Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 07 07

Home Browse Search

SUBJECT: DRAFT COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN UNDERPASS IMPROVEMENTS DATE: JULY 7, 2021 PAGE3OF6 Option #3 is more similar to Option #1 (the continued motion) in that it dictates a particular split of funding and still allows the City to receive a contribution should it only construct one project. Again, like Option #1, Option #3 encourages more work within the URA because funding increases if two projects are constructed. Option #3 provides $10M in contributions should the City only construct the Main Street & South Boulder Road project. Staff feels this split aligns with the importance of the Main Street underpass, as well as the complexity and cost of that project which would be constructed as a gateway within the URA. For Option #3, the funding would be structured as follows, for one project and then for both projects: 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $1.75M $2.0M 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $1.25M $2.0M $2.5M $2.5M $2.5M $3.0M As the city attorney described on June 30, it is legal for the LRC to incorporate stipulations around its priorities in the Cooperation Agreement. The City would not advance on a bond issuance until mid-2022 at the earliest, at which time the City and LRC would have more certainty around final costs and project inclusion. As stated previously, the LRC contribution does not affect the dollar amount for projects included in the ballot question as this is the maximum amount per TABOR for completion of those projects. Additionally, per bond counsel, there will be no adverse effects on the issuance of bonds should contingencies be in place as project costs and locations for improvements will be finalized prior to the issuance of bonds. Outside of the funding structure of the draft Cooperation Agreement, Commissioners briefly discussed an alternative termination clause (Section 5) and incorporating language that would require the underpasses to be designed and constructed with signage, art, and general beautification. Although City Council has also shared a desire to incorporate these items in the original projects, the LRC can certainly include language to make art and signage project requirements. Commissioners expressed concern about the Hwy 42 & South Street project name reference for the agreement, since a less costly version of the project could cause it to be aligned somewhere other than South Street. The city attorney can address this is in a revised agreement by referencing "the Hwy 42 underpass in the general vicinity of the intersection at South Street (for brevity, 'Hwy 42 & South Street')." Staff has prepared updated financial projections to reflect the LRC's potential annual contributions. The contribution schedule is now aligned with the City's financing plan Agenda Packet P. 4