Capital Improvement Plan FY2014-2018 - Augusta Improvement Plans/FY 2014-2018...A Capital...

FY2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan

City of Augusta, KS 1 | P a g e

Capital Improvement Plan FY2014-2018 The City of Augusta, Kansas 113 E. 6th Avenue, PO Box 489 Augusta, KS

July 2013



Table of Contents

Introduction…… …………………………………………………………………… 3

What is a Capital Improvement Plan?………………………………………………. 3

Capital Improvement Fund………………………… ……………………….………3

Capital Project Defined………….. …….…………………………………………... 3

Capital Outlay…………………………………………… …………………………. 4

Capital Improvement Plan Development Process…………. …………………….… 4

CIP Review Committee Members ………………………………………………….. 5

Guidelines and Procedures……. …………………………………………………… 5

2013 Capital Project Status Updates……. ……………………….………………… 6

2014-2018 CIP Executive Summary……. ………………………………….……… 8

Project Information Sheets……. …………………………………………………… 14



Introduction

Year after year, cities across the country work to keep pace with the growing needs of their communities as they battle the deficiencies of an aging infrastructure—the City of Augusta is no exception. The infrastructure needs of our city are tremendous and, like many small communities, the resources to address these needs are limited. Beyond simply maintaining and updating our existing infrastructure, our community also has a vision for the future about new facilities and amenities that would make Augusta a more vibrant and attractive place to live, work, and play. City leaders recognize that resources are not available to tackle of these projects at once. Rather, we must prioritize the community’s various needs and wants and strategically address them within the framework of the limited resources that are available. For that purpose, the City of Augusta has endeavored to create its first ever Capital Improvement Plan.

What is a Capital Improvement Plan?

A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a systematic, organized approach to planning for the expansion or enhancement of the City’s fixed capital assets. Fixed capital assets are generally defined as assets that require a significant amount of money to acquire or construct, and will last for an extended period of time. The CIP covers a multiyear period to help local officials foresee capital needs, estimate project costs, and arrange financing for large projects.

Capital Improvement Fund

The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is not to be confused with the Capital Improvement Fund. The CIP does not commit the City Council to funding any particular project in any particular year, whereas the Capital Improvement Fund represents proposed revenues and expenditures for the current year and is prepared as part of the annual Operating Budget. It generally includes only those projects from the first year of the Capital Improvement Plan that will be funded that year.

Capital Project Defined

The City of Augusta defines a capital project as a project with a minimum total cost of $25,000 resulting in 1) the creation or acquisition of a new fixed asset; 2) the enhancement of the capacity of an existing fixed asset; or 3) a considerable extension in the useful life of an existing fixed asset. Only projects that meet the definition of capital project are eligible for Capital Improvement Fund dollars. Expenses considered as operational, recurring, or maintenance are not generally considered eligible capital projects and are typically funded through the City’s Operating Budget as capital outlay.



Capital Outlay

Items designated as capital outlay will not be eligible for Capital Improvement Fund dollars, although they may be incorporated in the Capital Improvement Plan for long-term planning purposes. Capital Outlay is generally an expenditure category in the operating budget that accounts for capital projects with total costs below the $25,000 threshold. Other expenses considered operations-oriented as opposed to project-oriented, such as vehicle and equipment purchases, are also generally considered as capital outlay. Building renovations may or may not be considered capital outlay depending on size and scope. Technology upgrades greater than $5,000 may qualify for Capital Improvement Fund dollars.

CIP Development Process

Early each calendar year, project information sheets are to be submitted by various city departments. Information sheets are to be submitted for all capital projects that should be constructed or started during the next five fiscal years. Sheets are to include a description of the scope and justification for a project, as well as anticipated costs and proposed funding sources. The departments also suggest a year for the project based on priorities and needs (referencing Master Plans when appropriate). All projects are reviewed by the Capital Improvement Plan Review Committee, which is made up of representatives from several departments and administrative staff, as well as a City Council member and a member of the Planning Commission. The Committee uses a set of scoring criteria and a scoring matrix to determine a score for every project submitted. The scores are then combined into a composite priority ranking. The highest possible score for a project is ten (10) points; the closer a project scores to ten points, the higher the priority. These priority rankings are then used to develop a draft CIP. The draft CIP is submitted to the Planning Commission for review to ensure that all of the proposed projects are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The draft CIP is then submitted to the City Council for review and approval. Once approved, projects from the first year of the Capital Improvement Plan are used to develop the City Manager’s recommended Capital Improvement Fund budget.



Guidelines & Procedures This section outlines various guidelines & procedures that should be followed in order to develop the Capital Improvement Plan. Directors/Superintendents will be responsible

for submitting project information sheets for all of the departments they oversee.

Submittals are to be made electronically using the appropriate Excel form.

A project information sheet should be submitted for each capital project; multiple project sheets should be saved and submitted in one Excel workbook.

Email Excel files to [email protected]

The Assistant City Manager will compile project request sheets into a project binder.

A project binder will be submitted to each CIP Review Committee member for their review.

Each Committee member will be responsible for scoring projects based solely on the priority criteria identified in the scoring matrix; financial and timing considerations will be discussed after all projects have been prioritized.

The Committee will discuss individual scores and arrive at a consensus score for each criterion, which will be recorded by the Committee Secretary.

The Assistant City Manager will be responsible for compiling a draft CIP report for Planning Commission and City Council review.

The Planning Commission will receive the CIP Committee in an open meeting to discuss the draft CIP report and determine compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.

Upon approval from the Planning Commission, the City Council will receive the CIP Committee in an open meeting to adopt the plan following a public hearing.

FY2014-2018 CIP Review Committee Members

City Council Rep Jason Lowery City Council Rep Matt Malone Planning Commission Rep Dave Bisagno Interim City Manager Josh Shaw Finance Director Erica Jones Director of Public Safety Tyler Brewer Electric Utility Director Bill Webster Streets/Sanitation Foreman Anthony Craft Parks Foreman Brian Alfaro Water/WW Superintendent Russell Still



2013 Capital Project Status Updates

Corps Levee Project Upgrade flood protection from 100-yr to 500-yr level. Includes ROW acquisition and utility relocations in addition to levee construction.

• Project Estimate: $9,680,000 • Const. Contract Amount: $6,746,107 • Contractor: TERRA Construction, Inc. (OKC) • Engineer: Corps of Engineers (Tulsa) • Status: Construction 90% complete as of June 25, 2013;

anticipated completed in August 2013

Million Gallon Tank Repair Replace roof, paint, and miscellaneous repairs to the million gallon water storage tank located at the Water Treatment Plant at 400 Grove

• Project Estimate: $574,000 • Const. Contract Amount: $513,770 • Contractor: Caldwell Tanks (Caldwell) • Engineer: Aquatech Engineering (Augusta) • Status: Complete

Garvin Park Playground/Parking Lot Installation of a new ADA-accessible playground in Garvin Park with an adjacent parking lot, made possible through 50/50 LWCF grant funding and local City Match.

• Project Estimate: $200,000 • Contract Amount: $198,177 • Contractor: Playpower LT Farmington (playground);

Cornejo & Sons (parking lot) • Engineer: MKEC • Status: Playground construction complete; parking lot

to be completed by August 30, 2013

Kelly/Ohio Intersection Realignment and reconstruction of the Kelly/Ohio Intersection to include new traffic signals and designated left turn lanes on all arms.

• Project Estimate: $826,000 • Contract: $826,000 • Contractor: APAC • Status: In Progress, anticipated completion 1st week of

August, 2013



Kelly/Ohio Sanitary Sewer Line Repair of sanitary sewer lines, manholes, and inlets in preparation for intersection paving project.

• Project Estimate: $136,550 • Project Actual: $136,049 • Contractor: Alan’s Excavating • Status: Complete

School Street Water Line Repair of sanitary sewer lines, manholes, and inlets in preparation for intersection paving project.

• Project Estimate: $99,712 • Project Actual: $99,712 • Contractor: Dondlinger and Sons • Status: Complete

East Sanitary Sewer Outfall Project Repair of east sanitary sewer outfall pipeline, including encasing the pipeline in concrete, adding rip rap, and doing grade work along the irrigation ditch.

• Project Estimate: $59,980 • Project Actual: $55,566 • Contractor: Alan’s Excavating • Status: Complete

Catalytic Converters Installation of catalytic converters at the City’s power plant to comply with EPA mandates regarding emissions.

• Project Estimate: $784,690 • Project Actual: $286,328 • Contractor: Kansas Power Pool • Status: Catalytic converters are on-site at the power

plant but have yet to be installed



Executive Summary

The City of Augusta has implemented its capital improvement planning process to create the 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). This CIP will serve as a financial planning and management tool that prioritizes capital improvement projects and schedules them for funding and implementation. Projects in the 5-year capital plan have been prioritized based on the following criteria: economic growth, citizen demand, consistency with plans, mandates, public health and safety, operating efficiency, opportunity cost, multi-project coordination, beautification, operational budget impact, and extent of benefit. Each project included in the plan must meet the City’s definition of capital project.

2014 Capital Budget The City of Augusta CIP Committee has proposed a 2014 Capital Budget totaling over $2.6 million, of which approximately $1.2 million (46%) is funded from local sources (e.g. debt, capital improvement funds, cash, etc.) and $1.4 million (54%) is funded from outside sources (e.g. grant funding). The average score for projects in the 2014 Capital Budget is 5.30 out of 10 compared to an average score of 3.77 out of 10 for projects excluded from the 5-year CIP.

2014 Capital Budget Summary

Project Category # of Projects

Avg. Project Score

Local Costs Outside Costs

AIRPORT 2 3.94 $115,000 $885,000

GENERAL GOVERNMENT 3 3.96 $299,000 $521,000

PUBLIC WORKS 1 6.55 $45,000 -

UTILITIES 3 7.13 $740,000 -

STREETS - - - -

TOTAL 2013 CAPITAL BUDGET 9 5.30 $1,199,000 $1,406,000

Projects in the 2014 Capital Budget include acquisition of the RV park north of the Airport, funded 90/10 by an FAA grant; installation of an Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS) at the airport, funded 75/25 by a KDOT grant; restoration of the Frisco Depot for use as a Visitor’s Center, funded 74/26 by a Transportation Enhancement Grant; and several major water and wastewater infrastructure projects. There is also funding allocated for technological upgrades to the City’s phone system and A/V equipment, which are outdated and no longer supported by maintenance agreements. 2014 also marks the second year of funding allocated to the sign replacement program to address an unfunded mandate from the Federal Highway Administration to bring the City’s street signs into compliance with MUTCD retroreflectivity standards.



2014 Capital Budget Funding Sources

The majority (68.9%) of funding for projects in the 2014 Capital Budget comes from two primary sources: grant funding and the capital improvement fund. As a general policy, the City will confine long-term borrowing to capital projects that cannot be financed from current revenues. All funding for projects in 2014 will be done on a pay as you go basis, either with budgeted cash/cash reserves or outside grant funding. Water and wastewater infrastructure improvements are a top priority; these items will be funding using utility revenues, utility reserves, and bond proceeds. To the extent possible, the city will leverage outside funding sources (primarily grants) to finance capital projects. In the 2014 Capital Budget, 54.7% of project funding comes from state, federal, or cost-share grants (e.g. FAA, KDOT, etc.), totaling just under $1.43 million.

54.74%

14.17%

6.53%

11.52%

13.05%

Grants/Donations CIP Fund Debt

Sales Tax Utility Revenues Utility Reserves

Bond Proceeds Sewer Capital Fee



2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan (5 Yr Plan)

The City of Augusta CIP Review Committee has proposed a 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan totaling nearly $33.6 million, of which approximately $25.34 million (75.4%) is funded from local sources (e.g. debt, capital improvement funds, cash, etc.) and approximately $8.27 million (24.6%) is funding from outside sources (e.g. grant funding).

A total of 22 projects were selected for inclusion in the 2014-2018 CIP out of 40 submitted projects. The remaining 18 projects totaling over $21.6 million were excluded from the plan for a variety of reasons such as financing availability, lack of clarity in project scope, timing, and availability of land (in the case of land acquisition). These elements will be refined and the projects will be reviewed during subsequent review processes by the CIP Committee. A complete listing of excluded projects, including their reason for exclusion, is provided at the end of this section. The average score for projects included in the 5-year CIP was 5.38 out of 10 compared to 3.77 out of 10 for projects not selected for inclusion. Some of the most notable excluded projects include the dredging of Santa Fe Lake and a new City Hall, both of which were scored highly by the CIP Review Committee (6.62 and 5.05 respectively). The dredging project is a high priority for safety reasons and for expanding the capacity of the City’s water supply. However, the cost is prohibitive without an outside source of grant funding or a significant tax increase. The City Council has expressed some level of interest in possibly purchasing the Bank of America building to serve as the new City Hall, but there is not a clear consensus at this point in time. The Bank of America building will be auctioned towards the end of 2013. If the City Council elects to pursue acquisition of the property, staff will need to explore financing options prior to the auction.

2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan Summary

Project Category # of Projects

Avg. Project Score

Local Costs Outside Costs

AIRPORT 6 3.17 $420,602 $5,231,438

GENERAL GOVERNMENT 5 4.50 $439,000 $541,000

PUBLIC WORKS 3 5.33 $852,200 $0

UTILITIES 6 7.49 $21,440,000 $0

STREETS 2 6.42 $2,190,000 $2,500,000

TOTAL 2014-2018 CIP 22 5.38 $25,341,802 $8,272,438



2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan (5 Yr Plan) Funding Sources

The majority (68.6%) of funding for projects in the 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Plan comes from two primary sources: sales tax and grant funding. The City has a 2% local option sales tax, of which, 1% goes to the general fund, CIP, and street improvements and the other 1% is split between the general fund and water system improvements. The City has two major water supply projects scheduled to begin construction in 2015 (a new raw water line to El Dorado and the Walnut River diversion project), both of which are funded primarily with sales tax and supplemented with water service fees. As a general policy, the city will confine long-term borrowing (debt) to capital projects that cannot be financed from current revenues. Approximately 1.98% of the funding for the 2014-2018 CIP will be paid through the issuance of new debt for the South Ohio Street Project.

To the extent possible, the city will leverage outside funding sources (i.e. grants and donations) to finance capital projects. Just over $8.27 million (24.6%) of the funding for the 2014-2018 CIP comes from local, state, and federal grants or cost-share agreements (e.g. FAA, KDOT, etc.).

24.61%

6.64%

1.98%

44.03%

17.49% 4.02% 1.01% 0.22%

Grants/Donations CIP Fund Debt

Sales Tax Utility Revenues Utility Reserves

Bond Proceeds Sewer Capital Fee



FY2014-FY2018 Capital Improvement Plan Project Costs

Project Category & Title Project Score 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

AIRPORT RPZ Land Acquisition 4.14 $900,000 AWOS 3.73 $100,000 Airport Parking Lot Paving 3.34 $91,000 Main Hangar Pavement 3.14 $34,000

Runway Extension 2.94 $250,000 $2,400,000

Runway Widening 1.73 $200,000 $1,677,040 Subtotal Airport: 3.17 $1,000,000 $200,000 $1,677,040 $341,000 $2,434,000

GENERAL GOVERNMENT Comprehensive Plan Update 7.02 $100,000 City Hall Phone System 4.85 $50,000 Frisco Depot Restoration 3.80 $750,000 Update Financial Software 3.59 $60,000 A/V Equipment for Council Chambers 3.24 $20,000 Subtotal General Government: 4.50 $820,000 $100,000 $60,000 $0 $0

PUBLIC WORKS MUTCD Sign Upgrades 6.55 $45,000 $50,000 Sidewalks on 7th Avenue 5.41 $10,200 $35,000 $100,000 $112,000

Public Works Facility 4.04 $500,000 Subtotal Public Works 5.33 $45,000 $60,200 $35,000 $600,000 $112,000

UTILITIES Water Supply Projects 8.04 $19,800,000 Water Plant Backup Generator 7.97 $600,000 Golf Street Tower 7.52 $340,000 Meadowlake & Washington Water Line 6.97 $100,000 WWTP Bar Screening 6.90 $300,000 WWTP SCADA Upgrade 4.09 $300,000 Subtotal Utilities: 7.49 $740,000 $20,400,000 $300,000 $0 $0

STREETS South Ohio Street Enhancement Project 6.97 $3,440,000 7th Street Geometric Project 5.86 $1,250,000 Subtotal Transportation: 6.42 $0 $4,690,000 $0 $0 $0

GRAND TOTALS 5.38 $2,605,000 $25,450,200 $2,072,040 $941,000 $2,546,000



Projects Not Selected for Inclusion in FY2014-FY2018 CIP

ADDITIONAL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS

Project Name Score Cost Reason for Exclusion

Santa Fe Lake Dredging 6.62 $4,000,000 Financing unclear.

Woodland Drainage Project 5.25 $336,000 Financing unclear (storm water fee?). Refine scope.

New City Hall 5.05 $1,000,000 Financing unclear. Council priority.

Lake Road Restoration 4.70 $650,000 Refine project scope. Refine financing.

Firearms Range 4.64 $350,000 Financing unclear. Location not identified.

Architectural Drawings – 7th Ave 4.55 $20,000 Financing unclear. Money better spent on projects?

Sports Complex Construction 4.00 $3,000,000 Financing unclear. Location not identified.

Recreation Center 3.95 $10,000,000 Financing unclear. Location not identified.

Airport Security Fence 3.73 $150,000 Recommended when mandated by TSA.

Fuel Farm Paving 3.34 $40,000 Financing unclear. Low department priority.

Hangar Road Paving 3.34 $40,000 Financing unclear. Low department priority.

New T-Hangars 3.29 $600,000 Financing unclear. Pursuing public-private partnership.

Project OveRView 3.09 $175,000 Financing unclear.

Sculpture Walk To River 3.05 $1,100,000 Financing unclear.

Land Acquisition for Cemetery 2.89 $100,000 Location not identified. Council priority unknown.

Skate Park 2.21 $50,000 Location not identified. Financing unclear.

Property Acquisition- 600 School 2.18 TBD Cost unknown.

Downtown Park - Green space 1.93 TBD Cost Unknown. No available space identified.

GRAND TOTALS 3.77 $21,611,000

Project Title:

Department Responsibility:

Description:

Justification:

Is the Proposed Project: Yes Nox

x

19,800,000 Project Type: Repair Replace Add New

Project Timing:2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total

$19,800,000 $19,800,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $4,500,000$300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,500,000

$0$1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $6,000,000

Operational Budget Impact:

Additional Comments:

8.04

These projects were examined in a water supply study commissioned by the City Council. The new water line would reduce maintenance costs because it would not be as prone to leaks or ruptures and would be installed along road ROW that is much more accessible than railroad ROW. However, butying more water from El Dorado will also come at a cost and potentially required renegotiation of the raw water contract at a higher price. Greater pipeline capacity will eventually required capital improvements at the water plant as well. Water rates will have to increase to help for the project.

Total

Maintenance CostsPersonnel CostsTotal

Annual Expenditures

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANProject Information Sheet

Water Supply Projects

Water

El Dorado Lake is the primary source of water supply for the City of Augusta and the 50+ year old pipeline is the only means of conveyance. The existing steel line does not have the capacity to meet current water usage demands. A new pipeline of sufficient size would ensure the long-term viability of Augusta's water supply to meet the demand for the next 50 years. The City of Augusta has been under water restrictions for two years because of drought conditions and the inability to meet peak water demands. Citizen complaints and public awareness of our water problems are at an all time high, and these problems are negatively affecting public perception, quality of life, and economic development in Augusta. The public voted in favor a 1% sales tax to pay for the majority of the project. The City has been under water restrictions for two years because of drought conditions that dramatically reduced the available water supply in Augusta City Lake and Santa Fe Lake. The City does not have the capability of meeting the community's peak watering demands without use of these lakes. The Walnut River project would allow the City to gain another backup water supply. This project enhances public safety and quality of life for citizens by supplementing water supply for drinking, fire suppression, and recreational purposes.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score

- Compliant with Comprehensive Plan and/or Master Plan?

(Completed by CIP Committee)

The El Dorado project would involve construction of a new raw water line, booster stations, etc. to replace the current raw water line that runs along approx. 10 miles of BNSF railroad right of way. Aquatech Engineering is performing engineering services for the project. The project will consist of four different construction contracts. The project will require some right of way acquisition. The Walnut River project would involve construction of an intake structure, pump, and water line from the Walnut River to a pre-sedimentation basin at the north end of the Augusta City Lake. Assuming that the state approve the City's application for water rights, the City could pump water from the Walnut River into the Augusta City Lake 8-9 months out of the year to make sure that the lake is as full as possible at the start of every summer.

- Mandated by State or Federal Government, or interlocal agreement?

1% Water Sales TaxWater Rates

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:

Is the Proposed Project: Yes Noxx

600,000.00 Project Type: Repair Replace Add New


$600,000 $600,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$600,000 $600,000

$0$0$0$0

$0 $600,000 $0 $0 $0 $600,000



7.97

Staff believes that the generator may have a positive overall impact on the operational budget by assisting the City with peak shaving for electrical power and preventing costly repairs to electrical equipment like VFDs and motors that tend to fail and have to be replaced as a result of power outages.

Total


Annual Expenditures


Backup Generator Water Plant

Water Production

It is critical we maintain water service throughout town for health safety and fire protection during emergencies. This generator will maintain our lines and water storage tanks so that we will not harm our existing system with fluctuations of pressures that might cause ruptures in our line and cause a possibility of contamination from drainage of lines or tanks. We need to maintain service 24/7 to our citizens. EPA and State regulatory agencies highly recommend and most times require back up power for water and wastewater plants. The Electric Department believes this generator can tie into the existing power grid to help the City with peak shaving capabilities and help lower power costs.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



A Generator with a automatic transfer switch will provide power to our water plant in times of an emergency. The Backup Generator is sized by an engineer to make sure the proper amount of electricity is provided to the plant to operate it safely and not do any damage to the existing equipment. If we lose power the transfer switch moves connection to generators so when it starts it keeps the plant running without any interruption.


Electric Reserve

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$300,000 $300,000


$0$0$0$0

$300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000



7.52(Completed by CIP Committee)

This project will be to completely rehab Golf Tower's interior and exterior for extended use of structure. The items that will performed will be sand blasting, primer, paint and sealer for inside and outside of tank. Insulate pipe, weld roof plates, replace ladder, and install balcony manway opening. Has 5 year warranty and 10 year service plan.


Fund 34 - Water Imp. Bonds


Golf Tower Rehab Project

Water Production

The Golf Tower has not been sandblasted or painted in 30 years. The City hired a company to drain, clean, and inspect the tank in November 2012. This intent of this project is to make all of the repairs that were recommended in the inspectors' report. These items are critical to maintain and extend the life of this structure. The tank shows excessive wear and we need to move ahead on this project to have a clean and safe structure to store our drinking water. This project will protect the tank from future corrosion plus enhance the visual appeal of a prominent and visible piece of city infrastructure. This project will improve the safety for personnel trying to access the tower to make needed repairs. The tower provides 500,000 gallon of water storage for emergency water supply for residents and firefighting and needs to be maintained.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


See attached facilities inspection report.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:




$100,000 $100,000


$0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000



7.02

By City Ordinance and K.S.A 12-747, the Planning Commission has a duty to adopt and maintain a comprehensive plan for the City and unincorporated area. Comprehensive plans are required by state statute in order to adopt subdivision regulations.

Total


Annual Expenditures


Comprehensive Plan Update

General Government

The current plan is over a decade old and in need of serious updating. Most of the development projects and infrastructure needs identified in the plan have been completed, so the plan no longer provides much guidance on future development for the City. The existing plan does not adequately capture the current conditions of the city, provide a vision for the community, or provide actionable steps for achieving that vision. The Comprehensive Plan will provide guidance for future capital project needs that can assist with development of the CIP document and with setting budget priorities for infrastructure upgrades.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



Update to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Last update occurred in 2002-2003. The Comprehensive Plan is the primary guide for land use, zoning policy, and development in the City of Augusta and the unincorporated growth area.


CIP

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$100,000 $100,000


$0$0$0$0

$100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000




Replace the 2" water line that runs in the alley between Meadowlake and Washington Lane. It is galvanized old and unreliable. We would install a new 6" inch line and 22 new water services for customers on the 2" line. The project is 1 block in length and would be around 1100 feet long.


Water Admin


Meadowlake and Washington Lane Water Line Replacement

Water Distribution

Water quality and availability is jeopardized due to the age and condition of the existing 2" line. There is also the problem with water pressure and availabilty of fire protection if we had problems with our other lines in the area. This line is probably 50 plus years old and is corroded to the point that very little water passes through the line compared to if it were a new line. Some 2" lines in town have only a half inch opening due to corrosion of these galvanized lines. The project would improve the quality of life for those customers in that area.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x

3,440,000.00 Project Type: Repair Replace Add New


$3,440,000 $3,509,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$1,500,000 $1,500,000$665,000 $665,000$400,000 $400,000$400,000 $400,000$150,000 $150,000$250,000 $250,000$75,000 $75,000

$0 $3,440,000 $0 $0 $0 $3,440,000


$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0



Reconstruction/enhancements of Ohio Street from Frisco to the Kelly Street intersection. MKEC is preparing conceptual plans for the project, which may include widening the street to three lanes, replacing curb and gutter, storm sewer and other utility repairs, and replacing/adding sidewalks.


Water AdminFund 49

Elect. Reserve

KDOT GrantDebt


South Ohio Street Enhancement Project

Administration

Ohio Street is the main north/south arterial street in the City. Traffic numbers along Ohio Street warrant improvements for safety considerations and enhancing traffic flow. The intersection at Kelly and Ohio will be reconstructed/realigned in the summer of 2013 and Frisco Street was resurfaced in 2010. This street repair will connect these other two improvement projects. This stretch of Ohio is in disrepair. Street improvements (other than 7th Street) are third highest infrastructure priority identified during the visioning process.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Total


Annual Expenditures

CIP carryoverStreet Sales Tax (carryover)

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$300,000 $300,000


$0$0$0$0

$300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000

Operational Budget Impact:($500) ($500) ($500) ($500) ($500) ($500)

($1,500) ($1,500) ($1,500) ($1,500) ($1,500) ($1,500)-$2,000 -$2,000 -$2,000 -$2,000 -$2,000 -$2,000



Installation of bar screening equipment at the wastewater treatment plant.


WW Reserve - Fund 47


Install Bar Screening Equipment at WWTP

WWTP

The JCI Auger Monster that was installed with the plant has been taken out of service. The unit is in need of a rebuild. However, the unit also causes a bottleneck in the influent channel at the top of the Headworks bulding. Our current methods of screening (influent basket and course bar rack in the headworks building) are inefficient. Rags and other solid items still make it through to the influent pumps, RAS pumps, and telescoping tubes for RAS sludge control, plugging them up. Objects that get into the influent pumps have the potential to cause serious damage to them. Currently screenings are manually raked off. This poses a possible health hazard to wastewater treatment plant employees.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Project should reduce manual labor required to operate plant and thus, improve operating efficiency and reduce operational costs.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:




$45,000 $50,000 $95,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$45,000 $50,000 $95,000

$0$0$0$0

$45,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $95,000




This project will replace over 1,100 Street signs through the community that are in need of repair or replacement to meet Federal Highway Adminsitration (FHWA) requirements as outlined in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The average cost to replaced a sign (with post) is about $120.00.


CIP


MUTCD Sign Retroreflectivity Upgrades

Public Works

A sign inventory conducted in 2011 indicated that 1,119 of the City's roughly 1,500 signs are in eed of repair or replacement to meet MUTCD standards. Public entities are mandated by the FHWA to have their signs meet MUTCD standards by the year 2015. Retroflective signs with breakaway posts improve visibility at night and reduce the amount of damage/injury caused to vehicles and their drivers in the event of a crash, which enahcnes public safety.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Public works staff will perform the labor to remove the old signs and install the new ones, so there may not be any additional operational costs other than the opportunity cost of taking personnel away from other projects. This project is mandated by the federal government.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x

1,250,000 Project Type: Repair Replace Add New

Project Timing:2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 5-yr Total

$1,250,000 $1,250,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$1,000,000 $1,000,000

$20,000 $20,000$90,000 $90,000$80,000 $60,000 $140,000

$0$170,000 $1,080,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000

Operational Budget Impact:($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($4,000)($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($4,000)($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($8,000)



Replace existing eastbound lanes of US 54/400 from 280 ft. west of Walnut to the West end of the ATSF bridge. Replace deteriorating concrete pavement with new 10" concrete pavement on 6" crushed stone base with geogrid reinforcement. Total project length approximately 2,060 feet.


CIP2013 CIP (design)

KDOT Grant2012 KLINK Project Fund


7th Street Geometric Improvements

Public Works

The westbound lanes of US 54/400 were replaced with full depth conrete in 2011. This project would do the same for the eastbound lanes. The eastbound lanes are showing significant wear and tear from high traffic volumes (particularly semi truck traffic). The City's patching capabilities are limited and some of the larger repairs that have been done were relatively short lived. 7th Street is a major highway that cuts down the middle of the City's main commercial corridor. This project will handle all of the required repairs as one single project, which will minimize mobilization costs as well as the deterimental impact on businesses from shutting the road down for smaller, phsaed projects.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


This project should reduced maintenance costs by limiting the amount of patching that has to be done one the eastbound lanes of 7th Street. This portion of road is notorious for pothole and patching issues, which a full depth reconstruction will address.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$10,200 $35,000 $100,000 $112,000 $257,200

Proposed Funding Sources:$10,200 $35,000 $100,000 $112,000 $257,200

$0$0$0$0

$0 $10,200 $35,000 $100,000 $112,000 $257,200




Construct new sidewalks in areas without sidewalk along 7th Avenue including North side west of Lulu, North side from Lulu to Bluff, North side west of Osage, and South side from Lulu to Bluff. Cost estimate (2010) is based on constructing sidewalks 5 feet wide. Sidwalks would consist of 4-inch concrete pavement except at driveways. Sidewalk pavement at driveways will be 6-inch reinforced concrete pavement. Existing drives that do not meet sidewalk slope requirements of ADA will be removed and replaced at the new sidewalk crossing tocomply with ADA.


CIP


Sidewalks on 7th Avenue

General Government

No sidewalks currently exist in these locations so the pedestrian access/walkability of the City's primary corridor is fractured and inconsistent. There is no good way for disabled individuals in wheelchairs or personal mobility devices to access businesses along long stretches of 7th Street. "Improving Curb Appeal" and "7th Avenue Improvements" were the second and third highest economic development priorities in the Augusta Vision 2008 document and "7th Avenue Improvements" were the second highest infrastructure priority. Project should enhance the beauty and curb appeal of the corridor.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$50,000 $50,000


$0$0$0$0

$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000




Complete replacement of phone system for City Hall and several other departments. Allow for direct dialing to extensions as well as between buildings, voice mail, call transfers, conference call, etc. System will be networked. Includes hardware, software, and installation.


Elect. Admin


City Hall Phone System

General Government

Current phone system is approximately 20 years old and is no longer supported. If system were to fail, City Hall and several other departments would have to replace it or not have any phones. The project will upgrade technology to improve efficiency of services and significantly improve customer service capabilities.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


There may be an annual maintenance/support fee. Project is being bid in 2013, but cost may have to carry over into 2014 budget.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:




$900,000 $900,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$810,000 $810,000$50,000 $50,000$40,000 $40,000

$0$0

$900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000




Purchase the RV park land that is north on runway 18-36, purchase the land south of the airport, and purchase a few slivers of property to the east of the airport. The RV park is located within the North runway protection zone, which planes fly directly over for landing and takeoff purposes. Currently, we have an avigation easment on the property,but new FAA regulations mandate that we own the property in our avigation easements.


CIP (2013 carryover)

FAA GrantCIP


RPZ Land Acquisition

Airport

The land to the north must be purchased to avoid violating FAA grant assurances. If we violate FAA grantassurances, we may not qualify for future grant funding, and at worst, could be required to pay back funding that we have already received for other projects. We also need to buy the land to the north so that we can get aninstrument/GPS approach for runway 18, which would make the airport much more marketable to larger aircraft. The FAA has indicated that we will be forced to physically remove the north 300' of the runway if we do not comply with their requirements. The City Council considered alternatives through a Runway Feasibility study developed by BWR (Lochner) for addressing this issue and selected an alternative for airport development that included the land purchases. This development alternative was used to created the airport's current Airport Layout Plan (ALP) on file with the FAA.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


The land to the north of the airport where the RV park currently is located is the first priority in aquiring land. The RV Park is highest priority for safety reasons. The slivers of land to the east will square up the airport property to align with the actual building restriction line.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$300,000 $300,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$200,000 $100,000 $300,000

$0$0$0$0

$0 $200,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $300,000



4.09

Project could possibly result in personnel savings by automating many of the processess that currently requiremanual operation.

Total


Annual Expenditures


WWTP SCADA System

WWTP

The SCADA software is a very old version of Wonderware. The computer is so old it doesn't have USB ports. Anewer version of the software and a new monitoring computer would allow for more efficient plant monitoring andcontrol. It would also let the City to take the Verbatim autodialer out of service and allow the computer to do the call outs for plant alarms. If the system would crash, plant staff would have no way to know if there was a problem at the plant such as a high sludge wetwell. A bypass of sludge not only has to be reported to KDHE, but could also pose a threat to human health.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



The SCADA system software that monitors various equipment at the plant is in need of an upgrade, along with the computer. This would be a full replacement of the existing SCADA system in order to operate the plan automatically rather than manually.


WW Reserve Fund 47

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:




$500,000 $500,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $65,000 $275,000$150,000 $150,000$15,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $75,000

$0$0

$235,000 $90,000 $90,000 $85,000 $0 $500,000



4.04

Although hard to quantify, the project should result in maintenance cost savings and potentially personnel savings through operating efficiency gains. The project should also boost morale and make employees more productive.

Total


Annual Expenditures


New Public Works Facility

Public Works

Replacing the quonset huts with a new square metal building will provide a much larger and functional space for the street department, sanitation department, water distribution, sewer collection, vehicle maintenance, etc. to operate. The current facilities are not functional or efficient. Useable space would likely double, but still fit within the existing footprint and not require any additional property acquisition. A new metal building is an economical option that would dramatically improve aesthetics of the area as well as the morale of employees working for the departments specified. The space would included dedicated office areas and meeting rooms for the departments to utilize. The mechanic's area and shop space could be enhanced with larger doors and pass through capabilities for vehicles. The new space should also enhance employee safety and accessibility, as the current facility is difficult and potentially dangerous in places to navigate through.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



The City would like to replace the two Quonset huts currently serving as the Street Shop with a new metal building. The Quonset Huts will be torn down and the existing concrete slab will be expanded. The new metal building will be constructed in the same location.


Sanitation Fund

CIPCIP (carryover)

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$750,000 $750,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$521,000 $521,000$86,000 $86,000$123,000 $123,000$10,000 $10,000$10,000 $10,000$750,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000

Operational Budget Impact:$2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $2,500$2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $12,500



Restore the Frisco Depot building that was purchased by the City in 2005. Building would be repurposed as a Visitor Information Center and would house the offices of Downtown Augusta Inc, the Chamber of Commerce, andConvention and Tourism Bureau as well as provide meeting space for the community.


Butler County GrantAPI Grant

Project Fund

TE GrantCIP (2013-14)


Frisco Depot Restoration

General Government

City Council has been committed to funding this project for some time. Project has been delayed for several years waiting for grant funding from KDOT. The City has cash on hand to cover a portion of the match for the project but the rest will have to come from leftover 2013 CIP funds as well as 2014 CIP funds. If City is awarded 74/26 Transportation Enhancement Grant from KDOT, the project will be ready to proceed immediately. Project will restore the historical structure and revitalize a blighted area at the Gateway to Augusta's historic downtown. Citizens identified project as a minor quality of life priority, but a large number of businesses support the project (as demonstrated by fundraising to help City purchase the building). Meeting space and technology could be utilized by City Council and staff for presentations, retreats, community events, etc.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


The City will be responsible for maintaining this building in operating condition going forwards. This will requireregular maintenance and cleaning resulting in an increase in operational costs.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$100,000 $100,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$15,000 $15,000$10,000 $10,000$75,000 $75,000

$100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000

Operational Budget Impact:$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000

$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000



The AWOS is a computer and antenna that analyzes the current weather conditions at the airport and provides safety and flight information for pilot. The AWOS is purchased as a "complete kit in a box." The AWOS is part of the Airport Master Plan, and it is a requirement by the FAA in order to have instrument approaches, which dramatically increase safety and help the airport attract new business.


KDOT Grant

CIPCIP (2013 carryover)


AWOS

Airport

The AWOS is part of the Airport Master Plan. Accurate and up-to-date weather information is essential to the safe operation of the airport. Pilots flying cross-country in business jets are not likely to land at airports that do not provide live weather reporting information. The AWOS will help attract new customers and business to the airport. The AWOS is also essential for getting a three letter identifier and upgrading to a regional airport status.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


The AWOS will have an estimated annual maintenance contract cost of $3,000-$4,000.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$60,000 $60,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$40,000 $40,000$20,000 $20,000

$0$0$0

$0 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $60,000



3.59

Total


Annual Expenditures


Update Financial Software

General Government

We have had Microsoft Great Plains financial software since 2000. We receive annual version updates and are not currently experiencing any difficulties, but there are some features that the software does not support. Upgrading the software could potentially enhance efficiency and customer service capabilities

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



The financial software manages the payroll, accounts payable, and fund balances for the entire organization.


Electric AdminWater Admin

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$0

Proposed Funding Sources:$68,250 $68,250$22,750 $22,750

$0$0$0

$0 $0 $0 $91,000 $0 $91,000




Asphalt mill and overlay (potential base work) of public parking lot located due north of the terminal building.


KDOT GrantCIP


Airport Parking Lot Paving

Airport

The parking lot paving has failed and has been in need of replacement for many years. The parking lot produced a lot of Foreign Object Debris (FOD) that gets carried onto the airport when cars drive through the parking lot/entrance area and onto the ramp. Commercial tenants and non-commercial tenants have requested that the parking lot be paved as the current lot is very unattractive and creates a safety hazard for aircraft because of the FOD issue. The paving should cut down on maintenance costs since there would be no potholes to constantly repair or fill in with gravel.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


Staff intends to pursue KDOT grant funding for this project.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:




$20,000 $20,000


$0$0$0$0

$20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000

Operational Budget Impact:$250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,250

$250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,250


3.24

Installing a new system should cut down on service calls to maintain the existing outdated system.

Total


Annual Expenditures


Council Room Audio/Visual Equipment

General Government

The current audio/visual equipment is outdated and certain parts of the controls are no longer serviceable. The controllers and inputs have been failing for some time. One of the cameras recently failed and so now vieiwers are limited to just a single widescreen view instead of being able to zoom in on individual councilmembers who are speaking. Broadcasting of council meetings on Channel 7 is an important method of communicating with the public and keeping citizens informed of City projects/business. We may lose this capability entirely in the next year or two if the system is not replaced.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score



Upgrade to Council Audio/Visual Equipment to include new cameras, recording equipment, and software. Perhaps consider adding webstreaming capabilities, etc.


Electric Admin.

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$0


$0$0$0$0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $34,000 $34,000




Replace failing asphalt pavement in front of transient hangar with concrete pavement to match surrounding apron.


CIP


Main Hangar Pavement

Airport

The asphalt pavement has failed and is in need of replacement. Cracked and chipped pavement currently creates Foreign Object Debris (FOD) that is a safety hazard for aircraft and requires substantial staff time to sweep up. The apron also creates the first impression for incoming pilots, so the pavement repair would significantly improve the aesthetics in and around the terminal building. The potholes and bumps in the existing pavement create hazards for staff while towing aircraft in and out of the transient hangar; it makes the process slower and less efficient and creates liability if the tug jerks and causes damage to the aircraft.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


A major runway widening/reconstruction project is scheduled for 2016 and a runway extension project for 2018. If the runway is reconstructed out of concrete instead of asphalt, staff hopes to utilize the contractor on-site to tackle the main hangar pavement as a side project and hopefully minimize the cost of the project because the contractor will already be on-ste mobilized for another bigger project.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$250,000 $2,400,000 $2,650,000

Proposed Funding Sources:$225,000 $2,160,000 $2,385,000$25,000 $120,000 $145,000

$120,000 $120,000$0$0

$0 $0 $0 $250,000 $2,400,000 $2,650,000




The Augusta Municipal Airport currently has the demand for facilities with the capacity for larger aircraft (ARC B-II). To meet this demand, several airport improvements will be required. The City would like to meet this demand by extending Runway 18-36 from 4,200' x 75' to 5,000 'x 75'. Project will also require relocation of the County roadway immediately to the south of the airport property.


KDOT Grant

FAA GrantCIP


Runway Extension

Airport

The runway extension is necessary to regularly serve the category of aircraft that are increasingly utilizing the airport. A longer runway allows larger aircraft to utilize the airport, which is an economic benefit because of the increase in fuel sales. Multiple businesses have also indicated that they would be willing to construct facilities at the airport or in an adjacent industrial park if the runway is extended to accomodate their aircraft. The runway extension would solidify Augusta's role as a true general aviation reliever for Wichita Mid-Continent and help us become the "airport of choice" for general aviation traffic in this region.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


In recent years the FAA has reduced grant matches from 95/5 to 90/10, thus doubling the City's funding match for major capital projects. Other airports have utilized KDOT grants to help supplement the local match component and we plan to do the same.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Project Title:


Description:

Justification:


x



$200,000 $1,677,040 $1,877,040

Proposed Funding Sources:$180,000 $1,509,336 $1,689,336$20,000 $83,852 $103,852

$83,852 $83,852$0$0

$0 $200,000 $1,677,040 $0 $0 $1,877,040




The Augusta Municipal Airport currently has the demand for facilities with the capacity for larger aircraft (ARC B-II). To meet this demand, several airport improvements will be required. The City would like to meet this demand by widening Runway 18-36 from 60' wide to 75' wide, overlaying to level the pavement surface and reduce pavement failure, paving overruns, and by installing a new lighting system. The new lighting system would include lights, cable, REILS and Vault Equipment.


KDOT Grant

FAA GrantCIP


Runway Widening and Lighting System

Airport

The runway pavement is failing in a number of locations (especially on the south 1,000 ft extension). The City's airport engineers believe that the base work was not constructed properly and significant stretches of the runway are in need of complete reconstruction. A wider runway is needed to support the larger jet and turbo prop aircraft that are increasingly utilizing the airport, both from a safety perspective and from a business perspective. A wider runway will help attract more business jet customers who may not land here currently for insurance reasons. The city is regularly spending upwards of $4000-5000 annually for crack filling on the existing pavement.

Project Cost Est: $

Project Score


In recent years the FAA has reduced grant matches from 95/5 to 90/10, thus doubling the City's funding match for major capital projects. Other airports have utilized KDOT grants to help supplement the local match component and we plan to do the same.

Total


Annual Expenditures

Capital Improvement Plan FY2014-2018 - Augusta Improvement Plans/FY 2014-2018...A Capital...

Documents

Transcript of Capital Improvement Plan FY2014-2018 - Augusta Improvement Plans/FY 2014-2018...A Capital...