Title
Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) Capital Improvements Extension from 2025 to 2034 Potential Project List for the City of Colorado Springs
Presenter:
Gayle Sturdivant, P.E., City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director, Public Works Department
Tim Roberts, Transportation Planning Program Manager, Public Works Department
Body
Summary:
The capital improvements portion of the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) sales tax will sunset in December 2024. The PPRTA Board intends to have an issue on the November 2022 ballot to extend the sales tax from 2025 through 2034 and include an A-list and B-list priority of projects.
Background:
The PPRTA was initially approved by voters in 2004. PPRTA funding consists of a one cent sales tax and is divided into three funding areas: 35% for maintenance; 10% for transit operations; and 55% for capital improvements. The maintenance and transit portion of the funding are perpetual unless rescinded by voters. The capital improvements portion had an initial sunset in 2014; however, in 2012 voters extended the capital improvements portion to 2024 unless rescinded by the voters.
Due to the great success of the PPRTA capital improvements and the overwhelming support of the voters in 2012 (approximately 80% voted in favor), the Board is planning to take an extension of the capital improvements tax to the voters in November 2022. The extension will provide adequate time for member jurisdictions to ready projects before funding starts in 2025. With the extension, the ballot will include A-list and B-list priority lists of projects and programs eligible for this extended funding.
Staff has been in an extensive process, concurrent with the ConnectCOS (City’s Transportation Master Plan) effort, to develop a draft project list for further consideration. The initial draft project list went through a multi-step scoring and evaluation process resulting in a prioritized project list. The initial draft project list consisted of seven categories. Projects within four of those categories were scored and ranked in relation to the ConnectCOS Community Goals and associated quantitative and qualitative metrics. The other three categories were either capital programs or bridges in need of replacement or major rehabilitation.
The multi-step scoring and ranking process included the following steps:
1) Consultant Rank: The ConnectCOS consultant team scored the potential projects by the scoring criteria developed for the Citizen Transportation Advisory Board (CTAB). The scoring criteria was based on the six ConnectCOS Community Goals and associated quantitative and qualitative metrics. Scores were consolidated and projects were ranked in each category.
2) CTAB Rank: CTAB members scored the potential projects by the ConnectCOS Community Goal-based scoring criteria. Scores were consolidated and projects were ranked in each category.
3) Supplemental Community Input Rank: Staff ranked the projects with the ConnectCOS Community Goal-based scoring criteria in mind with community needs considered. This input included, but was not limited to, citizen inquiries, economic development, regional growth, critical safety or condition issues, opportunities to leverage other funding sources, regional collaboration, and the overall effectiveness of the project.
Staff reviewed the three rankings and assigned proposed capital list recommendations. Projects identified as A-list are recommended for PPRTA capital funding. Projects identified as A/B list are projects highly recommended for PPRTA capital funding but may not advance to the A-list due to fiscal constraints. As fiscal constraints are applied to the project list, these projects will be clearly placed on either the A-list or B-list. B-list projects are important projects for the city and should be considered for PPRTA capital funding once the A-list projects are fully funded. Five projects on the list are identified for regional collaboration and more than one PPRTA member government may participate. The lists include a wide variety of capital projects including reconstruction of bridges and streets, filling in transportation network gaps, signal upgrades, corridor improvements, sidewalk and trail construction, and transit enhancements.
The PPRTA Board has projected approximately $535M in capital funding for the City during the extension. The City, in conjunction with PPRTA, is developing construction cost estimates and the anticipated total project cost in future years to further assist with defining the cut-off for A-list and B-list projects. As the cost estimates are completed over the next several months, further refinement to the lists will take place. Staff will also continue to collaborate with the PPRTA member jurisdictions for partnering opportunities to further leverage PPRTA capital funding and outside funding sources.
Staff requests informal endorsement of the lists for further collaboration with the PPRTA member governments, Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), and the PPRTA Board to finalize the lists for the November 2022 ballot issue. Once the ballot language is drafted, Staff will bring the proposed ballot language back to Council for their formal endorsement by Resolution in late July or early August.
Previous Council Action:
Resolution 227-04 supporting the November 2, 2004, ballot issue to create the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority
Resolution 109-12 endorsing extension of the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority Capital Program
Financial Implications:
The PPRTA capital improvement revenue estimate is $535M over a 10-year period (average $53.5M per year). Many of the projects on the proposed PPRTA project lists need to be completed regardless of funding source. Without the PPRTA capital funding extension, the City would need to invest an additional $53.5M annually for transportation projects. Other sources of funding are limited and are already being used to fund projects. Therefore, additional funding would need to come from the General Fund.
City Council Appointed Board/Commission/Committee Recommendation:
Starting in August 2021, CTAB worked on the project scoring criteria and later scored the projects. On December 7, 2021, CTAB finalized the scoring criteria. Between December 13, 2021, and January 4, 2022, CTAB members scored the proposed projects. CTAB scores were discussed on January 14, 2022. On February 1, 2022, CTAB reviewed the Consultant and CTAB rankings with the Supplemental Community Input scores provided by staff. CTAB voted 6-2 to reaffirm their scores and provided further input for staff to reconsider the Supplement Community Input score for two projects.
Stakeholder Process:
Staff and CTAB relied upon the extensive public engagement efforts for ConnectCOS to develop the project lists.
Alternatives:
1) Endorse the proposed PPRTA project lists and referral to the Board; Council could endorse the project lists as presented and recommend the projects to the PPRTA Board.
2) Adjust the project lists: Council could recommend adding or deleting projects before referring to the PPRTA board.
Recommended Action
Proposed Motion:
Recommend endorsement of the proposed PPRTA project lists and referral to the PPRTA Board, and direct staff to complete cost estimates, apply fiscal constraints as directed by the Board, and collaborate with the other PPRTA member governments to finalize the lists and the ballot language.
Summary of Ordinance Language
N/A