Utility Committee Agenda and Packet 2019 03 15

Home Browse Search

g Cityot Louisville COLORADO • SINCE 1878 Memorandum I Department of Public Works To: Utility Committee From: Cory Peterson, Water Resources Engineer Date: 3/15/19 Re: Water CIP Overages and Budget Impacts Summary: With the recent responses from several water bid advertisements, a trend in bid prices that are in excess of current budgets is developing. In addition, there are several new projects that have been identified that will require a new allocation of funds. Given the significant impacts and the number of projects, it was determined that a temporary hold should be placed on some of the projects until the following objectives could be decided: 1) Reaffirm the commitment to these projects, 2) Discuss the potential impacts to future rates and, 3) Make any appropriate adjustments. The intent of this holistic approach is to provide the Utility Committee with the entire scale of the impacts as to maximize the information available in making the final determinations. Projects: Two projects, the control vault and metering technology, have already been presented and approved by City Council. These projects include an overage of $209,147 for the control vault and the addition of $159,350 for the metering technology pilot programs. The following is a breakdown of the remaining identified projects starting from the largest financial impact. • The Southern Water Supply Pipeline (SWSP) has a design budget of $129,000 for 2019 and a construction estimate of $1,324,000 in 2020. The SWSP is the only connection of the City's CB-T and Windy Gap water rights. Without additional capacity the City will be unable to fully utilize these supplies. Staff advertised for design services in late 2018 and received responses ranging from $126,000 to $344,000. The most responsive and staff recommended proposal has a projected cost of $287,000 inclusive of contingency. The higher cost is being driven by the complexities of the project, including coordination with other entities and several major crossing including Hwy 42 and the railroad. Early discussions with several of the prospective design firms suggest that the future construction cost is underfunded. Costs for similar projects along the Front Range were evaluated and applied to specific site conditions and a new estimate of $3 million was developed. The revised projection, results in an unaccounted for increase in the budget of $1.8 million. Ls 15