are paying for before we pay for it. If a funding solution is found, CDOT is ready to move forward and spend the funding. The list provides substance for another funding package (from the legislature) and will keep the conversation moving.

Commissioner Bracke wanted to know what happens to projects that ended up on the cutting room floor. Tim Kirby, CDOT Multimodal Planning Branch Manager, responded that all projects identified from public and stakeholder input will be included and documented in an appendix in the 2045 SWP to

182

https://www.codot.gov/about/transportation-commission/meeting-agenda.html

capture all feedback and show project-based strategies to address needs. Executive Director Lew added that we are being clear about what this list is and what it isn’t – it is how to prioritize $500 million per year. It still leaves things unfunded. We are making sure we convey it is not everything.

In terms of getting the pipeline to flow into future years, Commissioner Bracke recognized that it flows with additional funding.

Executive Director Lew responded regarding how to make pipeline flow by explaining that there is a limit of what we or the market can absorb with staff and contractors to implement projects on the list. CDOT needs to consider the resources available in terms of funding, contractors and construction supplies to deliver the list.

Vince Rogalski, Chair, Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC), noted that in years past if surprise money came in, CDOT and planning partners were requested to create a new list each time. This work is being done to avoid repetitive list making.

CDOT Staff is planning to continue to refine and make maps more visually appealing. The SWP Committee will need to meet monthly through June 2020.

CMAQ Program Distribution Formula Staff is not proposing any changes to the overall CMAQ formula, which has been in place for several years. However, the Commission is being asked to consider reallocating the small amount of statewide dollars to vehicle electrification programs. Discussion:

The key change being requested of the TC is to approve reallocating the small amount of statewide dollars to vehicle electrification, with more details discussed at the Mobility Committee workshop following this SWP Committee meeting.

It was explained by CDOT staff that a resolution to adopt the CMAQ formula will be voted on by the TC tomorrow.

Vince Rogalski noted that the STAC recommended moving this CMAQ formula proposal forward.

No other major comments were raised by the TC members.

Whole System Whole Safety Workshop State Transportation Safety Plan (STSP) (Charles Meyer)

Purpose: The Colorado TC has made transportation safety a top priority for Colorado. The Colorado 2020-2023 State Transportation Safety Plan (STSP), developed with expertise from safety stakeholders around Colorado, updates the 2014 Colorado Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The STSP establishes a collaborative and shared vision and mission for transportation safety, and identifies the key safety needs in Colorado for guiding investment decisions toward strategies and countermeasures with the highest potential to save lives and prevent injuries. Action: Support for the STSP was sought from the TC, including the prioritization of funding for safety and the reestablishment of the Transportation Commission Safety Subcommittee. Discussion:

Charles Meyer, CDOT Traffic Safety Manager, spoke on the State Transportation Safety Plan (STSP) and the stakeholder outreach and data analysis that was conducted in conjunction with development of this plan.

The project team heard from stakeholders that the goal and target needed to be “zero deaths”- previously the goals was “towards zero deaths”. In order to get there, we need cooperation among agencies to make this happen.

Key issues related to an increase in bicycle and pedestrian fatalities, along with motorcycle fatalities.

Charles is looking for TC input and for TC support on strategies. There is no resolution for this item in February.

Commissioner Thiebaut asked to be sure to link the STSP to Rebecca’s work to PD 704.0. 183

Commissioner Vasquez asked how CDOT will work to modify crash rates and monitor performance. Charles Meyer noted working with non-profits and other entities for enforcement is what is needed. Measures and rates are recorded through surveys and crash data as it becomes available and safety campaigns and programs are conducted to promote better behavior.

Commissioners were glad to see goal of Vision Zero deaths. It is important for the TC to publically endorse the STSP.

Commissioner Bracke asked when over time we anticipated getting to zero deaths, and what we need to know how to change the situation, and how to expedite the change. She recommended that any TC Safety Committee should be named Vision Zero.

It was also noted by Commissioner Adams, that City of Denver’s press release for Vision Zero was a big event. It is important to make big events and for Commissioners to attend these types of events. We need to demonstrate that safety is priority number 1.

Commissioner Zink noted it is important to know why fatalities have increased. Charles Meyer explained that there are a number of factors that influence crash patterns. There is a huge increase in fatalities for bicycles, pedestrians, and motorcycles. Distracted drivers and other behaviors are influencers for this increase.

Commissioner Vasquez commented that looking at other states for best practices, and what benchmarking has been observed elsewhere is another important piece of information for the TC and CDOT to understand. Charles noted that CDOT is looking into this.

The TC members supported the concept of drafting a resolution to support this STSP as part of the consent agenda at the February regular TC meeting.

Funding for Strategic Safety and Urban Arterial Initiative (San Lee and Rebecca White) Purpose: The purpose of this workshop was to summarize and inform the TC of the Statewide Strategic Safety Program, its accomplishments and to provide information on a future focus in the areas of employee safety and improving safety on urban arterials. Action: Discussion and information only in February. Notice of forthcoming funding request during the March TC meeting for $20 Million in increased funding to advance the Strategic Safety Program, incorporate employee safety initiatives, and consider allocating additional funding to improving safety on urban arterials; which will be presented in March as part of a larger discussion on program reserve and use of additional Surface Treatment Block Grant dollars. Discussion:

CDOT established a Strategic Safety Program in March 2019 with $11.3 million of funds for the year.

Several projects were initiated under this program and included the following types of improvements: Striping, Rumble Strips, MASH Compliance Guard Rails, Variable Speed Limits, and Cable Rail.

Commissioner Gifford asked about MASH guardrail and if testing of safety hardware for all types and weights of vehicles is occurring. Charles Meyer responded that yes various vehicle types and weights have been tested.

CDOT staff explained that requests from Regions for safety projects show a funding gap of $ 24.4 million annually, or $27 million annually with attenuator purchase. There is a desire to grow this existing program.

Attenuators priced out include the cost for an attenuator truck. It was noted that there are opportunities to use these trucks for other purposes.

The mobile unit cost seems excessively high, per Commissioner Beedy. CDOT staff explained that positive protection results from the mobile unit that is highly effective. This is a huge benefit to maintenance crews. CDOT looking into dual purpose and use for truck as part of the purchase.

Commissioner Stanton supported putting more money into this type of investment and observed that $10 million is not that much of an expenditure considering the benefits.

Rebecca White noted that looking at San’s data is on State Highways and Interstates, and for urban arterials, the data shows a 78% increase in crashes on urban arterials since 2010. Staff will come back to

184

discuss this further. SB 267 funds have set aside $25 million for urban arterials safety also. DTR has identified $26 million for transit and bike pedestrian facility improvements along urban arterials also. Another potential funding source is surface transportation block grants to expand this program.

Commissioner Adams noted this should directly address the increase in bicycle and pedestrian fatalities and tie back to the STSP and Vision Zero.

Commissioner Beedy noted that to promote human behavior change, consider requiring a 10-15 minute video with questions for each application, when folks are updating their driver licenses – or something like that.

Agenda Change Commissioner Thiebaut recommended a tabling of the discussion on PD 14 until next month (March)

and the TC members agreed to this.

Commissioner Thiebaut asked Charles Meyer to answer any questions the TC members have related to the PD 704 workshop. No comments were raised by TC members.

Dashboard of Major Projects & Notification of Developments/Variances (Jane Fisher) Purpose: The purpose of this workshop was to provide an update regarding calendar year 2019 construction expenditure results, calendar year 2020 construction expenditure baseline, and dashboards for major projects and their application in identification of items that may warrant management attention. Action: Information only. Discussion:

No substantial TC comments were documented regarding the dashboard presentation. State-of-the-Art Mobility/Mobility Systems (Don Stanton): Innovative Mobility Implementation Tools FY 20-21 Budget Proposals- Electrification & CMAQ (Sophie Shulman) Purpose: The purpose of this workshop is to provide an update on possible implementation tools to achieve the goals of the Office of Innovative Mobility, specifically remaining items to help reach the State’s goals around zero emission vehicles. Staff has requested input from the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee on the future use of Statewide Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to support zero emission vehicle efforts. Action: Based on TC feedback at the February workshop, staff prepared a resolution for approval at the February TC regular meeting. Discussion:

Sophie Shulman, Director of the CDOT office of Innovative Mobility, explained rationale for why Air Quality greenhouse gas emissions concerns are an urgent and are an immediate need to address in Colorado.

The need for ZEVs was emphasized as important to improve conditions now and in the future. Mike King, CDOT Assistant Director of Electrification and Energy, discussed the relevant budget programs which are: Clean Transportation Planning that is occurring with seven neighboring states, Transit Agencies are to have their own EV Plan, and to meet statewide needs, Colorado would need $60 million of infrastructure now, and if all transit vehicles were to become EVs it could cost roughly $1 billion for infrastructure.

Commissioner Gifford noted that the private sector may not fully address a transition to ZEVs, and that CDOT will need to fill in the gaps to promote a transition to EVs.

185

A map of current DC Fast Charging and 34 more locations from CEO grant was presented.

Commissioner Bracke recommended to somehow starting along scenic byways and EV corridors. It was noted that the 34 EV charging locations are near or connect to scenic byways. Sophie Shulman stated that CDOT works closely with CEO to make sure funds are used wisely. However, gaps still exist for EV charging.

Commissioner Beedy asked about if there are any incentives to give to hotels credit for adding EV charging stations on their property. Charge Ahead Colorado grants cover EV chargers, and hotels are eligible applicants.

Commissioner Adams it would help to build a business case for folks to review. A one-pager or brochure regarding EVs, comparing them to traditional fossil fuel vehicles. Sophie Shulman noted that CDOT has calculated the cost of ownership types.

Commissioner Zink cautioned against the TC promoting one vehicle type over another. Be careful about stepping into the market place.

Commissioner Hall concurred with Commissioner Zink. EVs need to pay for their fair share before we invest in supporting EVs.

Commissioner Stanton concurred with Commissioners Hall and Zink.

Commissioner Vasquez expressed the importance of helping folks make an informed decision regarding air quality emissions along with their vehicle purchases. Sophie Shulman noted that OIM sees efforts as education, and not promoting EVs. The effort is to educate to support informed decision-making.

Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Thursday, February 20, 2020, 9:30 am – 11:00 am Call to Order, Roll Call: All 11 of the Commissioners were present: Commissioners Bill Thiebaut, Sidny Zink, Eula Adams, Irv Halter, Shannon Gifford, Gary Beedy, Kathleen Bracke, Barbara Vasquez, Donald Stanton, Kathy Hall, and Karen Stuart. Public Comments

Craig Cannon of Zone Crew said his company has some signs he thought could be effective in slowing traffic in school zones, and asked for permission to test them in school zones. FHWA does not prohibit such tests.

Adams County Commissioner, Steve O’Dorisio, spoke about a homeless encampment in the highway public right of way near a constituent’s home. He said Adams County is working with CDOT to enforce a ban on trespassing on the highway right of way.

Travis Madden of the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP) spoke about the benefits of electric vehicles. He said their use improves air quality, gives households the money they would otherwise spend on gas, and helps CDOT in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation.

Comments of Individual Commissioners

Commissioner Vasquez thanked the Northwest Transportation Planning Region (TPR) for the robust process it went through to determine transportation priorities. Air quality and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector are big concerns.

Commissioner Zink attended a meeting of the Gunnison Valley TPR, and noted that CDOT had a float at the winter celebration in Durango.

Commissioner Stuart thanked Adams County Commissioner O’Dorisio for bringing up the issue of homeless people camping on the public right of way. She noted that some CDOT maintenance workers are reluctant to push people out of their camping areas. Transportation (TC) might want to have a workshop regarding this topic. She spoke at a climate change panel before a group of more than 40 people, both young and old, and discussed what CDOT is doing about climate change. She also thanked

186

Region 4 Regional Transportation Director, Heather Paddock, for her leadership at a regional meeting at which regional transportation priorities were set. She also attended a meeting with Governor Polis about different ways of funding transportation.

Commissioner Stanton thanked the Adams County commissioner for bringing to the TC’s attention the widespread problem of homeless encampments. He and Commissioner Stuart went to see the mayor of Westminster about ways to improve Federal Boulevard. Becoming a more resilient agency is important for CDOT, which is affected by fires and flooding due to weather events.

Commissioner Gifford spoke about climate change, suggesting that the best thing CDOT can do is support the efforts of others. In the past month, she also spoke on a panel about poverty, focusing on transportation.

Commissioner Halter, now in his fifth week of being on the Commission, thanked Region 2 Regional Transportation Director, Karen Rowe, for answering his many questions as a new commissioner. On April 17, he will speak about transportation to the El Pomar Forum.

Commissioner Bracke praised Heather Paddock for her leadership of a Region 4 meeting setting transportation priorities. In addition, she attended coalition meetings on North I-25 and US 85. A regional transit study for northern Colorado is getting under way. She was among those thanking Charles Meyer for his safety discussions around the state, centering on the State Highway Safety Plan. She serves on the Scenic Byway Commission, which has discussed ways to encourage use of electric vehicles on the byways.

Commissioner Beedy reiterated his concern about the many roads he sees needing improvement in the rural areas in his District 11. He wonders if CDOT might be able to use recycle wind turbine blades – of which there are many in eastern Colorado, for fill or other purposes. He, too, met with Governor Polis about finding new sources to pay for transportation. He is very impressed with the good work snowplow operators do, and the larger and more efficient snowplows they have for the job now.

Commissioner Hall commented that her son drives the I-25 South gap every day, and wanted CDOT to know how much he appreciated how well CDOT keeps the highway clear of snow. She also said that attendees at a meeting in Grand Junction were pleased to have CDOT Executive Director, Shoshana Lew, join them.

Commissioner Adams thanked Region 1 Regional Transportation Director, Paul Jesaitis, for his help getting him up to speed. He discussed his work on two TC committees: Small Business and Diversity, and Audit. County commissioners of Arapahoe and Douglas counties in his District, have a strong desire to work with CDOT. Recently he met with the only Regional Transportation District (RTD) board member who is disabled, and they discussed how RTD accommodates disabled persons. Recently he spent 10 days in India, where air pollution in large cities is a concern.

Commissioner Thiebaut commended his fellow commissioners and staff members who work with the Commission, in particular Herman Stockinger, and Olivia Martinez.

Executive Director’s Report (Shoshana Lew)

The cost of keeping state highways clear of ice and snow is going up, not down.

She said she would like to see a legislative funding package come together, and believes the 2045 Statewide Transportation Plan, that includes a 10-year Pipeline of Projects, will help prompt action.

CDOT needs to match consumer education with technological advances such as with electric vehicles. Chief Engineer’s Report (Steve Harelson)

At a recent meeting of the Colorado Asphalt Paving Association, several state highways received awards for smoothness. One project that Central Federal Lands of FHWA managed on Cottonwood Pass received a perfect score.

SB 267 projects are rolling out.

Recently he met with the head of the construction management program at Colorado State University about ways to get students thinking about the possibility of working for CDOT. Having younger people eager to work for CDOT will become more important as current employees retire.

He had the opportunity to witness a load test of a bridge girder. The instrumentation allowed viewers to see the girder bend under a load and then spring back after the load had passed.

187

High Performance Transportation Enterprise (HPTE) Director’s Report (Nick Farber)

HPTE sent its annual report to the Legislature, a statutory requirement.

The HPTE board is considering a more public-friendly name for the organization.

One of the items before the HPTE board later in the day is a resolution approving a “term sheet” between CDOT and the Union Pacific Railroad Company for CDOT to acquire 59 acres of the Burnham Yard for $50 million. A term sheet serves as a basis for drafting a contract. CDOT would use the land for infrastructure improvements for or adjacent to I-25.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Colorado Division Administrator’s Report (John Cater)

He thanked the TC for having a discussion with Carl Andersen, technical director of the FHWA Office of Operations Research and Development, about technology and the future of mobility on Wednesday. He brought some materials about the topic for those who wanted them.

He highlighted the Transportation Environmental Resource Council (TERC), comprising high-level management from state and federal resource agencies. The TERC meets periodically about a variety of topics. The TERC is a great opportunity to strengthen relationships. The results of the relationship building were evident after the 2013 floods.

FHWA has a national goal of teaching incident management techniques to 45 percent of first responders (law enforcement, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, firefighters etc.). In Colorado, about half the first responders have received the training. An answer to a question from Commissioner Beedy regarding the focus of the training, John Cater said the training emphasizes the need to get traffic moving as quickly as possible after an incident.

Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC) Report (STAC Chair, Vince Rogalski)

Staff proposed the formula for distribution of Regional Priority Program (RPP) funds and STAC approved it that is before the TC today.

STAC also approved the formulas for distribution of FASTER Safety and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) before the TC today. STAC approved putting CMAQ statewide money toward infrastructure for electric vehicles.

During the federal and state legislative report, a STAC representative voiced approval of changes to the NEPA process as proposed by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The representative said the changes would save costs and improve efficiency. Another item mentioned was an effort at the federal level to permit public-private partnerships at rest areas.

A discussion about CDOT’s performance toward the PD 14 targets resulted in a recommendation to separate rural and urban crash data, possibly with different targets for urban and rural areas. CDOT has a safety goal of working toward zero highway deaths; a goal some thought was not attainable. The city of Oslo, Norway, only had one traffic death, indicating that the goal could be within reach.

The STAC also decided to include I-76 as a corridor of statewide significance in the statewide transportation plan (SWP). It was the only interstate left off the list of corridors of statewide significance.

Act on Consent Agenda – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. 1. Temporary Resolution #1: Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2020 (Herman

Stockinger). 2. Temporary Resolution #2: Approve PD 704.0 FASTER Safety (Charles Meyer)

o Charles showed a DRCOG video about how people feel about zero deaths as a whole and for members of their families. One in four highway fatalities involve bicyclists or pedestrians.

Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #3, 8th Budget Supplement of FY 2020 (Jeff Sudmeier) – Passed on February 20, 2020 with a split vote (see details below).

188

Temporary Resolution #3 was severed into a Split Vote:

Section 1 Vote was for clean transportation planning ($500K), support consumer adoption of electric vehicles ($1.5 million), and electrification of the CDOT fleet ($800K) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020.

Section 2 Vote was to approve the $1.5 million for electric vehicle charging stations –Passed on February 20, 2020 with eight (8) for and three (3) against.

o Commissioners Hall, Zink, and Beedy voted against the funding of the EV charging stations. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #4, 7th Budget Amendment of FY2020 (Jeff Sudmeier) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #5, Match Funds for INFRA Grant (Jeff Sudmeier) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. Regional Priority Program Formula Discussion (Rebecca White)

The recommended allocation formula (Option B) for a total of $47 million each year is 25 percent vehicle miles traveled (VMT), 20 percent population, 40 percent state highway lane miles, and 15 percent truck VMT. (The STAC approved this staff-recommended formula in a 12-3 vote.)

Discuss and Act on Regional Priority Program Resolution Amendment (not supporting use of RPP Formula for distribution of other funds) - Failed on September 20, 2020 with three for and eight against.

Regional Priority Formula Programming Amendment failed on three (3) for to eight (8) against Adams Y Beedy N Bracke Y Gifford N

Hall Y Halter N Stanton N Stuart N

Vasquez N Zink N Thiebaut N

Discuss and Act on: RPP Formula Resolution # 6 (Option B Formula) –Failed on February 20, 2020 with five (5) for and six (6) against

Passage of the RPP formula resolution as presented also failed by five (5) for and six (6) against vote. Adams N Beedy Y Bracke Y Gifford N

Hall Y Halter N Stanton N Stuart N

Vasquez Y Zink Y Thiebaut N

Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #7, FASTER Safety Formula (Rebecca White) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #8, CMAQ Formula (Rebecca White) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. Discuss and Act on Temporary Resolution #9, CDOT/HPTE Intra-Agency Agreement for I-270 (Nick Farber) – Passed unanimously on February 20, 2020. Central 70 Quarterly Status Report (Keith Stefanik)

For this informational item about the quarterly report, the Central 70 Project Manager, Keith Stefanik, showed a video of progress on Central 70 shot from the air.

Keith said he often hears that nothing is happening on the project, but the fact is that most of the work now is taking place below ground, not visible to motorists on I-70.

He said the project is about 90 days behind schedule, but hopes that time can be reduced on work on the east side of the project.

189

Shoshana Lew, CDOT Executive Director, said the railroads are working with CDOT, and she is cautiously optimistic about negotiations. Documents for the project protect CDOT.

Other Matters: Report of the Vice-Chairman Nominating Committee and Discuss and Act on Election of Vice-Chair (Shannon Gifford, Bill Thiebaut)

The Nominating Committee recommended Commissioner Stuart as Vice-Chair of the TC.

The TC approved Karen Stuart’s nomination.

190

2829 W. Howard Place, Suite 562, Denver, CO 80204 P 303-757-9772 F 303-757-9656 www.codot.gov

DRAFT COPY

MEMORANDUM

DATE: Monday, March 6, 2020 TO: The Transportation Commission FROM: John Lorme, Director, Division of Maintenance and Operations

Dan Roussin, Program Administrator Access Management Unit SUBJECT: Access Appeal of Access Permit # 319181 Purpose

The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize and inform the Transportation Commission of the access permit appeal in Region 3 on State Highway 340, and the access appeal process outlined in the State Highway Access Code (2 CCR 601-1, 2.9).

Action Requested

Region 3 has received an appeal for access closure on CDOT construction project (NHPP 070A-030) from Mr. Alex Arevian. In accordance with the Colorado State Highway Access Code, the applicant has timely requested a hearing before the Transportation Commission (TC). The Transportation Commission will make the determination if the appeal goes through the Internal Administrative Review Committee process, or through the Department of Administration, Division of Administrative Appeals process.

Background

CDOT controls highway access through the State Highway Access Code, 2 CCR 601-1 (2002). Through this access permit process, CDOT notifies landowners of any changes to access. The Mesa County MPO named I70B a corridor that needed improvements. CDOT finalized an Environmental Assessment for this Corridor in 2008. Region 3 has built 4 phases of the corridor in the past 10 years. Region 3 is in the process of designing and constructing Phase Five of I70B (1st Grand Avenue) project. Including the project, Region 3 Access Unit has issued over 30 permits for access changes associated Phase 5 of the project. Phase 5 is slated to be constructed in 2021-22.

Details

Region 3 issued Access Permit # 319181 and received an appeal letter from Mr. Alex Arevian, landowner of 302 West Grand Avenue. Region 3 has concluded this property has reasonable access to the local street network (Mulberry Street) with the concurrence of the City of Grand Junction.

1. Property has direct access off Mulberry Street (signalized local street). Reasonable Access. 2. The access is approximately 50' of Mulberry Street. (Too Close). The access is within the Functional Area

of the Mulberry Intersection, and doesn't meet current Access Code standards. 3. Access also doesn't meet Access Code Spacing requirements. 4. Access conflicts with new pedestrian path being built within CDOT project. Grades are also an issue.

Next Steps

Staff recommends to the Transportation Commission to delegate the appeal to the Department of Administration, Division of Administrative Appeals. Going thru the CDOT Internal Administrative Review Committee process, the applicant still has the option to go through Administrative Appeals if they aren’t satisfied with the CDOT Internal Administrative Review Committee decision. Because of the time sensitivity of the Phase 5 CDOT project, staff believes Administrative Appeal process will provide the most efficient and effective decision.

Attachments

● Appendix A: Access Permit #319181 ● Appendix B: Location Map

191

222 South 6th Street, Room 100, Grand Junction, CO 81501-2769 P 970.683.6271 F 970.683.6290 www.cdot.gov

R3 Traffic Section, Access Unit 222 S. Sixth St, Rm 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 PH (970) 683-6284 FAX (970) 683-6290

November 5, 2019 Alex Arevian 714 38 3/4 RD Palisade, Colorado 81526

Re: State Highway Access Modification Permit No. 319181 Closure located on the north side of Hwy 340A approximately 70 feet west of Mulberry St. and 850 feet east of MP 13

Dear Property Owner: The purpose of this letter is to notify you of the closure of your access to Hwy 340A in the interest of public health , safety, and welfare: Closure located on the north side of Hwy 340A approximately 70 feet west of Mulberry St. and 850 feet east of MP 13. The Colorado Department of Transportation will be closing your access with the CDOT highway project #NHPP 070A-030 (21986). Your access shall be off Mulberry St. CDOT anticipates construction of the project to begin in Summer 2021. The work will be done through the CDOT Project at no cost to you. If you have any questions about the project or the design of the reconstruction to your access, please contact Matt Casey, PE, CDOT Project Engineer, Program West Design (970) 683-6361. Enclosed is a detail sheet showing the closure of your access to State Highway 340A. Please review these plans and contact Mr. Casey if you have any design questions. If there are no questions about this State Highway Access Closure Permit, no further action is required on your part. If you do have any questions or concerns you have 60 days from the date of this letter to contact me. I can be reached at (970) 683-6284. Respectfully,

Dan Roussin Permit Manager [email protected] Copy: Matt Casey, R3 PE CDOT Program West Design (electronically) Rob Beck, R3 PE CDOT Resident Engineer (GJ) (electronically) Doug Killerud, R3 CDOT ROW (electronically) Trent Prall, PE, Public Work Director, City of Grand Junction (electronically)

File

192

STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT FORM 138 (PAGE TWO)

The following paragraphs are additional terms and conditions of this permit. These are provided for your convenience but do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the State Highway Access Code (Access Code). A copy of the Access Code is available from the Colorado Department of Transportation (Department) at the address noted on page one this permit. When this permit was issued, the Department made its decision based in part on the access category which is assigned to the highway, what alternative access to other public roads and streets is available, current use of the access, and safety and design standards.

I. OBJECTIONS AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING

1. The permittee may file an objection to the Department’s action described herein and request a hearing on such

objection. The objection and request for hearing must be received by the Department on or before the date noted on the front of this permit. The objection must include all written data, views and arguments related to the Department’s action. The objection and request for hearing must be submitted in writing. If the objection does not include a request for a hearing, a hearing will not be scheduled. The Department will consider the information provided and respond to the submittal.

2. If a hearing is requested, it will be heard by: (i) the Transportation Commission, (ii) an administrative law judge, or

(iii) a district court judge in the county in which the access is located. The Department shall determine the tribunal for the hearing.

3. If no objections and request for hearing are received in the time allowed, the Department will proceed with the

access modifications and the Department or local authority may record the permit with the County Clerk and Recorder

II. FURTHER INFORMATION

1. This permit is issued based upon current conditions and knowledge. If there are future changes in the use of the access after the issuance of this permit, the access permit-issuing authority must be notified of the change. A change in property use which makes the existing access design or use in non-conformance with the Access Code or the terms and conditions of the permit, may require the reconstruction or relocation of the access. Upon notice that there has been or will be a change in use of the access, the issuing authority will review the original permit; it may decide it is adequate or it may require that the permittee apply for a new permit, which may require reconstruction or relocation of the access.

2. All terms and conditions of the permit are binding upon all assigns, successors-in-interest and heirs. Over time,

the responsibilities of the permittee and conditions represented herein may change due to changes in the state legislation and regulations.

3. When a permitted driveway is used in violation of the Access Code or the terms and conditions of the permit, the

local government or Department may obtain a court order to halt the violation and or revoke the access permit.

4. The permittee, his heirs, successors-in-interest, and assigns, of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even though deposited on the access in the course of Department snow removal operations. The Department will maintain the highway drainage system in unincorporated areas, including those culverts under the access which are part of that system within the right-of-way.

5. The issue date of the permit is the date the Department representative has signed the permit.

6. Parking on State Highway right-of-way is prohibited except where posted.

Note: "Act" means the highway access statute, section 43-2-147, Colorado Revised Statutes.

"Access Code", or "Code" means the State Highway Access Code, 2 CCR 601-1, as adopted and amended by the Transportation Commission of Colorado. "Department" means the Department of Transportation, State of Colorado.

CDOT Form 138, page 2 12/7/99 194

PPPPPP

4110

607+00

608+00

AA

4560

4570

45804580

4560

4570

45804580

0+00 1+00

LEGEND

198

20'0' 10' 40'

JCOLIP

RDACCESS

SH 340

EXISTING GROUND

TYPE 2 (SECTION IIB)

PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER

SIDEWALK (6 INCH)

PROPOSED CONCRETE

FINISHED GRADESIDEWALK (6 INCH)

PROPOSED CONCRETE

TYPE 2 (SECTION IIB)

PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER

EXISTING ROW

MSCHWAB

(ALEX AREVIAN)

ACCESS 17 VACANT LOT

ACCESS PLAN

SECTION A-A

ACCESS 17 VACANT LOT (ALEX AREVIAN)

ACCESS AT MULBERRY ST TO BE CLOSED 50.76' EXISTING DRIVE

SH-34

0

ST

A 607

+62.5

6

(A

LE

X

AR

EVIA

N)

AC

CE

SS

17

VA

CA

NT

LO

T

MU

LB

ER

RY

ST

Numbers

Structure

No Revisions:

Revised:

Void: Sheet Subset:

Detailer:

Designer:

NHPP 070A-030

Sheet Number

Init.CommentsDate:

Sheet Revisions As ConstructedWednesday, October 23, 2019 11:33:04 AMPrint Date:

Horiz. Scale:1:20 Vert. Scale: As Noted

Project No./CodeFile Name:

MS

CH

WA

B 11:3

3:0

4

AM

pw:\\

pw

hdruscen01:H

DR_

US_

Central_

01\

Docu

ments\

57

03\

10001955\

1012317

2\

6.0

_C

AD_

BI

M\

6.2

_WIP\

21986\

Desig

n\

Dra

win

gs\

21986

DE

S_

Access_

PnP-02.d

gn

21986DES_Access_PnP-02.dgn

Unit Information: PEW Design -

-

NEJUnit Leader Initials: 21986

Subset Sheets: of303-860-7139FAX: 303-764-1520Phone:

DENVER, COLORADO 802021670 BROADWAY, SUITE 3400

Colorado Department of Transportation

Region 3

Phone:970-683-6351

FAX:970-683-6369

606 South 9th Street

RBB

Grand Junction, CO 81501

TM

ASPHALT PAVEMENT

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

195

ST

NOAANOAA

DI

BB

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

AA

A A

A A

AA B

B

BB

AA

AA

AA B

B

AA

A A

AA

A

A

A

A

BB

A

A

Numbers

Structure

No Revisions:

Revised:

Void: Sheet Subset:

Detailer:

Designer:

NHPP 070A-030

Sheet Number

Init.CommentsDate:

Sheet Revisions As ConstructedWednesday, October 23, 2019 11:32:59 AMPrint Date:

Horiz. Scale:1:200 Vert. Scale: As Noted

Project No./CodeFile Name:

MS

CH

WA

B 11:3

2:5

7

AM

pw:\\

pw

hdruscen01:H

DR_

US_

Central_

01\

Docu

ments\

57

03\

10001955\

1012317

2\

6.0

_C

AD_

BI

M\

6.2

_WIP\

21986\

Desig

n\

Dra

win

gs\

21986

DE

S_

Access_

Key

map.d

gn

21986DES_Access_Keymap.dgn

Unit Information: PEW Design -

-

NEJUnit Leader Initials: 21986

Subset Sheets: of303-860-7139FAX: 303-764-1520Phone:

DENVER, COLORADO 802021670 BROADWAY, SUITE 3400


Region 3

Phone:970-683-6351

FAX:970-683-6369

606 South 9th Street

RBB

Grand Junction, CO 81501

TM

ACCESS PLAN KEYMAP

11

KEYMAP

ACCESS PLAN

JCOLIP

RDACCESS

200'0' 100' 400'

CENTRAL PLAZA)

ACCESS 11 (GRAND

(EDWARD JONES)

ACCESS 5

(EDWARD JONES)

ACCESS 6

(MESA MUSIC)

ACCESS 8

(RITE AID)

ACCESS 12

CENTRAL PLAZA)

ACCESS 14 (GRAND (MESA COUNTY)

ACCESS 18

(MESA COUNTY)

ACCESS 19

(GAY JOHNSONS)

ACCESS 21

(GAY JOHNSONS)

ACCESS 28

(BURGER KING)

ACCESS 34

ACCESS 35 (ALLEY)

ACCESS 36 (FEATHER)

ACCESS 37 (FEATHER)

(WHEELING WHEELS)

ACCESS 40

(WHEELING WHEELS)

ACCESS 41

(MESA MUSIC)

ACCESS 101

(FUOCO)

ACCESS 4

I-70B

I-70BN 1ST ST

WHIT

E

AV

E

RO

OD

AV

E

MAIN

ST

MULBERRY ST

RICE ST

N 2ND ST

OU

RA

Y

AV

E

MULB

ERR

Y ST

SPRUCE ST

SH

34

0

DR EGATNORF

MSCHWAB

(EDWARD JONES)

ACCESS G22

(N 1ST ST)

ACCESS 7

(OURAY AVE)

ACCESS 10

GR

AN

D

AV

E

(GRAND AVE)

ACCESS 23

(CITY ALLEY)

ACCESS 30

(PRIVATE LOCO)

ACCESS 29

(WHITE AVE)

ACCESS 33

(ROOD AVE)

ACCESS 39

ACCESS 42(ALLEY)

(W ROOD AVE)

ACCESS 38

(W WHITE AVE)

ACCESS 32

JOHNSONS)

(GAY

ACCESS 31

(SPRUCE ST)

ACCESS 20

MILITARY SURPLUS)

ACCESS 2 (TOM'S

(BILLBOARD)

ACCESS 102

(CARPET ONE)

ACCESS 3

(ALEX AREVIAN)

(VACANT LOT)

ACCESS 17

196

197

roussind

Text Box

Location Map 302 W. Grand Avnue Access Permit 319181

roussind

Pencil

roussind

Line

roussind

Line

roussind

Line

roussind

Line

roussind

Line

roussind

Typewritten Text

X

roussind

Typewritten Text

Closure

roussind

Text Box

Reason for Closing 1. Property has direct access off Mulberry Street (signalized local street). Reasonable Access 2. The access is approximately 50' of Mulberry Street.(Too Close). The access is within the Functional Area of the Mulberry Intersection. 3. Access doesn't meet Access Code Spacing. 4. Access conflicts with new pedestrian path.

roussind

Typewritten Text

Access

roussind

Typewritten Text

X

roussind

Typewritten Text

Arevian Property

Purpose CDOT Region 3 is proposing to dispose of ~0.075 acres of right of way that is no longer needed for transportation or maintenance purposes. The property will be conveyed at nominal value. Action CDOT Region 3 is requesting a resolution approving the disposal of ~0.075 acres of right of way that is no longer needed for transportation or maintenance purposes. Background Parcel 5A-X is a portion of a larger tract of right of way dedicated to CDOT in 1984 to fulfill a requirement related to a CDOT Access Permit. The dedication was made at no cost to CDOT. Parcel 5A-X contains approximately 3,283 sq. ft (0.075 acres) and is outside of the right of way necessary for I-70B. Details The adjacent parcel owner would like the parcel for the development of a Maverick convenience mart. Since the subject parcel was dedicated to CDOT at no cost to CDOT then Region 3 is recommending the disposal of Parcel 5A-X at nominal value is in the overall public interest based on economic benefits pursuant to 23 CFR 710.403(e)(1). CDOT Region 3 has determined that this property is not needed for maintenance or transportation purposes. The disposal of the subject property will have no effect upon the operation, use, maintenance or safety of the highway facility. The disposal of the subject property will be at nominal value. Key Benefits CDOT will be relieved of maintenance responsibilities and liability associated with this parcel. Next Steps Upon approval of the Transportation Commission, CDOT will convey Parcel 5A-X in accordance with C.R.S. 43-1-210(5). CDOT will execute a quitclaim deed to convey the subject property. The deed will be recorded in the office of Mesa County Clerk and Recorder. Attachments Proposed Resolution Exhibits- Legal Description Exhibits Depicting the Disposal Parcel

DATE: March 4, 2020


FROM: Stephen Harelson, P.E. Chief Engineer

SUBJECT: I-70B and F ½ Road (Parcel 5A-X) - Disposal

198

Purpose CDOT Region 1 is proposing to dispose of ~5,987 sq. ft. (0.137 acres) of right of way that is no longer needed for transportation or maintenance purposes. The property will be conveyed at fair market value. Action CDOT Region 1 is requesting a resolution approving the disposal of ~0.137 acres of right of way that is no longer needed for transportation or maintenance purposes. Background Parcels 200Rev was acquired by CDOT as part of Project IM 088A-024 Unit 2 for the widening, median work and sidewalk improvements of SH 88 at 7th Avenue. The improvements have been completed leaving ~0.137 acres that is no longer needed for transportation or maintenance purposes. Parcel 200Rev-EX is a portion of Parcel 200Rev. Parcel 200Rev-EX contains approximately 5,987 sq. ft (0.137 acres) and is outside of the right of way necessary for SH 88. Details Denver Public Schools has expressed an interest in acquiring Parcel 200Rev-EX. CDOT Region 1 has determined that this property is not needed for maintenance or transportation purposes. The disposal of the subject property will have no effect upon the operation, use, maintenance or safety of the highway facility. The disposal of the subject property will be at fair market value. Key Benefits CDOT will be relieved of maintenance responsibilities and liability associated with this parcel. CDOT will also obtain revenue from the sale of the parcel that will be applied to future transportation projects in accordance with 23 CFR 710.403(d). Next Steps Upon approval of the Transportation Commission, CDOT will convey Parcel 200Rev-EX in accordance with C.R.S. 43-1-210(5). CDOT will execute a quitclaim deed to convey the subject property. The deed will be recorded in the office of Denver City and County Clerk and Recorder. Attachments Proposed Resolution Exhibits Depicting the Disposal Parcel

DATE: March 5, 2020


FROM: Stephen Harelson, P.E. Chief Engineer

SUBJECT: SH 88 and 7th Ave. (Parcel 200Rev-EX) - Disposal

202


MEMORANDUM

Purpose To review and consider requests for reduction of the required Match Funding Level on local Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) candidate projects. Action The Regional Planning Commissions (RPC) of eight of Colorado’s Transportation Planning Regions (TPR) are requesting the Transportation Commission adopt a Resolution to approve of reduced or eliminated Match Funding Level requirements on local candidate MMOF projects. Background Colorado Senate Bill 2018-001 included a provision that established a new Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) and also transferred a combined $96.75M of FY2019 and FY2020 general fund revenues to the program. A portion of the MMOF program equating to $80,112,500 is dedicated to local entities for local or regional multimodal investments. The Bill also required the Colorado Transportation Commission (TC) to establish a distribution formula for the MMOF Local Funds and also permitted the TC to create a formula for reducing or exempting the match requirement for local governments or agencies due to their size or any other special circumstance. In June 2019 the TC adopted Resolution 19-06-05 establishing rural and urban formulas for the distribution of MMOF Local Funds to Colorado’s 15 TPRs. It also adopted policy providing the option of reducing or eliminating the Match Funding Level requirements in the MMOF program for local governments or agencies with fewer economic resources to fund projects, based on certain criteria or circumstances. The Multimodal Options Fund requires a 50% Match Funding Level, such that any project awarded funding requires an equal or greater match of funds from sources other than the MMOF itself. The TC’s match alleviation policy makes a TPR/MPO eligible to request TC approval of a reduced minimum Match Funding Level based on the following criteria of the agency sponsoring the project:

• Counties with population below 50,000, • Municipalities with population below 20,000 or • Agencies whose jurisdiction or service area has a population that is proportionally below the above thresholds.

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: REBECCA WHITE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: MULTIMODAL OPTIONS FUND, MATCH REDUCTION REQUESTS

205


Further, the TC’s match alleviation policy qualifies candidate projects for reduced Match Funding Levels where the jurisdiction or service area of the sponsoring agency is above the State’s mean 12% Poverty Rate. Projects that do not meet the 12% Poverty Rate threshold may also qualify for match reduction if the TC determines the sponsor has demonstrated other reasonably qualifying “extraordinary need or disadvantage”. Attached to this memo are requests submitted by these eight TPRs for a total of 24 candidate projects, indicating that their RPCs have voted affirmatively to support the proposed Match Funding Levels. The following 23 of the 24 proposed match reduction candidates meet both the Population and Poverty Rate thresholds in the adopted TC match reduction policy:

Planning Region

Sponsor Project Name Match Funding Level

Grand Valley Town of Collbran Town of Collbran Trail Feasibility Study 21% Grand Valley Town of Palisade Town of Palisade Hwy 6 Multimodal Project 40% Eastern Town of Cheyenne

Wells Cheyenne Wells School District Pedestrian/Bike Improvement 20%

Eastern Town of Hugo Sidewalks Through Hugo 20% Eastern Yuma County/

City of Wray Sidewalk Installation and Improvements Throughout Wray 20%

Eastern City of Sterling Seep Ditch Trail Segment 1 20% San Luis Valley Town of Manassa Manassa Pedestrian & Bicycle Downtown

Improvements 0%

San Luis Valley Town of Saguache Streetscaping Design for the Improvement of Public Safety 0%

Gunnison Valley

All Points Transit APT Microtransit Feasibility Study 0%

Gunnison Valley

Lake City Third Street Pedestrian & Drainage Improvements 20%

Southwest Dolores County Scheduling and Records Software 0% Southwest Dolores County Bus/Vehicle Shelter 0% Southwest Montezuma County Paths to Mesa Verde, Cortez Side Phase 2 10% Southwest Town of Pagosa Springs East End Area Master Plan 12% Southwest Southern Colorado

Community Action Agency

Operating Costs for Fixed Route to Support Rural CO Route in SE La Plata County 0%

Upper Front Range

Town of Estes Park Bike/Ped ADA compliant Sidewalk Improvements on Division Blvd 28.5%

Upper Front Range

Town of Platteville Bike/Ped Division Street ADA compliant Sidewalks 0%

South Central South Central Council of Gov’t

Construction of a Transit Garage in Walsenburg, CO 30%

South Central City of Trinidad Creating/striping bicycle lanes on select City Streets in Trinidad, CO 30%

South Central City of Trinidad Replacement of existing signal devices with ADA compliant equip 30%

Southeast City of La Junta Design Plan – Off Road Trail Facility – Bike/Ped 0%

Southeast City of Lamar Design Planning & Pedestrian Bridge 0% Southeast Southeast Colorado

Economic Development Design Plan & Regional Bus Shelters 0%

206


In addition, the following proposed match reduction candidate is eligible based on Population, but does not meet the Poverty Rate qualification. The TPR has provided the alternative evidence below as evidence of extraordinary need or disadvantage.

Planning Region Sponsor Project Name Match Funding Level

Eastern Phillips County Sidewalk Installation and Improvements at Courthouse 0%

Alternative evidence provided by the TPR: • Phillips County has a poverty rate of 8.1%. However certain communities within the boundaries of Phillips

County exceed the poverty level criteria, chiefly the community of Haxtun with a poverty level of 13.17%. Recommendations Staff has ascertained that the 23 candidate projects on the previous page are eligible based on Population thresholds and they also meet the Poverty Rate qualifications as required in the TC’s MMOF match reduction policy. On the Phillips County candidate project above, staff do not believe the reason provideda demonstrates an “extraordinary need or disadvantage” on behalf of the County, as was intended in the TC’s MMOF match reduction policy. Staff therefore recommends the TC approve the proposed minimum Match Funding Levels requested on the 23 qualifying candidate projects and to defer any determination on the non-qualifying Phillips County project until and if additional or alternative evidence is provided. Options

Adopt a Resolution approving the 23 requested Match Funding Level reductions that qualify based on Poverty Rates and defer a decision on the Phillips County project until additional evidence is provided.

Adopt a Resolution approving all 24 requested reductions to the minimum Match Funding Level including the Phillips County project.

Deny Match Reduction Level reductions on any or all of the requested projects. Next Steps With the TC’s approval or denial of proposed Match Funding Levels, TPRs can finalize or amend project selections in their regions, as needed. Following formal project selections and match reduction decisions, CDOT will work immediately with project sponsors to initiate the necessary award contracting or IGAs. Attachments Draft TC Resolution 20-##-## TC Resolution 19-06-05 TPR/MPO Chair letters requesting match alleviation

207

Region 10 Vince Rogalski, Chair

Gunnison Valley Transportation Planning Region

February 27, 2020

Bill Thiebaut, Chair, Colorado Transportation Commission

Members, Colorado Transportation Commission

c/o Herman Stockinger, Commission Secretary


2829 West Howard Place

Denver, CO 80204

Re: Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) Match Reduction Request

Dear Chair Thiebaut and Members of the Transportation Commission:

The [TPRJ is sending this letter to request the Transportation Commission's consideration and approval to reduce or eliminate the

required match funding levels on certain MMOF candidate projects within our planning region.

At the meeting of the [TPR] Regional Planning Commission on [date], the members reviewed candidate MMOF

projects and voted affirmatively to support reduction or elimination of the 50% match funding level required in TC Resolution

#TC-19-06-05 to the match funding levels proposed on the following projects:

Total Requested Matching Match%

Applicant Project Name requeste Project Cost MMOF Funds

d

All Points

Transit

APT Microtransit Feasibility Study

$40000 $40000 $0 0

Lake City $1,072,578 $ $858,062 $214,516 20%

Third St Pedestrian & Drainage Improvements

Each of the project applicants listed above are eligible to request match reduction or elimination based on having populations

below the municipal (20,000) or county (501000) thresholds outlined by the TC's MMOF match policy. Specifically,

• AIIPoints Transit's study will be conducted in primarily Montrose and Delta Counties, both which have populations

less than 50,000, which the GVTPR agrees is below the requisite thresholds.

• The Town of Lake City's population is 438 residents.

Region 10 League for Economic Assistance and Planning, Inc. 145 South Cascade Avenue I Montrose, CO 81401

970-249-2436 phone I 970-249-2488 faxwww.region10.net

214

February 27, 2020

OFFICE OF BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PHONE: 970-336-7204

FAX: 970-336-7233 1150 0 STREET

P.O.BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632

Bill Thiebaut, Chair, Colorado Transportation Commission Members, Colorado Transportation Commission c/o Herman Stockinger, Commission Secretary Colorado Department of Transportation 2829 West Howard Place Denver, CO 80204

Re: UFR TPR Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) Match Reduction Request


The Upper Front Range (UFR) Tranportation Planning Region (TPR) is sending this letter to request the Transportation Commission's consideration and approval to reduce or eliminate the required match funding levels on certain MMOF candidate projects within our planning region.

At the Regional Planning Commission's (RPC) December 5th meeting, the RPC members directed the Chair, Barbara Kirkmeyer to review candidate MMOF projects and vote affirmatively to support reduction or elimination of the 50% match funding level required in TC Resolution #TC-19-06-05 to the match funding levels proposed on the following projects:

Applicant Project Name Total Requested Matching Match%

Project Cost MMOF Funds requested

Town of Estes Bike/Ped ADA compliant

Park sidewalk improvements on $ 699,409.78 $ 500,000 $199,409.78 28.5% Division Blvd

Town of Bike/Ped Division Blvd $250,000 $250,000 $0 0%

Platteville ADA compliant sidewalks

Each of the project applicants listed above are eligible to request match reduction or elimination based on having populations below the municipal (20,000) or county (50,000) thresholds outlined by the TC's MMOF match policy. Specifically,

• Estes Park with a population of 6,000.

• Platteville with a population of 2,660.

The project applicants below qualify for match reduction or elimination based on having poverty

220

300 S. Bonventure Ave., Trinidad, CO 81082 PH (719) 845-1133 Fax (719) 845-1130 www.sccog.net

Walter Boulden Administrator, South Central Transportation Planning Region (SCTPR) 300 S. Bonaventure Ave. Trinidad, CO 81082 2/13/2020 Re: Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) Match Reduction Request Dear Chair Thiebaut and Members of the Transportation Commission: The South Central TPR is sending this letter to request the Transportation Commission’s consideration and approval to reduce or eliminate the required match funding levels on certain MMOF candidate projects within our planning region. At the meeting of the SCTPR Regional Planning Commission on January 23, 2020, the members reviewed candidate MMOF projects and voted affirmatively to support reduction or elimination of the 50% match funding level required in TC Resolution #TC-19-06-05 to the match funding levels proposed on the following projects:

Applicant Project Name Total

Project Cost

Requested MMOF

Matching Funds

Match % requested

South Central Council of Governments

Construction of a transit garage in Walsenburg, CO. $ 360,000 $ 252,000 $ 108,000 30%

City of Trinidad Creating/striping bicycle lanes on select City Streets in Trinidad, CO. $ 25,000 $ 17,500 $ 7,500 30%

City of Trinidad Replacement of existing signal devices with ADA compliant equipment $ 100,000 $ 70,000 $ 30,000 30%

Each of the project applicants listed above are eligible to request match reduction based on having populations below the municipal (20,000) or county (50,000) thresholds outlined by the TC’s MMOF match policy. Specifically:

The SCCOG, which is not a county or municipality, provides its service across Huerfano and Las Animas Counties with a combined service area population (20,900) that the TPR agrees is proportionally below the requisite thresholds. The transit garage will be built in Walsenburg, CO with a population of 2,960, to serve Huerfano with a population of 6,662;

City of Trinidad CO with a population of 9,096. The project applicants below also qualify for match reduction based on having poverty rates that are above the statewide mean poverty rate threshold (12%) identified in the TC’s MMOF match policy. Specifically:

The SCCOG, which is not a county or municipality, provides its service across Huerfano County with a poverty rate of 14.8% and Las Animas with poverty rate of 17%; and

City of Trinidad has a poverty of 15%.

The SCTPR has determined it is in the best interest of our region to grant the match reductions above and that each individual project sponsor is justified based on the TC’s match requirements under the MMOF program. We kindly request the TC’s approval of these requests. Respectfully, ___________________________________________________ Walter Boulden SCTPR, Administrator

222

http://www.sccog.net/

P.O. Box 1600 112 West Elm Lamar, Colorado 81052 719.336-3850 Fax 719.336.3835

www.seced.net

February 28, 2020 Mr. Bill Thiebaut, Chair, Colorado Transportation Commission Members, Colorado Transportation Commission

c/o Herman Stockinger, Commission Secretary


2829 West Howard Place

Denver, CO 80204 Re: Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) Match Reduction Request


The Southeast TPR, in conjunction with Southeast Colorado Enterprise Development, Inc., is sending this letter to request the Transportation Commission’s consideration and approval to reduce or eliminate the required match funding levels on certain MMOF candidate projects within our planning region.

At the meeting of the Southeast TPR Regional Planning Commission on February 26, 2020, the members reviewed candidate MMOF projects and voted affirmatively to support reduction or elimination of the 50% match funding level required in TC Resolution #TC-19-06-05 to the match funding levels proposed on the following projects:

Applicant Project Name Total Project

Cost Requested

MMOF Matching

Funds Match %

requested

City of La Junta Design Plan-Off Road Trail Facility-Bike/Ped

$ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 0 0.0%

City of Lamar Design Planning & Pedestrian Bridge

$ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 0 0.0%

Southeast TPR Design Plan & Regional Bus Shelters

$ 364,017 $ 364,017 $ 0 0.0%

Each of the project applicants listed above are eligible to request match reduction or elimination based on having populations below the municipal (20,000) or county (50,000) thresholds outlined by the TC’s MMOF match policy. Specifically,

City of La Junta - with population 6,559.

City of Lamar with population 7,340.

Southeast TPR, in conjunction with Southeast Colorado Enterprise Development, which is not a county or municipality, but is a regional organization providing its service across multiple jurisdictions with a combined service area population that the TPR agrees is proportionally below the requisite thresholds. The Southeast TPR covers six counties of Baca, Bent, Crowley, Kiowa, Otero and Prowers, with a combined service area population of 42,541, well below the thresholds.

223

P.O. Box 1600 112 West Elm Lamar, Colorado 81052 719.336-3850 Fax 719.336.3835

www.seced.net

Southeast TPR Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) Match Reduction Request Page 2 The project applicants below qualify for match reduction or elimination based on having poverty rates that are above the statewide mean poverty rate threshold (12%) identified in the TC’s MMOF match policy. Specifically,

City of La Junta with poverty rate 27.25%,

City of Lamar with poverty rate 20.22%,

Southeast TPR, which is not a county or municipality, provides its service across multiple jurisdictions with an overall service area poverty rate above the qualifying 12% threshold. The Southeast TPR covers six counties with the following poverty rates – Baca-19.5%, Bent-24.5%, Crowley-24.6%, Kiowa-10.6%, Otero-22.9% and Prowers-18.3%, a combined average well over the 12% threshold.

The Southeast TPR has determined it is in the best interest of our region to grant the match reductions or eliminations above and that each individual project sponsor is justified based on the TC’s match requirements under the MMOF program. We kindly request the TC’s approval of these requests. Respectfully, Stephanie Gonzales Chair, Southeast TPR

224

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9262

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: NINTH BUDGET SUPPLEMENT - FY 2019-2020 Region 2 $1,062,394 – Surface Treatment and Senate Bill 267 – SH69A Westcliffe to Hillside Overlay – Request additional funding to award the project to the lowest bidder. Additional SB 267 funds will be provided from within the Region 2 allocation for FY 20 Rural Paving, with the expectation that an increase on this project will be offset by a subsequent reduction in the SB 267 allocation on another rural paving project. The increase to award is greater than $500,000 and is more than 15% above the original approved amount. Per Policy Directive 703.0 a budget increase in this amount requires Transportation Commission approval.

Phase Funding Original Previous Current Total Revised Expendedof Work Program Budget Adjustments Request Adjustments Budget To-Date

Construction Senate Bill 267 $6,500,000 $0 $469,836 $469,836 $6,969,836 $0Surface Treatment $0 $0 $592,558 $592,558 $592,558 $0Total Construction $6,500,000 $0 $1,062,394 $1,062,394 16% $7,562,394 $0

Total Project $6,500,000 $0 $1,062,394 $1,062,394 16% $7,562,394 $0

SH69A Westcliffe to Hillside OverlayBudget Components by Phase, Funding Program, Fiscal Year

Funding RequestTotal Adjustment

Percent

225


Transaction ReferenceDate Transaction Description Amount Balance Document

June-19 Ending Balance 12S19 $18,209,819July-19 Balance 1S20 $11,808,394

August-19 Balance 2S20 $12,272,130September-19 Balance 3S20 $10,454,730October-19 Balance 4S20 $10,405,695

November-19 Balance 5S20 $24,405,695December-19 Balance 6S20 $26,731,087January-20 Balance 7S20 $26,731,087February-20 Balance 8S20 $29,536,886

No requests this month

March-20 Pending Balance 9S20 $29,536,886

Transportation Commission Contingency Reserve Fund ReconciliationNinth Supplement FY 2020 Budget


June-19 Ending Balance 12S19 $75,156,855July-19 Balance 1S20 $84,029,527

August-19 Balance 2S20 $81,129,527September-19 Balance 3S20 $79,401,157

October-19 Balance 4S20 $79,401,157November-19 Balance 5S20 $52,343,864December-19 Balance 6S20 $48,843,864

January-20 Balance 7S20 $48,843,864February-20 Balance 8S20 $48,843,864

Additional Apportionment for Highway Infrastructure Programs 19,064,151$ 1000270616Allocation to Structures (8,450,501)$ Pending

Allocation to STP-Metro (16,497,711)$ PendingAllocation to Strategic Projects for Urban Arterials (17,178,240)$ Pending


Transportation Commission Program Reserve Fund ReconciliationNinth Supplement FY 2020 Budget


June-19 Carry forward from FY 2019 $0July-19 Balance 1S20 $10,000,000

August-19 Balance 2S20 $12,000,000September-19 Balance 3S20 $12,000,000October-19 Balance 4S20 $12,000,000

November-19 Balance 5S20 $12,000,000December-19 Balance 6S20 $22,000,000January-20 Balance 7S20 $14,806,900February-20 Balance 8S20 $10,197,300

Request additional Snow and Ice Funds (5,456,000)$ Pending


Transportation Commission Maintenance Reserve ReconciliationNinth Supplement FY 2020 Budget

226


State Total BudgetReg Highway Project Description County TCCRF projCode

- -$

-$

State Total BudgetReg Highway Project Description County TCCRF projCode

-$

-$

Mileposts

Total

Grand Total TCCRF Activity for Emergency Relief Since Last Reporting

Transportation Commission Contingency Reserve FundEmergency and Permanent Repairs-Nonparticipating costs and state match

September 11, 2013 Flood Related Monthly Activity

Mileposts

Spring 2015 Flood Related Monthly Activity

Total

FebruaryTC Contingency Balance (Emergencies)

Pending Requests:No Requests this Month

Pending March TC Contingency Reserve Balance

Projected Outflow: Low Estimate High EstimateState Match for Emergency Relief/Permanent Recovery ($2,000,000) ($5,000,000)State Match for Spring 2015 Floods $0 ($2,500,000)

Projected Inflow: Low Estimate High EstimateNone $0 $0 Projected FY 2019-2020 YE Contingency Balance $27,536,886 $22,036,886

TCCRF Surplus (Deficit) to Reach $25M Balance July 1, 2020 $2,536,886 ($2,963,114)

FebruaryTC Program Reserve Balance

Pending Requests:Additional Apportionment for Highway Infrastructure Programs

Allocation to Structures

Allocation to STP-Metro

Allocation to Strategic Projects for Urban Arterials

Pending MarchTC Program Reserve Fund Balance

Projected Outflow: Low Estimate High EstimateAnticipated Federal Revenue Adjustment ($14,725,771) ($14,725,771)

Projected Inflow: Low Estimate High EstimateReimbursement for Demolition of CDOT Headquarters $1,000,000 $0 Reimbursement for COP Defeasance $1,900,000 $1,900,000 Projected FY 2019-2020 YE Program Reserve Balance $13,955,791 $12,955,791

FY 2019-2020 Contingency Reserve Fund Balance Projection$29,536,886

FY 2019-2020 Program Reserve Fund Balance Projection$48,843,864

$0

($8,450,501)($16,497,711)($17,178,240)

$19,064,151

$25,781,562

$29,536,886

227

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9201 F 303.757.9563 www.codot.gov

Purpose The purpose of this memo is to inform the Transportation Commission of the pending STIP Policy Amendment #1 for the FY2020 – FY2023 STIP. Action Requested Department staff is requesting your approval of the attached amendment package so that CDOT may subsequently request concurrence from the Federal Highway Administration Colorado Division Office. Once this concurrence is received, this project will move from the “pending” status to the “approved” status in the STIP database in SAP. This will allow the projects to move forward. Background In Attachment 1 you will find details on the proposed STIP Policy Amendment #1 requested by CDOT for inclusion in the FY2020 – FY2023 STIP. This amendment package includes three projects that will utilize SB267 funds. All three projects meet STIP Amendment Guidance criteria for requiring a STIP Policy Amendment in order to be included in the STIP – each project will cost $5 million or more, and needs to be vetted with the general public for inclusion in the STIP. Each of these projects is high profile and considered to be regionally significant to the areas in which they are located. All of these projects are located in non-MPO areas and thereby require Transportation Commission approval prior to advancing. Per federal requirements (23 CFR 451.212) CDOT has conducted a public involvement outreach for review and comment on this proposed amendment. This outreach was initiated via e-mail to members of the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee, County Commissions and County planning staff. The amendment has also been available for review on the CDOT website at: https://www.codot.gov/business/budget. The public comment period opened on February 7, 2020 and will close on March 13, 2020. To date, no comments have been received. If any comments are received between now and March 13, they will be summarized for the Transportation Commission and presented at the regular meeting on March 19. OFMB has reviewed the amendment for consistency with the long-range statewide transportation plan, as well as for fiscal constraint. These projects meet those criteria.

MEMORANDUM

TO: TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

FROM: REBECCA WHITE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT

JAMIE COLLINS, STIP MANAGER, DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT

DATE: MARCH 6, 2020

SUBJECT: STIP POLICY AMENDMENT #1 FOR FY2020 – FY2023 STIP

Division of Transportation Development 2829 West Howard Place, 4th Floor Denver, CO 80204

228

https://www.codot.gov/business/budget

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9201 F 303.757.9563 www.codot.gov

Options and Recommendations Department staff recommends approval of STIP Policy Amendment #1 package. Should the Transportation Commission require further information, department staff will research and provide that information to the Commission. Next Steps Once approved, Department staff will:

Forward the Amendment package to FHWA for their concurrence; Approve the amendment in the STIP database in SAP.

Attachments

Attachment 1 - STIP Amendment table detailing the projects being added to the STIP; Attachment 2 - Resolution for approval of the STIP Policy Amendment #1 package;

229

FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023CDOT Region STIP ID STIP Description Funding

Program Amount Amount Amount Amount Reason for Amendment

3 SIN7021 I-70 Vail Pass Aux Lane

7PXFR8 Total

$13,500,000 $3,500,000$18,000,000

The preliminary engineering of this project is currently being designed under the umbrella STIP number SR36607.028. Region 3 has determined that with the completion of the Environmental Assessment and construction funding available that this project qualifies as a Regionally Significant Project. All future funding to this project will be programmed to this number.

3 SIN7022I-70 Auxiliary Lane East Frisco toSilverthorne SB1 $24,000,000

Construction of eastbound auxiliary lane from MP 203 to 205. Identified in the Silverthorne Interchange PEL as a safety improvement for eastbound I-70. Minimal widening required.

2 SR25216.146US 287 Bridge Preventative Maintenance 7PX $5,000,000

US 287 Bridge Preventative Maintenance: Scope of Work: Bridge preventative work such as bridge deck repair, joins replacement, bridge rail replacement at nine selected bridges. MP21.13, MP32.22, MP 38.33, MP39.93, MP 40.09, MP 42.46, MP 46.51, MP 100.53, MP122.53

Amounts in Dollars

FY2020 - FY2023 STIP - Policy Amendment 1

for Transportation Commission Approval on March 19, 2020

If you have any questions or comments regarding the amendment actions above, please submit them to:

Jamie Collins, Colorado Department of [email protected]

303-757-9092

Comments will be taken until close of business on March 13, 2020

ATTACHMENT 1

230

Colorado Bridge Enterprise Board Meeting Minutes February 20, 2020

PRESENT: Shannon Gifford, District 1

Don Stanton, District 2 Eula Adams, District 3 Karen Stuart, District 4 Kathleen Bracke, District 5 Barbara Vasquez, District 6 Kathy Hall, District 7 Sidny Zink, District 8 Irv Halter, District 9 William Thiebaut, Chair, District 10 Gary Beedy, District 11

AND: Staff members, organization representatives, and the public An electronic recording of the meeting was made and filed with supporting documents in the Transportation Commission office. In February, the Bridge Enterprise Board of Directors

• Approved the minutes from the January Board Meeting • Approved match commitment for federal INFRA grant • Received the BE Q2 FY 2020 Quarterly Report

231

of 1

TO: THE BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: SEVENTH SUPPLEMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BUDGET Region 4: This request is to establish the construction phase budget for this bridge replacement project. The existing deficient bridge is currently a second-tier candidate bridge in the January 2020 BE Prioritization Plan. However, it was a top-tier candidate bridge in the July 2019 BE Prioritization Plan when pre-construction funding was allocated. The project is now ready for advertisement and construction funding is being requested to capitalize on project readiness.

• $3,739,200 FASTER Funds – Construction Phase: Establish the construction phase.

Phase Funding Current Total Revised Expendedof Work Program Budget FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 Request Budget To-Date

FASTER Bridge Funds 10,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10,000$ -$ Total Right-of-Way 10,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10,000$ -$

FASTER Bridge Funds 672,900$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 672,900$ 415,985$ Total Design 672,900$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 672,900$ 415,985$

FASTER Bridge Funds -$ 3,739,200$ -$ -$ 3,739,200$ Total Construction -$ 3,739,200$ -$ -$ 3,739,200$ 3,739,200$ -$

682,900$ 3,739,200$ -$ -$ 3,739,200$ 4,422,100$ 415,985$ Total

FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 Request

1,125,000$ 2,614,200$ -$ 3,739,200$

Year of Expenditure

US 34 ML over North Fork Republican River in Yuma County(D-27-G) (New structure D-27-H) (SAP Project # 22962/1000…)

Budget Components by Phase, Funding Program, Fiscal YearBE Supplement Action

Year of Budget

Right-of-Way

Construction

Total Project Budget & Expenditure

Design

2829 W. Howard Place Denver, CO 80204

232

2829 W Howard Pl., Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9011 www.coloradodot.info/programs/BridgeEnterprise

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: FINAL FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BUDGET FUND 538 Purpose: This month the Bridge Enterprise (BE) Board of Directors (Board) is being presented with a final fiscal year (FY) 2020-21 Statewide Bridge Enterprise Special Revenue Fund (C.R.S 43-4-805(3)(a) 538 (Fund 538) budget for adoption. Action: The Board is being asked to review and adopt a final BE budget plan for FY 2020-21. Background: In November 2019, staff presented the Board with a fiscal year 2020-21 proposed budget for review and approval. The Board had no comments or suggested changes and the proposed budget was adopted. Since then, staff has made the following updates to the proposed budget that was originally approved in November:

• Line 4: US Treasury Subsidy for Build America Bonds: The amount of the subsidy has been reduced from $5.9 million to $5.2. The change is a result of the Series 2019A bond refunding that was completed in December 2019.

• Line 33: 2010 A Bond Debt Service: The amount has been reduced from $18.2 million to $17.2 million as a

result of the Series 2019A bond refunding that was completed in December 2019.

• Line 37: Funding for Bridge Enterprise Projects: The amount has increased from $100.2 to $100.5 as a result of debt service savings.

These changes are highlighted in green on Attachment A: FY 2020-21 Final Bridge Enterprise Budget Fund 538. Important to note: The Office of Financial Management and Budget (OFMB) will update the Department’s FY 2020-21 Revenue Allocation Plan to reflect these changes after they are adopted by the BE Board. Options and Recommendations:

1. Review and approve the Final Bridge Enterprise Budget Fund 538. - STAFF RECOMMENDATION 2. Request additional information or changes to specific line items. 3. Do not approve.

Next Steps

• Bridge Enterprise budget staff will coordinate with OFMB to ensure that the approved budget amounts are distributed appropriately.

• Enterprise budget and accounting staff will provide the BE Board of Directors with a year-end report for FY 2019-20 in October 2020 following the close of the fiscal year.

Attachment: Attachment A: Final Fiscal Year 2020-21 Bridge Enterprise Budget Fund 538.

2829 W Howard Pl., 3rd Floor Denver, CO 80204

233


Attachment A: Final Fiscal Year 2020-21 Bridge Enterprise Budget Fund 538

234


MEMORANDUM

TO: BRIDGE ENTERPRISE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: BILL THIEBAUT, BRIDGE ENTERPRISE CHAIR DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NEW BRIDGE ENTERPRISE VICE CHAIR Purpose: The Bridge Enterprise Board of Directors is being asked to approve the attached resolution formally acknowledging the new Bridge Enterprise Board of Directors Vice Chair. Background: At the February 2020 Transportation Commission (TC) meeting, Commissioner Karen Stuart was appointed as the new TC Vice Chair. In the past, the TC Vice Chair also served as the Bridge Enterprise Board of Directors Vice Chair. The TC Chair and TC Secretary, Bill Thiebaut and Herman Stockinger, will remain as the Colorado Bridge Enterprise Chair and Secretary, respectively. Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution #BE-20-3-X: Bridge Enterprise Vice Chair FY2019-2020

2829 W Howard Pl., 3rd Floor Denver, CO 80204

235

of 2

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9262 F 303.757.9656

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CDOT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

DATE: MARCH 19, 2020

SUBJECT: MONTHLY CASH BALANCE UPDATE Purpose To provide an update on cash management, including forecasts of monthly revenues, expenditures, and cash balances in Fund 400, the State Highway Fund.

Action No action requested or required.

Background Figure 1 below depicts the forecast of the closing Fund 400 cash balance in each month, as compared to the targeted minimum cash balance for that month (green shaded area). The targeted minimum cash balances reflect the Transportation Commission’s directive (Policy Directive #703) to limit the risk of a cash overdraft at the end of a month to, at most, a probability of 1/1,000 (1 month of 1,000 months ending with a cash overdraft).

Figure 1 – Fund 400 Cash Forecast

236

of 2

2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9262 F 303.757.9656

The projected closing cash balance in February 2020 (some final figures were unavailable at the time of writing on March 9th) was $902 million; $732 million above that month’s cash balance target of $170 million. The large cash balance results from the additional revenues listed below.

Cash Revenues

The forecast of revenues and capital proceeds includes:

Senate Bill 17-267: $425 million in November 2018, $500 million in March 2020, and then $0 thereafter.

Senate Bill 18-001: $346.5 million in July 2018, and $105 million in July 2019.

Senate Bill 19-262: $60 million in July 2019.

The forecast does not include $500 million of revenues in each of FY21 and FY22 from SB 17-267 capital proceeds. The transit grants and the portions of projects that are to be funded from these sources are also excluded from this forecast. Revenues and expenditures for these sources will be added when there is more certainty regarding the availability of these revenues, likely after the conclusion of the legislative session. Cash balances will be drawn down closer to the target balances over the course of fiscal years 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 as projects funded with SB 18-001, SB 17-267, SB 19-262 progress through construction.

February’s closing cash balance is $45 million lower than January’s forecast of that balance, largely due to a $50 million milestone payment related to the progress of construction on the Central 70 project.

Cash Payments to Construction Contractors

The current forecast of payments to construction contractors under state contracts (grants paid out under inter-government agreements for construction are accounted for elsewhere in the expenditure forecast) from Fund 400 is shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2 – Forecasted Payments - Existing and New Construction Contracts

$ millions CY 2017 (actual)

CY 2018 (actual)

CY 2019 (actual)

CY 2020 (forecast)

CY 2021 (forecast)

CY 2022 (forecast)

CY 2023 (forecast)

CY 2024 (forecast)

Expenditures $642 $578 $669 $839 $767

$623

$416

$355

See the Dashboard of Major Projects memo for additional information on CY 2020 construction expenditures. Note the higher Construction Payout forecast in the Dashboard of Major Projects includes Bridge Enterprise projects.

237


MEMORANDUM

TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: MARCH 19, 2020 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2019 REPORTING REQUIREMENT – C.R.S. 43-1-123(3)(A) AND (B) Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to meet the requirements of Colorado Revised Statute 43-1-123(3) that requires the Department report to the Transportation Commission the money expended for total transportation project costs during the preceding fiscal year. Action The Transportation Commission is not being asked for any action on this memorandum, it is being furnished as informational only. Background Colorado Revised Statute 43-1-123(3) (a) and (b) specifically requires that the Department report the following: (a) Payments to private sector contractors for work on transportation projects; and (b) Total transportation project costs for projects completed by department employees, including indirect cost recoveries and employee salaries. Report Details For Fiscal Year 2019, the Colorado Department of Transportation spent $860.0M related to transportation projects. Colorado Revised Statute 43-1-123(3)(a)

For Fiscal Year 2019, the Colorado Department of Transportation made total payments of $712.2M (82.8%) to private sector entities for work on transportation projects - $544.0M (63.3%) to private sector construction contractors and $168.2M (19.6%) to private sector consultants.

Colorado Revised Statute 43-1-123(3)(b)

For Fiscal Year 2019, the Colorado Department of Transportation made payments of $94.5M (11.0%) to CDOT staff for salary and benefits for work on transportation projects.

The table below breaks down CDOT’s costs into major groupings of transportation project expenditures.

238

of 2


CDOT Transportation Project Costs – Fiscal Year 2019

Amount Percentage of Total Right of Way (2%)

Acquisitions $24.7M 2.9%

Preconstruction (10%)

CDOT Staff $13.5M 1.6%

Consultants $85.8M 10.0%

Other $2.8M 0.3%

Indirect Costs (10%)


Consultants $20.9M 2.4%

Other $18.8M 2.2%

Const. Management & Oversight (10%)


Consultants $52.0M 6.0% Other $5.5M 0.6%

Construction (68%)

Contractor Payments $544.0M 63.3%

CDOT Staff Consultants

$2.1M

$9.5M

0.2%

1.1%

Other Total

$1.5M

$860.0M

0.3%

100%

239