Loading...
6A - 2002-2007 Capital Improvements Program~ CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 26, 2001 (Agenda Item Prepazation Date: July 13, 2001) ~ l_..~ AGENDA TITLE: Pubiic hearing and consideration of a recommendation to the City Manager concerning the 2002-2007 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Peter Pollock, Planning Director Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Planning Jean Gatza, Presenter Kate Bernhardt, Parks & Recreation Jim Crain, Open Space and Mountain Parks Bob Harberg, Public Works, Utilities Sam Hartman, Library Glenn Magee, Facilities and Asset Management Annie Noble, Tributary Greenways Joe Perone, Transportation Molly Winter, Downtown Management Commission I. INTRODUCTION - BACKGROUND ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM The City of Boulder's 2002-2007 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) is a six-year plan for public physical improvements. The C1P provides a forecast of funds available for capital projects and identifies all planned capital improvement projects and their estimated costs over the six-year period. The first year's program in the CIP is adopted by the City Council as the Capital Budget, as a counterpart to the annual Operating Budget. Even though fiscal resources are appropriated only in the first year of the CIP, the succeeding five years of the CIP are important in providing a longer-term plan for setting spending priorities, scheduling projects in a logical sequence, and coordinating and tazgeting capital improvement projects for all city departments. Capital improvement projects are defined as any major project requiring the expenditure of public funds (over and above operating expenditures) for the purchase, construction, or replacement of the physical assets of the community. This broad S: \plan\pb-items~nemos\pbmemo. doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Pase #1 definition includes those projects that are bondable and includes new or expanded physical facilities as well as the land acquisition and site improvements necessary for a project. ~ The city Planning Department coordinates the process for preparing the annual CIP with other city departments. The Planning Boar{i evaluates and makes recommendations to the City Manager and City Council on the proposed CIP as I,part of the annual budget process. The role of the Planning Board is to: 1) evaluate CIP projects in the context of the long-term, "big picture" policies of the Bouider Valley Comprehensive Alan (BVCP); 2) make recommendations on the scope, priorities, and scheduling of CIP projects; 3) make recommendations on resolving policy issues raised by the proposed location and design of CIP projects; ~~ 4) make a determination of which CIP projects will be required to undergo a Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) review. The C1P is an essential implementation tool for carrying out the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan's policies of orderly and efficient provision of urban facilities and services. The Comprehensive Plan provides for the phased growth of the city with annexation to occur only when the full range of urban services is available. The Capita~ Improvements Program schedules projects that correct current facility deficiencies and that enhance the level of service for existing residents through facility expansions and updating. Each year the CIP is updated by adding a new sixth year of capital improvement projects. Adjustments ~ are made to costs and revenues forecasted the previous year. Changes may also be made to the year(s) in which a project is scheduled, reflecting changes in fiscal conditions and changes in overall funding priorities. New capital projects; may be added or deleted based on new facility needs identified in updated or new city master plan;s, area plans, or studies. Planning Board's review of the IICIP includes the policies and plans of the BVCP, but also looks to subcommunity plans, area plans and departmental master plans. Within the general framework of the Comprehensive Plan, subcommunity plans and area plans provide mora detailed planning for land use, urban design, neighborhood revitalization, and public facility needs. Most departments now have functional master plans for the', provision of services and facilities. The master plans are devised consistent with the policy an~i implementation framework and the growth projections in the Comprehensive Plan. However,l more specific policies, concepts, and service and facility schemes are provided in the master plans. System-wide priorities for scheduling and tazgeting capital improvements are provided by many of the ma'ster plans. Staff is working on an update to the Project Planning and Approval Process for capital projects. Several issues have been raised concerning insufficient impact assessment of master plans and major projects prior to budgeting. The City Council Environmental Task Force has discussed issues with the review and approval of capital projects'and master plans and identified potential strategies for improving the review process. Proposed revisi~ns include better master plan coordination and review of system-wide . S:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Paee #2 plans; an assessment of capital projects at the annual CIP budgeting for consistency with BVCP-and ~ master plan goals; and revisions to the CEAP to better assess potential impacts of project alternatives. As many of the departmental master plans are planning updates, staff is working to develop a standard outline for these plans that will include specific project and financial information. The link between master plans and capital projects has been somewhat unclear in the past in some cases. Staff envisions increased alternative analysis to take place in the master plans for capital project planning. Capital projects are typically prioritized first in the departmental master plans and then reflected in the CIP. The Transportation Division completed an extensive prioritization process in 2000 that better aligned the capital planning with the goals of the master plan and a reallocation $1M to bicycle/ pedestrian improvements and transiUtransit pass programs, which is again reflected in this year's CIP. This will be revisited in the upcoming Transportation Master Plan update. In the past few years there has been a city-wide effort to examine long-term resource needs for system maintenance and deficiency correction. This effort will continue in the future and will be reflected in future CIPs. II. PLANNTNG ISSUES FOR 2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS What funding is planned to implement improvements on 28~h Street and the surrounding area? The 28th Street - 2000: Central Corridor Planning Study (28th Street - 2000) unifies previously funded and currently proposed improvements for 28th Street and its frontage road from Baseline Road to Iris Avenue. The city of Boulder's Transportation Division initiated the study June 1, 1999, with the goals • of implementing corridor-wide safety and aesthetic improvements as wel] as improving the corridor's funcfion as a regional transit destination. Funding far construction is allotted from city, state, federal and RTD sources. Twenty-eighth Street from Baseline Road to Iris Avenue is identified as the top priority comdor in the city's multi-modal grid. Implementation of the 28`h Street - 2000 Project continues to be the highest priority of the transportation CIP. South segment funding of $4.6M (includes $1.1M in TEA-21 funding) is programmed in 2002 and 2003. The public input, design and approval process is underway for the north segment (North 28`h Street Network Plan) with the middle segment (Pearl to Arapahoe) to follow. Funding for the north segment of $4.8M is programmed starting in 2004. As an eariy action item of the North 28`h Street Network Plan, a fixed-term transportation planner position is proposed to help start up, organize and run the transportation management organization (TMO). Funding is also planned for an Intermodal Center to accommodate current and future local and regional bus service, future commuter rail service. A multi-departmental team comprised of Transportation, Housing, Planning, Open Space, RTD, the City Attomey's Office and consultants have worked together to complete the second phase of site selection and identified a suitable site for the new facility. Staff is recommending the site at the northeast comer of Pearl and 30`h. Council approval will be requested to proceed with land acquisition in 2001. Sufficiant funds from the RTD and the city of Boulder have been identified to acquire the site. However, some of the sources of funds may not be available until 2003 and 2004. i S:\plan\pb-items~rciemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Paae #3 What is the status of the North Boulder Branch Library? ~ An estimated $1.5 million has been appropriated from the Capital Development Fund (formerly DET) for this project. A tota] capital budget of $3.3 million is estimated; the remaining $1.8 million is unfunded at this time and the Library Commission is currently exploring funding altematives, including a library bond issue in 2003. Preliminary branch library planning activities have been completed and included public surveys, neighborhood meetings, and service and programming discussions; a preliminary branch library program plan has been drafted. The Library Commission envisions this facility as both a neighborhood library and a community center for the north Boulder community. The facility is expected to be located on the 3.2-acre city-owned parcel at Fourmile Canyon Creek and North Broadway. What concerns or issues were raised by the various advisory boards reviewing departmental CIPs? Summary Minutes are attached for the Transportation, Tributary Greenways, Parks and Recreation and Utilities CIP reviews. See Attachment H. Transportation The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) reviewed and recommended approval of the draft 2002-2007 Transportation Capital Improvements Program (CIP) at its June 11, 2001 meeting as ~ submitted by staff. The Board's discussion included various clarifying questions for staff. Due to concern raised by one member, the Board had a lengthy discussion regarding regional transportation impacts and how the city's capital planning addresses those impacts. The Board passed a motion recommending that staff provide a dollar amount for the regional component of the budget and a]ist of possible regional projects if funding were available. Utilities The Water Resource Advisory Board (WRAB) reviewed and recommended approval of the draft 2002-2007 Transportation Capital Improvements Program (CIP) at its June 18, 2001 meeting. The WRAB recommended approval of the proposed Utilities Division 2002-2007 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) including the preliminary year 2002-2003 operating budget, monthly utility rates and plant investment fees. The Board's discussion included various clarifying questions but was approved as presented. Parks and Recreation The Parks and Recreation Advisory Boazd reviewed the draft Pazks and Recreation CIP on Apri123, 2001. This draft included a reallocation of funding from the FoothiUs Community Pazk and fund balance to assist in funding the 2001-2002 renovation and expansion of the North Boulder Recreation Center. This funding reallocation would result in some delay to the phased development of the Community Park. The Board requested that staff explore other funding options for the recreation center project. At its May 21, 2001 meeting, staff provided additional options for funding the North Boulder . S:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Paee #4 Recreation Center. The Board racommended approval for the draft 2002-2007 CII', fundamentally the ~ same as presented in April. Tributar~Greenwa~ At a joint meeting on June 25, 2001, the Water Resource Advisory Board and the Transportation Advisory Board reviewed the Greenways 2002-2007 CIP. The discussion focused mainly on the $ I SOK request for the proposed weed control program. They discussed whether the program should be funded at a lower level, then ramped up in ensuing years ar fully funded, then ramped down in ensuing years, After debate about whether or not to approve this particular part of the budget, they decided to make a motion about the weed control portion. The Boards passed a motion to recommend approval of the maintenance budget as presented for the next two years with a review after two years. They discussed and recommended approval of the rest of the Greenways CIP as submitted by staff. Onen Space and Mountain Parks It is anticipated that the Open Space Board of Trustees wil] consider and then recommend to both the Planning Board and City Council for approval the attached 2002 - 2007 CIP budget submittal at a pubiic hearing at its July 11, 2001 meeting. What has changed in this CIP from previous years? This six-year capital plan has most of the same projects as have been identified in past years. Each year some funding amounts change or the anticipated year changes, in response to budget projections, wst sharing/savings opportunities and goal prioritization. ~ III. IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBCOMMUNITY AND AREA PLANS How is the implementation of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan (NBSP) being addressed in the CIP? The development of the North Boulder Community Park, Fourmile Creek Improvements and several transportation projects are included in the CIP (see description by department below). Additionally, bicycle and pedestrian connections typically occur in north Boulder annually, but are not specifically called out in the CIP, as they are done opportunistically, or as part of a larger program (e.g., greenways, bikeway, or sidewalk improvement programs). The funding far the north Boulder branch library and north Boulder police annex that had been approved in past years is still earmarked for these projects and will be available when the projects are ready to be constructed. Transportation Division: The following improvements recommended in the NBSP are listed in the CII': street improvements for Yarmouth between Broadway and US 36 (2002), on-street bike lanes and sidewalks on Violet Avenue between Broadway and US36 (2002-2004), on-street bike lanes on Broadway between Iris and Norwood (2004-2005). Parks Degartment: The Foothills Community Pazk in north Boulder is proposed for continued funding for phase two construction (2002-2006). Two pocket parks aze also proposed for funding: the Drive In Theater Park (2002) and Dakota Ridge (2005, 2006). ~ S:\plan\pb-items~nemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Pase #5 Flood Control Utilitv: In accordance with the Fourmile Canyon Creek Flood Mitigation Plan, flood ~ mitigation improvements along Fourmile Canyon Creek are proposed for funding in 2002 and 2005- 2007. Tributarv Greenwa~: Various improvements to Fourmile Creek will involve environmental preservation, habitat restoration and off-street trail connections. What capital improvements are planned for the Downtown? The CAGID underground parking structure at the corner of 9th & Walnut is planned to begin construction in 2001. A 200-room hotel will be built by a private developer, and a civic building will be constructed as well. The structure includes a total of 669 parking spaces on two undergound levels. CAGID will own and operate 569 spaces. $12.5 million in bonds will be sold to finance CAGID's portion of the structure. Concrete reconstruction for Broadway from University to Pine is proposed for funding in 2002. This will correct remaining structural deficiencies in this major corridor. The project will be constructed in conjunction with the Broadway/Boulder Creek Bridge replacement (approved for 2001 and 2002 funding). Planning and design phases of the bridge replacement are currently underway. The Downtown Management Commission has completed a Master Plan for major maintenance, capital replacement, and redesign of certain elements of the Downtown Mall. Final design was completed in ~ 2000 and construction will begin in 2001. How is the Civic Park Master Plan being implemented? Phase I of the Civic Park improvements have been completed. These improvements include the consriuction of Civic Plaza, and the reconstruction of 13th Street. Phase II improvements completed in 1999-2000 include gates at both ends of 13th Street, signage on the gateway elements and pedestrian lighting in the Civic Center Plaza. Construction on pedestrian lighting along 13th Street was completed in 2001. In view of major recent improvements to the 13th Street area of Civic Park, including the Tea House and improved bike path, an increase in Civic Park usage as monitored by the Parks Department, and the need to coordinate new capital improvements throughout the entire Civic Center area, the Civic Center Task Force is updating and revising the 1992 Civic Park Master Plan. The firm of EDAW, Inc., of Denver, has been hired to address specific design issues such as completion of the east end of the Civic Plaza, to address the design needs of the central area of the park between 13th Street and Broadway, coordinate the park design with a newly designed Boulder Creek Bridge on Broadway, and the plaza area and ATM machine on the west side of the Municipal Building. The update to the Civic Center master plan project is being tied into a project by the City's Facilities Asset Management Division to conduct a building use assessment for the City offices in the Central campus area. Additionally, the Civic Center Master Plan project is being tied to a general parking study which is ~ S:\plan\pb-items~nemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Pase #6 being conducted through the Downtown Management Commission. Transplan, Inc. has been hired to ~ determine how the proposed parking changes to the Civic Center Master Plan will be affected by the new development which is occumng in the area near the Civic Center area. The Civic Center Task Force reviews and recommends to the City Manager on implementation options, capital projects and funding, and management and maintenance coordination for the Civic Center area. This group includes: city staff representing: Planning Deparhnent, City Managers Office, the General Improvement District (GID) Director, the Facility and Asset Management (FAM) Director, Tributary Greenways, the City Attorney's Office and the Parks and Recreation Department. The 1995 parks and recreation sales tax issue contains $75,000 per year for a 20 year term to provide for physical improvements to Civic Park. The Pazks and Recreation Advisory Board determines the uses of these funds. For the years 1998 through 2003, $27,000 per year has and will go towards paying off the construction of the Teahouse, leaving $48,000 per yeaz for other capital improvements. Future capital improvements will be based upon completion of the revised Civic Park Master Plan. IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF MASTER PLANS What is the status of the Greenways Master Plan? Staff in the final phase of completing the Greenways Master Plan update. The first phase, involving adoption of Greenways projects and opportunities, was approved by City Council in fall 2000. The final phase of the plan involves reaching consensus on the following issues: ~ • the development of procedures and processes far project planning and public involvement • an organizationalstructure • a financing plan • a maintenance strategy In March, staff presented a recommendation to City Council for each of these issues. Staff is proposing that a Greenways Advisory Committee (GAC) be established to review and make recommendations to staff and City Council on the Greenways CIP and CEAPs. The GAC will be made up of one representative from the WRAB, TAB, PRAB, OSBT and Planning Board, designated by the chair of each of the respective boards. After input from City Council, staff will proceed with the establishment of the Greenways Advisory Committee and prepare the Greenways Master Plan for final adoption this fall. Which Master Plans are currently being updated or are scheduled for update in the near future? Police and Fire Master Plans The Police and Fire Master Plan updates are nearing completion. City Council will consider putting a bond issue to the voters in 2003 to address needs outlined in these updates. Municinal Aimort Master Plan The current Airport Master Plan was adopted in 1994. The update process is dependent on FAA airport . improvement program funding availability, which should be auailable in 2002 or 2003. bepending on S:\plan\pb-items~nemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A. Paee #7 the duration of the public review and hearing process for the update, completion of the airport master plan is anticipated in late 2003 or 2004. ~ Transnortation Master Plan The current TMP was adopted in 1996. Over the last five years a number of areas needing additional work have been identified and the Plan commits the city to a five year update schedule. While work on the update has been delayed pending results of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update, there is now a consensus on the part of the Transportation Advisory Board and the Council Sub- committee on transportation to move forward with the TMP update in coordination with the completion of the BVCP update and the subsequent commercial growth management project. Parks and Recreation Initial steps to begin the master plan update are underway. The parks and recreation department is in the process of preparing a citizen survey, needs assessment and facility inventory in preparation o£ the master plan update process. The update process is anticipated to begin next year. V. REVIEW AND COMMENTS FROM BOULDER COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Review of the draft 2002-2007 CIP by County Planning Staff will be done in July. Any recommendations will be forwarded to both Planning Board and Council. VI. SELECTION OF PROJECTS FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ~ ASSESSMENT (CEAP REVIEW) The projects that are proposed to be evaluated under Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) review are listed in Attachment E. CEAP reviews are prepared when projects are in the site location and facility design phase. The primary purpose of the CEAP is to encourage the consideration of the environment in planning and decision making and, ultimately, to arrive at actions that are environmentally compatible. The intent of the CEAP is to make project planning more efficient in considering issues in advance of implementation. CEAP findings ue submitted by departments to their respective advisory board for review as part of CIP project approval. Council has khe opportunity to call up projects for their review and approval. (For those departments that do not have an advisory board, Planning Board is responsible for reviewing CEAP findings as part of project approval.) The list of 2001 CEAP projects will be advertised in the Camera on July 15, 2001 to allow public comment on which projects will require CEAP review. ~ S:\plan\pb-items~ttemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A, Pase #8 VII. SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS - ~ Staff recommends that Planning Board approve the 2002-2007 Capital Improvements Program as submitted. Staff also recommends that: Planning staff should continue to participate in other department's efforts to coordinate multiple capital facility projects (Master Plan Updates, 28th Street implementation and potentia] area plan, Tributary Greenways Master Plan, etc.) 2. The list of CIP projects for Community and Environmental Assessment Process review should be approved as recommended by staff in Attachment E. Approved By: ~ ~ IL~~Y~ Peter Pollock ~ Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A summarizes the highlights of the 2002-2007 CIP by fund. Attachment B provides the Planning Board CIP recommendations to Council for last yeu's CIP. Attachment C provides the CIP submissions by Department, including each Department's overview and project status reports. Attachment D provides spreadsheets for the 2002-2007 CIP by fund. Attachment E is a list of projects racommended for a CEAP. Attachment F is a list ofprojects suggested for design review. Attachment G is spreadsheets of projects by subcommunity_ Attachment H is the summary minutes from Transportation, Tributary Greenways, Parks and . Recreation and Utilities CIP advisory board reviews. S:\plan\pb-items~nemos\pbmemo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6A. Paae #9 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE 2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM BY FUND ~ The Z002 Capifal Improvements Program includes proposed funding of $48,277,270 for 66 projects. The entire six year CIP includes proposed funding of $193,322,205 for 117 projects, The 2002 CIP budget constitutes 25 % of the 6 year projection. GENERAL FUND The general fund pays for new facilities and additions or alterations to existing facilities which are not related to City growth (i.e. level of service improvements and existing needs) as scheduled in variaus department § Master Plans. The money for this fund comes fram many d~erent sources and is allocated for capital projects that meet city goads and are not growth related. The departments which usually draw from the general fund for CIP projects are.• FAM, Fire, Police, Library, Information Techttology, and Housing and Human Services For the year 2002, no capital projects are planned for the General Fund. There are several reasons for this void: • Projects related to the maintenance & renovation of existing buildings are now funded from a sepazate fund that is financed out of the General Fund. • Capital improvements in several General Fund service areas are being funded out of earmarked revenue: • The Police Records System is being financed out of the Public Safety Fund. • The development & renovation of pazks and recreation facilities is being financed out of the .25% Sales/Use Tax Parks and Recreation Fund. • Several large computer and softwar2 projects have been completed over the past ~ several years, thus negating the need to fund new computer related capital projects in the year 2002. • Pending Library projects cannot move forward until a funding source is available for related operating costs and the General Fund capital contribution. • The revenue picture continues to be tight. Further, there is some uncertainty regarding the negative revenue impact of the F1atIrons Crossing Mall scheduled to open in the fall of 2001. Therefore, the current budget emphasis in the General Fund continues to be augmenting reserves and financial sustainability rather than adding new services and/or facilities. DEDICATED FUNDS CAPPPAL DEVELOPMENT FUND (CDl~ (Previously ca[led the Development Excise Tax or DE~ Funding for CDFprojects is from the assessment of Development Excise Taxes on new development. The proposed 2002-2007 Capital Development Fund (CDF) CIP is $2,908,000 - 1% of the six year projection. Five projects are scheduled for funding in 2002 for a total of $1,758,000. These proposed projects constitute less than 1% of the 2002 CIP. ~ Major Issues and Projects: Funding is proposed in 2002 for Additional Municipal Space. This will be directed toward a space analysis for the Civic Campus. • The Facilities & Asset Master Plan, accepted in 1998, identified the need for funding small facility projects related to growth at the discretion of the FAM Manager. $30,000 from the DET fund is proposed for miscellaneous facility DET Projects. Past uses of the money have included the remodel of the Uni-Hill Police Annex, the Municipal Building west plaza. No projects have been identified to date for the 2002 funding. The Facilities & Asset Master Plan identiFied the need for the creation of small plazas, pocket parks and other municipal spaces related to new development. $20,000 from CDF funding is proposed yeazly for nublic plaza space. The intent of the appropriation is for the city to capture opportunities to create small public spaces in conjunction with private development of sites. Past uses of the money have included the west side of the municipal building and the landscaped area in front of the teahouse. FACILITY RENOVATION AND REPLACEMENT FUND Funding for Facility Renovation antl Replacement Fund projects is from a contribution by the General Fund equal to 1% of the current replacement value of General Fund facilities and from restricted fund departments as annual contributions to the fund. The proposed 2002-2007 Facility Renovation and Replacement Fund CIP is $3,303,400 - 1% of the six yeaz projection. $498,000 is allocated in 2002 for 3 projects. These projects make up 1% of the 2002 CIP. ~ Major Issues and Projects: • Remodel Fire Station #2 - This fire station was, located at 2225 Baseline Road was built in 1958 and is in need of modernization. This project will remodel the interior of the facility and provide a noise mitigation system to reduce noise levels caused by the high volume of traffic along Baseline. Provide Additional Municinal Space - Departments/Divisions needing additional space include: Fire/Administration, Police, Public WorksBuilding Services, and Library. This project will include a space analysis and program plan for existing facilities. It will also include renovating existing buildings to accommodate new uses. PUBLIC SAFETY BALLOT FUND The Public Safety Ballot Fund is a combination sales and property tax that was passed in 1997 to fund public safety improvements. No projects in the Public Safety Ballot Fund are proposed for capital funding in 2002-2007. OPEN SPACE FUND The proposed 2002-2007 Open Space Fund CIP is $12,900,000 - 7% of the six year projection. These projects total $2,150,000 for 2002, constituting 4% of the CIP for 2002. ~ Major Issues and Projects: ~ • The proposed Open Space 2002 CLP continues the funding levels during the period 2002- 2007, for Acauisitions and Trails rehabilitation. construction, and major maintenance. The Water Rights Proeram will primarily focus on water acquisitions in the Coai Creek area. The water rights acquisition program provides funding to purchase additional water shazes from private owners or other City agencies for use on Open Space for agricultural and environmental purposes as water becomes available. The Mineral Rights Proeram will provide funding to purchase underlying mineral interests from private owners as they become available on the real estate market. Many of these interests in minerals, gas, oil, and aggregates were severed from the lands previously purchased by Open Space and could cause future management dilemmas. PARKS & RECREATION FUNDS - Parks & Recreation Department funding comes from various sources including fees, development excise taxes, ballot issue bands, lottery fund monies, etc. The various funds are specific regarding allowed uses and many projects receive funding from more than one funding source. Capital projects are funded from the Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund, the 1995 Ballot Fund and the Lottery fund. Capital projects for 2002 have $6,850,701 proposed - 10% of the 2002 CIP. Parks & Recreation projects for the 6 yeaz CIP have $18,113,827 proposed for funding constituting 10% of the 6 year CIP. ~ Major Issues and Projects: Some funding has been reallocated from the Foothills Communit,~ and fund balance to assist in funding the 2001-2002 renovation and expansion of the NoRh Boulder Recreation Center. This funding reallocation will result in some delay to the phased development of the community park. The CIP proposal for neiehborhood/pocket nark development would fund ongoing design and development of several existing undeveloped parksites per year. Parks & Recreation Advisory Board prioritizes parks to be developed based on citizen need and staff input. Most of the funding for 2002 will be used for design and development of the Blue Sky Hill Pocket Park at $luff and 22nd. The balance remaining in the general park development category has no specific site identified at this time. If those funds are not used for a project in 2002, they wiil be combined with funds identified in 2002 to fund upcoming project needs. Some examples include: Sinton, Eiks, Boulder Valley Village (19th & Violet), Aurora 7 playground, Beu Creek Pazk playground, Stazio Ballfield playground and Pleasant View playground. Funding is proposed in 2002 for infrastructure development £or the Drive In Theater neiehborhood parksite. ~ TRANSPORTATION FUND AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT FUND Funding for ciry transportation projects comes from several different sources. The transportation Fund is primarily supported by the dedicated sales tax, Highway Users Tax, County Road and ~ Bridge fund, and State Highway Maintenance and Landscape Funds. The proposed 2002-2007 Transportation Fund CIP is $39,845,500 19% of the six-year projection. Sixteen projects aze proposed for funding in 2002 for a total of $9,012,000. These projects constitute 21% of the 2002 citywide CIP. Funding for city transportation deve[opment projects come from the Transportation Excise Tax. Growth related projects are funded from this fund. The proposed 2002-2007 Transportation Development Fund CII' is $4,881,000 - 4% of the city-wide six year projection. Three projects are scheduled for funding in 2002 for a total of $65Q000. These projects constitute 3% of the 2002 citywide CIP. Major Issues and Projects: Pedestrian Svstem Implementation - The budget associated with the pedestrian mode focuses in three areas, sidewalk repair/replacement funding, pedestrian/motorist rights and responsibilities in crosswalks, and providing adequate pedestrian crossing facilities. CIP funding for facility enhancements (missing links and crossing treatments) includes a total of $2,779,404 for 2002. Bicycle Svstem Implementation - The bicycle system CIP includes developing and testing facility enhancements such as bicycle crossings of roadways and access/egess locations that make bicycling a more attractive mode of travel. It also includes completing missing links and other facility enhancements on a faster track. The Bikeways Facilities Enhancement capital prograuunatic budget includes a total of $2,027,092 for 2002 directed towards these improvements. ~ Transit Svstem Im~lementation - The transit component of the CIP focuses on creating super-stops, intermodal centers and building toward complimentary bus and rail-based regional transit facilities. The 2002 CIP includes $484,359 towards this effor[. Roadway System - The roadway program maintains and appropriately enhances our infrastructure through intersection improvements, street reconstruction and street resurfacing projects providing a usable, efficient and safe street network for bikes, buses and motor vehicles. The 2002 CIP includes $6,001,245 for these improvements. Transportation Demand Mana e~ ment - The TDM program is fixnded entirely from the operating budget. Miti ag tion - Mitigation programs focus on mitigating the negative impact of transportation by mitigating traffic speed and noise. The 2002 CIP includes $260,400 for these improvements. MUNICIPAL AIRPORT FUND The 2002-2007 Municipal Airport CIP is on hold pending the update of the 1994 Boulder Municipal Airport Master Plan. The timing for the update process is dependent on FAA airport improvement program funding availability, which shouid be available in 2002 or 2003. Completion of the Airport Master Plan is then anticipated for 2003 or 2004. ~ 4 UTILITIES FUNDS ~ Fundingfor the ciry's Utilities capital improvementprojects is derived from general utilityfees and special external agency grants. The primary revenue sources are Plant Investment Fees (PIFs) from new customers, monthly water sales to customers, and hydroelectric sales to Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCO). Water sales are relatively stable and track the overall growth of the service area. WATER UTII,ITY FUND The proposed 2002-2007 Water Utility Fund CIP is $77,050,000 - 25% of the six year projection. Sixteen projects are proposed for funding in 2002 for a total of $40,350,000. Thase projects make up 17% of the 2002 CIP. Major Issues and Projects: • Continued emphasis on the rehabilitation and improvement of the city's existing water system infrastructure continues, especially in the area of the city's deteriorated water distribution system. Many rehabilitation projects are proposed to address these problems, including the Goss Grove Distribution System Rehabilitation, which is proposed for funding in 2002 and the Whittier Neighborhood Distribution System Rehabilitation, proposed for funding in 2003. • Water from the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Colorado Big-Thompson project) is anticipated to play an increasingly important role in the City's overall water system deliveries. For this reason several projects have been identified to assure the reliability of the water quality and delivery from the Boulder reservoir Water treatment ~ Plant. • The capacity expansion of the Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Plant has been once again delayed due to the anticipated reduction in peak water demand projections as a result of the city's commitment to a more aggressive water conservation program. These efforts may preclude the need for an expansion project. Significant repairs to the Barker water system, recently acquired by the City from Public Service Company of Colorado, are needed. Repairs to this water system are necessary to assure safe and reliable water deliveries to the Betasso Water Treatment Plant. (WTP). WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND The proposed 2002-2007 Wastewater Utility Fund CIP is $28,810,000 - 11% of the six year projection. Six projects are scheduled for Wastewater Utility Fund funding in 2002 for a total of $12,500,000. These projects make up 18% of the 2002 CIP. Biosolids Composting - The city is currently involved in a joint study with Westem Disposal regarding the feasibility of a composting facility. If feasible, a Class A biosolids compost facility may be constructed or managed through some type of 'partnership' contract. This project provides funds for the planning, design and construction of a biosolids composting facility. ~ • In accordance with the recent intergovernmental agreement with fhe City of Lafayette, funding is proposed to relocate the wastewater treatment plan's effluent outfall pipe downstream of 75'h Street. ~ FLOOD CONTROL UTILITY FUND The proposed 2002-2007 Flood Control Utility Fund CIP is $19,400,000 - 11% of the six year projection. Three projects are scheduled for Flood Control Utility Fund funding in 2002 (and an allocation of $150,000 to Tributary Greenways) for a total of $1,650,000. These projects make up 17% of the 2002 CIP. As in the past several yeazs, the majority of funds in the Flood Control Utility CIP have been allocated to major drainage way im~rovements for Goose Creek - 30th Street to Folsom Street and Elmer's Two-Mile Creek between Goose Creek and Valmont Road. Work is underway from 30th Street through the Branding Iron Mobile Home Park. The funding proposed in 2002 would complete the project along Goose Creek through the Mapleton Mobile Home Park. Funding proposed for 2003 would complete improvement along Elmer's Two-Mile Creek between the Boulder White-Rocks Ditch to Valmont Road. Money is budgeted for potential flood mitigation improvements along Fourmile Canvon Creek. Recommendations concerning improvements are anticipated in the near future as part of the on-going master plauuiug process. CAGID BONDS The proposed 2002-2007 CAGID CIP is $7,800,000 - 4% of the six yeaz projection. The one project is scheduled for CAGID Bond funding in 2002. This project makes up 16% of the 2002 CIP. Construction of an underground parking structure on the CAGID owned surface parking lot at the ~ comer of 9th & Walnut is proposed for continued funding in the 2002 CIP. CAGID will finance its portion of the underground parking structure through general obligation bonds. A ballot for these bonds passed in November 1998. $7,800,000 is proposed for 2002. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ APPROVED AUGUST 3, 2000 ~ CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 20, 2000 Council Chambers Room, Municipal Building 1777 Broadway, 3:00 p.m. The following are the minutes of the July 20, 2000 City of Boulder Planning Board meeting. A permanent set of these minutes is kept in Central Records, and a tape recarding of the meeting is maintained for a period of seven years in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). BOARD PRESENT: Peter Gowen A1 Gunter, Vice Chair Tina Nielsen Alan O'Hashi Beth Pommer Mark Ruzzin, Chair BOARD ABSENT: Andria Jacob ~ STAFF PRESENT: Kate Bernhardt, Superintendent of Parks, Planning and Construction Bill Boyes, Facilities and Asset Management Dick Brasher, Transportation Jim Crain, Open Space Donna Gartenmann, Library Jean Hagen, Planner Bob Harberg, Public Works, Utilities Sam Hartman, Library Bev Johnson, Planner Mary Lovrien, Board Secretary Annie Noble, Tributary Greenways Peter Pollock, Planning Director Ken Ramsey, Parks Planning and Construction Support Steve Russo, Parks and Recreation Nancy Steinberger, Tributary Greenways Michael Sullivan, Open Space Molly Winter, Downtown Management Commission ~ s:\pl an\data\cur\bms\000720.min City of Boulder July 20, 2000 Planning Boazd Minutes 1. CALL TO ORDER ~ Chair M. Ruzzin deciared a quorum at 3:05 p.m., and the following business was conducted. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no minutes to approve. 3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no citizen participation. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS The Board did not discuss any dispositions or Planning Board call-ups. 5. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY (This item was discussed after the action item.) M. Ruzzin noted that the Pollard Motors site will not be used as a temparary RTD Park and Ride. P. Pollock said that RTD located other sites that were cheaper and closer to the Table Mesa Park and Ride site. A. O'Hashi noted that City Council approved a motion directing the Planning Board to review other areas where the homeless shelter could be sited and have staff review the land use implications of homeless shelters. P. Pollock said that staff will get an outside resource to review options and alternatives regarding how the code might be structured (types and size of homeless shelters, occupancy, open space, and parking) and ~ to assist with the public process. He mentioned that on August 3 the Board will debrief the process and substance of the homeless shelter hearing. P. Pollock discussed items to be reviewed by the Board, including the tour of sites proposed for the Boulder V alley Comprehensive Plan land use map changes, the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, and the proposed rezoning of Riverbend, and items to be reviewed by City Council, including annexation issues regazding Githens Acres. He said that discussions are occurring with the University of Colorado regarding Grandview Terrace and the South Campus. He discussed the proposed organizational changes between the Planning Department and Public Works Development Inspection Services, the new personnel in the two departments, the proposed increase in development review fees, and a proposed Building Services fund. 6. ACTION ITEMS A. Public hearing and consideration of the 2001-2006 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). J. Hagen presented highlights for the 2001-2006 CIP, including funding for the Lakewood pipeline reconstruction, the north Boulder branch library and police annex, the Iris Hollow park site, Broadway and Boulder Creek bridge replacement, flood improvements at Goose Creek, reprioritization of the Transportation capita] funding with an emphasis on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit programs, Open Space acquisitions, trails construction, and Tributary Greenways. She noted ~ that master plan updates for Flood Control and Drainage, Transportation, and Police are scheduled s:\plan\data\cur\bms\000720.mi n City of Boulder July 20, 2000 ~ Planning Board Minutes to begin next year. She said that initial work has been done to make the capital project maps and information available on the City web site, and staff continues to explore implementation that would be part ofthe Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update. Public Participation for the Afternoon Session: There was no public participation. OPEN SPACE MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for Open Space. FACILITIES AND ASSET MANAGEMENT MOTION: On a motion by A. Gunter, seconded byB. Pommer, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for Facilities and Asset Management. Statement of Intention: ~ • Encourage the Downtown Mall restrooms renovation/replacement project to be accelerated. LIBRARY MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by M. Ruzzin, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for the Library. A. Gunter offered a friendly amendment that the Libraty, to the extent possible, try to coordinate its services and activities with the Children's Museum and the north Boulder Library and to explore setting up branch libraries at schools. P. Gowen and M. Ruzzin accepted the friendiy amendment. Statement of Intention: Encourage continued efforts to develop a County-wide library usage plan. PARKS AND RECREATION MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. Gunter, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed in the amended packet presented at the meeting for Parks and Recreation. ~ s:lpl an\data\wrl6ms1000720.min City of Boulder July 20, 2000 Planning Board Minutes ~ TRANSPORTATION MOTION: On a motion by M. Ruzzin, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CII' program as proposed for Transportation. Statement of Intention: Solicit suggestions from the Transportation Advisory Board regarding traffic related studies, including a focus on paying employees if they do not drive to work and other things besides RTD-related projects. AIRPORT MOTION: On a motion by A. O'Hashi, seconded by B. Pommer, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for the Airport. DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT COMMISSION MOTION: P. Gowen made a motion that the Planning Board recommend to City Council approval . of the 2001-2006 CIP program for the Downtown Management Commission as proposed with an additional provision to encourage staff to advance the capital funding for the replacement of the restroom facilities on the mall seeking funds from all available sources to accelerate the completion of the proj ect. A. O'Hashi seconded the motion. The Board discussed the possibility of separating the additional provision from the motion, and P. Gowen withdrew his motion. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. O'Hashi, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval ofthe 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for the Downtown Management Commission. Statement of Intention: Encourage the development of a comprehensive parking provision and usage plan for the Downtown and Civic Center area. B. Tributary Greenways - Projects and Opportunities A. Noble provided the Board with background on the Greenways Master Plan update and described how the projects and opportunities were identified. She said that the purpose of the Greenways ~ s: \plan\data\cur\bms\000720.min 4 City of Boulder ~ July 20, 2000 Planning Board Minutes program was to integrate six different objectives along six designated tributaries in Boulder Creek. She described the six objectives (providing altemative transportation routes for pedestrians and bicyclists, providing flood mitigation improvements, providing recreation, providing water quality improvements, preserving cultural resources, and preserving habitat). She said that the update to the Master Plan provides an opportunity to reevaluate the program, to identify projects and implement programs to support the objectives, and to develop goals for each of the six objectives. N. Steinberger identified the environmental projects (environmental protection areas, environmental restaration areas, water quality best management practices, and creek daylighting projects) and how they were evaluated. Public Participation: Jim Knopf, 320 Hollyberry Lane: He distributed a proposal entitled "Boulder's Tributary Greenways Wildtife Habitat EnhancemenY' because of the concern about the habitat aspect of the Boulder Creek Greenways. He said that the proposal is a request for funding to educate the public on habitat protection and restoration and to preserve and restore the areas along the creek. Linda Andes-Georges, PLAN Boulder, 5684 Aurora Place: She said that PLAN Boulder is asking the Board to consider recommending funding for riparian restoration. She said that the Greenways ~ Program has had a lack of funding for part of its mission. Return to the Board: MOTION: On a motion by M. Ruzzin, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the proj ects and opportunities as proposed in the staff inemorandum dated July 20, 2000 (preparation date July 1, 2000) as part of the Greenways Master Plan. Statements of Intention: Consider developing an amendment to the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan to provide flexibility in the future to make the necessary changes as part of a comprehensive plan for the drainage. Notify all adjacent property owners along the tributaries of Boulder Creek to inform them of any proposed changes, including a provision that addresses private property rights and private versus public lands. As part of the Tributary Greenways Master Plan, include a statement of how the City proposes to work with private property owners relative to improvements along tributaries. ~ s:\plan\data\cur\bms\000720. min City of Boulder July 20, 2000 Planning Board Minutes ~ • Develop a maintenance plan for tributaries that lie along industrial areas and a plan for instream water. C. Continuation of the public hearing and consideration of the 2001-2006 Capitai Improvements Program (CIP). Public Participation for the Evening 5ession: There was no public participation. TRIBUTARY GREENWAYS MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for the Tributary Greenways Program. Statement of Intention: Encourage the City Manager to identify additional potential funding to apply to the environmental component of the Greenways Master Plan. FLOOD CONTROL, WATER, AND WASTEWATER UTILITIES ~ MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. O'Hashi, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approva] of the 2001-2006 CIP program as proposed for Flood Control, Water, and Wastewater Utilities. Encourage the City to find alternative water sources for riparian areas impacted by repairs to City treated water storage facilities. PROJECTS RECOMMENDED FOR A CEAP J. Hagen said that staff would like to remove the Lakewood Hydroelectric project under the W ater Utility Division from the list of proj ects recommended for a CEAP since it has already gone through a CEAP review. MOTION: On a motion by B. Pommer, seconded by P. Gowen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the projects recommended for a CEAP as proposed with the exception of the Lakewood Hydroelectric project. 6 ~ s:\pl an\data\c ur\bms\000720.min City of Boulder ~ July 2Q 2000 Planning Board Minutes PROJECTS SUGGESTED FOR DESIGN REVIEW MOTION: On a motion by B. Pommer, seconded by P. Gowen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the list of projects suggested for design review as proposed. ADDITIONAL MOTIONS MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by B. Pommer, the Planning Boazd recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) to City Council approval of the following: 1) staff should continue to expiore possibilities to develop an implementation plan for capital projects associated with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Year 2000 Update; 2) Planning staff should continue to participate in other departmenYs efforts to coordinate multiple capital facility projects (28th Street implementation and potential area plan, Fourmile Canyon Creek Master Plan, etc.); and 3) the Downtown Design Advisory Board and Yhe Landmarks Board should be involved early in the planning and design for the Broadway Bridge Replacement. MOTION: On a motion by M. Ruzzin, seconded by P. Gowen, tha Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) that City Council encourage continued efforts to develop a County-wide ~ library usage plan. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) that City Council encourage the City Manager to identify additional potential funding to apply to the environmental component of the Greenways Master Plan. MOTION; On a motion by M. Ruzzin, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) that City Council encourage the development of a comprehensive parking provision and usage plan for the Downtown and Civic Center area. MOTION: On a motion by B, Pommer, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) that City Council encourage the Downtown Mall restrooms renovation/replacement proj ect to be accelerated. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by M. Ruzzin, the Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Jacob was absent) that City Council encourage the City to find alternative water sources for riparian areas impacted by repairs to City treated water storage facilities. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 9;55 p.m. . s:\plan\data\cur\bms\000720.min BOULDER PUBLIC LIBRARY 2002 - 2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ~ DEPARTMENT SUMMARY May 17, 2001 Library CIP Projects: 2002-2007 On May 16, 2001, the Library Commission approved the below 2002-2007 Library CIP. Commission members identified the North Branch Library as the top priority project. The remaining projects were not prioritized. No~th Boulder Branch Library_(First Priority.~ Preliminary branch library planning activities have been completed and included public surveys, neighborhood meetings, and service and programming discussions; a preliminary branch library program plan has been drafted. The Library Commission envisions this facility being both a neighborhood library as well as serving as a community center for the north Boulder community. Location: The facility is expected to be located on the 3.2 acre city-owned parcel at Fourmile Canyon Creek and North Broadway. Cost: $3.3 million (construction) $300,000 (annual operating) Funding Sources: $1.5 million has been appropriated for the north branch library construction (CDF) $1.8 million - construction, plus operating expenses (Library Bond Issue - 2003) . Timeframe: planning and construction - 2004 open to the public - 2004 or 2005 Five Year Librarv Computer Replacement Fund The existing Library Computer system was upgraded in 2000, the first major system upgrade in 11 years. Because upgrades are needed, in reality, every five years, the Library Commission is beginning the replacement planning process so that IT-CIP resources will be available at the end of the next five year period, in 2005 Cost: $600,000 Funding: IT-CIP Addition to the Main Librarv The demand for additional "people" space at the Main Library continues to grow and includes the need for more studying, seating, and research work spaces, Additionally, there is a serious need for more small group meeting areas as well as meeting rooms that can accommodate larger groups of people. Inadequate "people" space is acutely felt in the area of Children's and Young Adult library services. Neither area in the current facility can adequately accommodate the number of people coming into the library for services today. Staff also has become increasingly aware of the need to provide a more secure space for younger patrons. The 1992 addition placed the children's library near the main entry and gave the space an open and inviting design. In today's world, this has become less practical - children can slip outside, unattended, and adults without children, who are not seeking children's services, wander into the children's spaces. . A recent tibrary survey indicated that there is a need to reconfigure the presentation of the library collection to satisfy customer demands. In particular, there is a need to provide larger spaces for the popular/browsing collections. The Library Master Plan recommends a 35,000 sf addition to the Main Library; the new addition wili be used principally as a children's and young adult wing and will give the children's staff and parents more control over the space. Moving children's and young adult services to the new . wing will allow for sizeable increases in seating and study spaces in the 1992 addition and will also allow for significant improvement in the library's popular/browsing collection. Location: The new addition will be expanded to the west of the 1992 addition. Library staff have already begun discussions with the Housing Authority staff to ensure that relocation of clients living in the Independent Living apartments is completed with sensitivity and dignity. We are also working with the Senior Services staff to see how this undertaking might allow us to solve some of our common parking concerns. Also, for the last year, library staff have been active participants in the Civic Center facilities master plan update and Downtown Management Commission parking study, ensuring that impacts from the proposed library addition are integrated with other City and civic projects. Cost: Up to $30 million (includes the north branch library) Unfunded Project. Funding Sources: Library bond issue (2003) Timeframe: 2004-2006 - planning and construction 2006 or 2007 - open to the public Existing Facilities - Renovations and Upgrades A. Main Library NorthWing/Bridge Ups~rades. Included will be installing secondary emergency exits on both the mezzanine and first floor areas and mezzanine office upgrades. Additionally, the 10 year old carpet, which experiences very high traffic, will be replaced. We are also proposing to extend the water and sewer lines to the Bridge food concession. ~ Cost: $200,000 Unfunded Project. Funding Sources: General Fund, Major Maintenance, FR&R (Facility Renovation and Replacement) or Library Bond Issue Timeframe: 2002 - 2003 B. Main Library Telecommunications Uparade• In order to keep up with technology, the Main Library needs to upgrade its existing telecommunications wiring to flat wire fiber optic or other high-speed options such as wireless. Cost: $150,000 - $200,000 Unfunded Project. Funding Sources: General Fund, Major Maintenance, FR&R or Library Bond Issue Timeframe: 2002-2003 C. Main Libr~ (South Win~ Electrical Wirint~ Uparade. The existing flatwire used at the Main Library is no longer manufactured; new connections do not interface with the old. Replacing sections of the existing flatwire over a five year period, beginning in 2002, is recommended. Cost: $40,000 a year for five years or $200,000 total Unfunded Project. ~ Funding Sources: General Fund, Major Maintenance, FR&R or Library Bond Issue Timeframe: 2002-2006 D. Meadows Branch Library Improvements. The size of the water lines in the public restrooms will be increased and fixtures replaced to fix on-going back-up and overflow ~ problems. The 12 year old carpet also needs to be replaced. Cost: $66,000 Unfunded Project. Funding Sources: General Fund, Major Maintenance, FR&R or Library Bond Issue Timeframe: 2004 Long Term Archival Stor~e Space - Carnegie Library - Unfunded Space to house valuable archival records and historic documents was a need identified in the 1995 Library Master Plan. In previous CIP submissions, the Library Commission recommended that the City purchase the Masonic Lodge building for joint use by City Records and the Carnegie Library, however the Masonic Association is not ready to sell the building. In 2000, the Library began renting approximately 600 sf of storage space to house some lesser used archival documents; this is a temporary measure that will provide short-term relief (2-5 years) to our storage needs. Long-Term, oermanent. The Library Commission has decided to proceed with selling the Blystat-Laeser House, the City-owned house located next door to the Carnegie Library; sale proceeds will be put towards addressing the long term archival storage needs of the Carnegie Library. In the next 5-7 years, the Library Commission and City will need to find an acceptable solution for handling the long-term storage needs for both Carnegie Library documents as well as those of City Records. Regional Library Services ~ The five public libraries in Boulder County (Boulder, Lafayette, Longmont, Louisville, and Lyons) are funded by the local municipalities but serve each others residents as well as residents who live in the unincorporated county and in cities and towns that do not have libraries. Because people use the library in one community, shop in another, yet live in a third, the Boards of Boulder county's municipal libraries have concluded that funding libraries through regional revenue sharing is a more equitable way of ineeting the library needs of all county residents. Over the last several years, staff and Board members of the above five libraries have had on- going meetings, reviewing the issues, examining a variety of service and funding options, and discussing long range opportunities; the recommendation is to work towards the approval of a countywide tax earmarked for library services. Gunbarrel Branch Librarv Discussions regarding the redevelopment of the Gunbarrel Shopping Center and the development of an adjacent property are in the early stages. We are coordinating with the Planning Department, as there is a possible opportunity for the construction of a branch library to be in included in the development with one or both of these properties. Gunbarrel residents most likely will have major responsibility for capital and operational expenses for this facility should it move forvvard. .