HomeMy WebLinkAbout232-05 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO. 232-05
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2006-2010 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP).
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby adopts the 2006-2010 Capital Improvements Program (CIP), a copy of
which marked Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
PASSED and APPROVED this 6th day of December, 2005.
ATTEST.
G,•ccii o; .
�, G• ptiN =
_U••
•FAYETTEVILLE
•
%9s'9RKANS • Jam .
�°'y.NG70N G�'..
By: �,o,,.dti..a-' "Jhu(t..„,
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
City Clerk's Office
Storage #1
aye,r
ARKANSAS
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
Five Year
Capital Improvements Program
2006-2010
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
2006 - 2010
Capital Improvements Program
Compiled by:
Kevin Springer, Budget Manager
Glynis Nelson, Financial Analyst
Barbara Fell, Senior Research Analyst
Stacey Kirk, Budget Analyst
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
2006-2010 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
PAGE(S)
Letter of Transmittal 1-6
Program Directional Information 7-16
CIP Project Cost Table 17
2005 Current Project Status 18-37
Resolution to Adopt 2006-2010 CIP 38
COMPREHENSIVE DETAIL
Summary of Project Requests 39-41
Comprehensive Detail 42-45
AIRPORT FUND PROJECTS
Airport Improvements:
Priority Rankings 47
Project Details 48-62
PARKS DEVELOPMENT FUND PROJECTS
Parks & Recreation Improvements:
Priority Rankings 63
Project Details 64-70
SALES TAX CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND PROJECTS
Bridge and Drainage Improvements:
Priority Rankings 71
Project Details 72-74
Fire Safety Improvements:
Priority Rankings 75
Project Details 76-78
Information Technology Improvements:
Priority Rankings 79
Project Details 80-88
Library Material Purchases & Improvements:
Priority Rankings 89
Project Details 90-91
PAGE(S)
Other Capital Improvements:
Priority Rankings 92
Project Details 93-96
Parks & Recreation Improvements:
Priority Rankings 97
Project Details 98-100
Police Safety Improvements:
Priority Rankings 101
Project Details 102-112
Street Improvements:
Priority Rankings 113
Project Details 114-124
Transportation Improvements:
Priority Rankings 125
Project Details 126-130
SHOP FUND PROJECTS
Vehicles & Equipment:
Priority Rankings 131
Project Details 132-145
WATER & SEWER FUND PROJECTS
Wastewater Treatment Improvements:
Priority Rankings 147
Project Details 148-152
Water & Sewer Improvements:
Priority Rankings 153
Project Details 154-158
Water & Sewer Services Improvements:
Priority Rankings 159
Project Details 160-164
OTHER FUND PROJECTS
Off -Street Parking Fund - Off -Street Parking Improvements:
Priority Rankings 165
Project Details 166
1
PAGE(S) 1
Public Safety Expansion Bond Fund — Other Capital Improvements:
Priority Rankings 167
Project Details 168
Solid Waste Fund - Solid Waste Improvements: '
Priority Rankings 169
Project Details 170
Street Fund - Transportation Improvements:
Priority Rankings 171
Project Details 172 '
UNFUNDED PROJECTS 173-191
APPENDIX
Listing Of Acronyms 193-194
Project Index 195-197 ,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Introduction
�raye.ieviHe,„
1 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
December 6, 2005
Members of the City Council and
Citizens of Fayetteville
rt is my pleasure to present the Adopted 2006-2010 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for the
1 City of Fayetteville. The City began this very important and successful CIP process in 1988 w
provide a focused plan that identifies the City's infrastructure and capital needs and also identifies the
funding to meet those needs. On the third page is a table that lists both the planned expenditures by
1 project category for the 2006-2010 CIP and the actual funds expended for the past five completed
years (2000-2004).
1 This Adopted CIP is developed to address identified capital needs for this planning period, 2006-
2010, within existing revenue streams to fund needed infrastructure. City Council, through the
Fayetteville City Council Street and Fayetteville Sewer Committees, have initiated the planning
' process to address necessary infrastructure improvements that are required to maintain the quality of
life for which our City has become known.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
These projects are focused on implementing improvements identified in the Master Traffic &
Transportation Study, the Fayetteville Alternative Transportation and Trails Plan (FATT), the
Community Park project, and completion of the Wastewater System Improvements Project (WSIP).
Earlier in 2005, the Street Committee initiated planning for phasing street and other transportation
improvements for a proposed Transportation Bond Program. This planning was tabled while the
City focused on initiating the construction phases of the WSIP. The Street Committee is tentatively
scheduling a review of the Transportation Bond Program for the first quarter of 2006.
During 2005, the City awarded construction contracts for upgrading the Paul Noland Wastewater
Treatment Plant and the construction of the West Wastewater Treatment Plant located on 300 acres
of City -owned land off Broyles Road. The majority of the line portions of the WSIP are expected to
be bid between November 3, 2005 and July 2006 with substantial completion for the Westside
Wastewater Treatment Plant scheduled for May 2008.
The City received approval of several federal funding requests during 2005. The most significant arc
the earmark funds of approximately $9 million for improvements to College Avenue and Fulbright
Expressway. The City also received the formal notification from the EPA for grant awards for $1.5
million for use in rehabilitating the City's wastewater collection system. The City is continuing to
pursue additional federal funding for trail construction and continued improvements to College
Avenue and Fulbright Expressway, as well as funding for communication improvements for public
safety. As these federal earmarks are finalized, staff will prepare amendments to this plan to reflect
these funds.
I
The City purchased the former Mexican Original manufacturing facility from Tyson Foods, Inc.
This purchase consists of a building approximately 126,000 square feet on over 11 acres. The initial
plan is to locate Fire Station #3 on this site to alleviate response time issues for portions of East
Fayetteville, the Fayetteville Industrial Park, and enable the City to relocate Fire Station #5 further
north on Highway 265. The 2005 Budget contains funding for the construction and equipping of
both Fire Station #3 and Fire Station #5. An engineering firm is in the process of surveying land for
Fire Station #5. As soon as the survey is complete, the City will proceed with the selection of an
architect for this facility.
The City has contracted with an architect to develop a space needs assessment report analyzing the
space needs for the Fayetteville District Court, Fayetteville City Prosecutor, Fayetteville Police
Department, and Fire Administration, Training, and Prevention for the next twenty (20) years. The
final report is expected in mid-December. This CIP contains a proposal to fund approximately $12
million dollars of facility improvements to address the identified needs for these Public Safety
functions. The 2006 Budget contains $400,000 to begin the architectural services for this project
with the remaining funding needed in early 2007.
The City is closer to a Community Park becoming a reality. In October, the SouthPass development
firm purchased the Cumming Property. As part of an agreement reached with the developers in
2004, the City is to receive approximately 239 acres and $1.0 million for the initial park development
cost. The property transfer and receipt of the funds is subject to a number of conditions including
annexation of the property into the City. It is expected that all of the conditions will be met during
2006.
Subsequent to postponement of the Transportation Bond Program and prior to adoption of this capital
program, staff evaluated each of the CIP projects submitted against an eighteen element project
criteria ranking. This improvement to the CIP process was necessary in order to overcome a seeming
entitlement of CIP funds. This process has allowed a more holistic analysis of needs and a
prioritization of need based upon community need rather than program need. The project criteria
ranking was necessary to use as one of several tools in developing this document. Additional tools
utilized by staff included factors that provided for a more complete ranking than numeric criteria
could provide on its own. These additional tools included:
• Funding is needed to complete a project in -progress;
• Impact on City operations if the project is not funded;
• Ability to complete the project as scheduled; and,
• Judgment — is this project absolutely necessary at this time with our existing
funding sources.
The project ranking criteria follows this letter for reference.
2
Project Category
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements/Expansion
Water & Sewer improvements
Street Improvements
Transportation Improvements
Parks & Recreation Improvements
Airport Improvements
Vehicles & Equipment Replacement/Expansion
Bridge & Drainage Improvements
Information Technology Improvements
Other Capital Improvements
Fire Safety Improvements
Library Material Purchases & Improvements
Police Improvements
Solid Waste Improvements
Adopted
2006-20/0
S
965,000
11, 575.000
14,153.000
17.961, 000
6.154, 000
11, 818, 000
8.242.000
3,344.000
1.685,000
13.613.000
2.710, 000
1.640.000
1.654.000
61.000
S 95, 575, 000
Actual
2000-2004
$ 13,128,049
23.430,366
19,109,871
5,803,524
10,158,998
7,301,646
7.601,215
2.519, 388
2,328,413
10,746,792
5,674.016
23,812,636
3,665,207
2,289.689
$ 137,569,810
The 2006-2010 CIP includes $95.6 million in planned capital improvements over the next five years
or approximately $4.8 million Tess in projects than the 2004-2008 CIP contained. Most of the change
in project value is due to the new central library and progress on the new wastewater treatment plant
and improvements to the City's wastewater collection system. The new library was completed in the
third quarter of 2004 and the wastewater treatment plant is scheduled to he on-line in May 2008.
Finally, improvements proposed in this CIP for the Airport, Vehicles & Equipment, Parks &
Recreation, Bridge & Drainage, Street, and Water & Sewer have been reviewed and recommended
by the Airport Board, the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, and the City Council's Street, Water
& Sewer and Equipment Committees.
Funding for Capital Improvements
The majority of projects listed in this adopted CIP are funded with a discretionary city sales tax that
was re -authorized in July 2002 for an additional ten years. The 2006-2010 CIP is based on the re-
authorized city sales revenues being divided evenly within the General Fund. The supporting
resolution approved by City Council provided the opportunity to shift the distribution of city sales
tax revenue from an even split (50-50%) to a minimum of 30%, if needed, for capital beginning in
2007. Currently, with the adoption of a City Property tax, the (50-50%) split will be sufficient for
General Fund operations. For 2007, a discussion by the City Council may be necessary to determine
3
•
if additional sales tax can be re -programmed for capital projects while the General Fund budget is
supplemented by property tax revenue.
Status of Projects Budgeted for 2005
The City has approximately $179.9 million in capital projects budgeted for 2005. A 2005 Current
Project Status report follows this letter. The current status of the major projects budgeted for 2005
are listed below:
Street, Drainage, and Transportation Improvements
• Van Asche Boulevard - Cost Sharing ($1.9 million). The design began in the third quarter of
2005 and will be completed in the first quarter of 2006 with construction also starting in the
first quarter of 2006.
• Township Widening - Gregg to North College ($1.0 million). This is a multi-year project
that began in the third quarter of 2005. The project is scheduled to be bid in the second
quarter of 2006.
• In -House Pavement Improvements ($2.0 million). Through November 30, 17.78 miles of
street have been overlaid.
• In -House Sidewalk Improvements ($0.7 million). Through November 30, 19,374 linear feet
of sidewalk had been constructed.
Water & Sewer Improvements
• Wastewater System Improvements Project ($113.0 million). Construction of the first
contract, which is the Noland Treatment Plant Improvements, is underway. West WWTP
construction is scheduled for substantial completion on May 31, 2008.
• 36" Water Line Replacement & Protection ($0.9 million). The study by Black and Veatch
and McClelland Consulting Engineers is complete. Staff is currently studying various
alternatives for future construction.
• Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation ($5.9 million). Field study is underway and will advertise late
in the fourth quarter A manhole contract for Farmington was completed by T -G Excavating
in September. The RJN Group has been awarded a contract for field investigations in the
western portion of the City and investigations are underway.
• Water & Sewer Operations Building ($1.9 million). Substantial completion has been
reached. Staff began occupying the facility in October.
4
Other significant projects:
• New Library Building ($1.5 million). The building is complete and all punch list items have
been resolved.
• West General Aviation Apron ($1.1 million). A construction contract was approved by the
City Council on August 2 and Change Order #1 was approved on September 6. Work will
begin upon FAA approval of contract documents. This project is primarily funded by grants.
• Fire Station #5 — Relocation ($1.9 million). The land for this station has been acquired and
negotiations are underway for the architect.
• Community Park Development ($1.6 million). SouthPass Development will deed about 239
acres to the City. The developers will meet with park staff during first quarter of 2006 to
begin formalizing plans for the site.
• Trail/Park Land Acquisition/Development ($0.9 million). During the third quarter,
construction of the first trail project under the new program began. The trail connection
along the east side of Kitty Creek from Joyce Street to the Mud Creek trail has been
completed. Work has begun on the second trail project.
• Joint Public Safety Command Center ($1.1 million). The City has purchased the property at
1851 East Huntsville Road. Wilson Estes Police Architects has been contracted for the
design of the work to he done at the facility. Negotiations for an agreeable fee for a Space
Needs Study were successful. Renovations of this facility will occur over the next two to
five years.
Unfunded Protects
The unfunded projects list contains projects that have been identified as needed without an identified
funding source. The value of the unfunded projects list has decreased from S180.6 million in the
2004-2008 CIP to $171.9 million for the 2006-2010 CIP. The decrease in unfunded projects is
primarily attributed to two major projects: Joint Public Safety Command Center and Crossover
(Highway 265) — Mission to City Limits. In the 2004-2008 CIP the Joint Public Safety Command
Center was listed in the unfunded projects list for $15.7 million. However, in the 2006-2010 CIP,
$12.0 million of this project is listed as funded in the Public Safety Expansion Bond Fund. The
Crossover (Highway 265) — Mission to City Limits project represented $10.6 million of the 2004-
2008 CIP unfunded projects list. This project currently has a budget of $1.0 million and has S6.5
million funded in the Sales Tax Capital Improvements Fund in the 2006-2010 CIP.
As a planning tool for infrastructure and other capital improvements, the CI P prioritizes projects and
schedules them for completion as soon as practical. The City advocates a primarily pay-as-you-go
policy. This policy requires difficult decisions to be made regarding the timing and scope of capital
improvements. Some projects simply have to wait.
5
The CIP is a five-year plan that may be updated and/or revised on an annual basis to reflect changing
priorities, to renew existing priorities, and to revise cost estimates. The funding requests for the
projects planned for 2006 were incorporated in the 2006 Budget, which was adopted by City
Council.
Finally, let me express my sincere thanks to the members of City staff, the City Council, various
committees, and the community for the significant effort and input that has helped to shape this
document.
Respectfully submitted,
teeze, ecoot
Dan Coody
Mayor
113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 479-521-7700
FAX 479-575-8257
6
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM DIRECTIONAL INFORMATION
Introduction
The Capital Improvements Program (CLP) for the City of Fayetteville examines the infrastructure
and capital needs of the City for the next five years. The CIP may be reviewed and updated on
an annual basis to reflect the changing needs of the community and changes in available monies
for financing capital projects. The City's philosophy concerning the use of the CIP is that it
should be considered as a financial planning tool that lists the City's capital improvement
projects, places the projects in a priority order, and schedules the projects for funding and
implementation. The CIP should be further considered as a major policy tool for the Mayor and
City Council.
Capital Improvement Policy
The CIP is approached as a valuable tool to be used in the development of responsible and
progressive financial planning. The program is developed in accordance with the financial
policies of the City. The policies and the CIP form the basis for making various annual capital
budget decisions and support the City's continued commitment to sound, long-range financial
planning and direction. The City's official Capital Improvements Policy is as follows:
• The City will prepare a biennial update of a five year CIP, which will provide for the orderly
maintenance, replacement, and expansion of capital assets.
• The CIP will identify long-range capital projects and capital improvements of all types,
which will be coordinated with the annual operating budget to maintain full utilization of
available sources.
• When preparing the CIP, the City will seek to identify all viable capital projects and capital
improvements required during the subsequent five year period. These projects and
improvements will be prioritized by year and by funding source. Every attempt will be made
to match projects and improvements with available funding sources. Future operating costs
associated with a project or an improvement will also be given consideration in the
establishment of priorities.
• The City will seek Federal, State, and other funding to assist in financing capital projects and
capital improvements.
• The City will incorporate the reasonable findings and recommendations of the City's Boards,
Commissions, Committees, and Citizens' task forces as they relate to capital projects and
improvements.
• The City will seek input on the establishment of projects and project priorities from the
public by holding hearings.
7
What Projects Are in the CIP
Projects and their cumulative component areas totaling $10,000 or more should be included in
the CIP. Projects costing less than $5,000 are not considered capital and are funded through
program operating budgets. Projects that cost between $5,000-10,000 are handled through the
budget process. Attempts will be made to fund these capital items through operating funds.
Projects in the CIP can include:
• obligations for labor and materials and contractors involved in completing a project,
• acquisition of land or structures,
• engineering or architectural services, professional studies, or other administrative costs,
• expenses for City vehicles and equipment, and
• renovating or expanding City facilities, grounds, or equipment.
Financing
The City finances capital improvements on essentially a pay-as-you-go basis utilizing revenue
from the 1% City sales tax originally adopted in 1993, the 1% Parks Development (Hotel, Motel,
Restaurant) sales tax adopted in 1996, and operating revenues from the Airport, Shop, Water &
Sewer, and Solid Waste funds. Based on a resolution approved by the City Council, prior to the
passage of the sales tax, a minimum of 75% of the sales tax revenues will be used to assist in
funding capital projects. In 2002, the 1% City sales tax was reauthorized for ten years (July 1,
2003 - June 30, 2013). Based on a resolution approved by the City Council, prior to the passage
of the sales tax, a minimum of 50% of the sales tax revenues will be used to assist in funding
capital projects beginning with collections for the month of July 2003. The funding for capital
projects in 2006 will be at 50% of the sales tax revenues collected. In addition, long-term debt is
considered and utilized only when the City faces a project that is of such importance and
sufficient financial magnitude as to warrant a bond issue.
The CIP is not a financing document in and of itself. Rather, the CIP is utilized as a planning
document that places projects in the annual budget whereby funds are appropriated for them by
the City Council. Prior to actual initiation of project work, required contracts are presented to
the Mayor or City Council, as appropriate, for final approval of expending funds.
Prosect Cost Determination
All projects are first costed in current or 2005 dollars. Then a determination of the year the
project is expected to start is made. Finally, a determination of the projected cost of the
improvement is made by referring to the "Project Cost Table" that provides the inflation
multiplier to be used for the project in the anticipated year.
Priority Selection of Protects
The adopted CIP will rely on priorities defined by the Mayor, City Council, community, and City
staff. As always, criteria such as government imposed mandates, usefulness to the community,
and impact on operational expenses will be reviewed in establishing priorities. A priority
8
ranking is assigned to each project by year and by funding source. Projects for which no funding
is anticipated to be available will be placed on an "Unfunded Projects List," which will identify
the cost of the project. This list identifies the project as being viable, but one for which no
funding is presently available. Unfunded projects may be funded if actual revenue is above
projected revenue, if costs on funded projects are below budget, or if another funding source is
identified.
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Airport Board, City Council Street Committee, City
Council Water & Sewer Committee, and City Council Equipment Committee meetings have
been held to obtain committee and public input and guidance regarding parks, streets, bridge and
drainage improvements, water and sewer improvements, and equipment purchases planned for
the next five years.
Each of the CIP projects submitted arc also evaluated against an eighteen element project criteria
ranking. Capital project evaluation criteria support the policy goals adopted by the City Council
but provide a means to measure the relative value of each proposed project. Following is a
"Capital Project Rating Criteria and Scoring" worksheet.
9
Capital Project Rating Criteria and Scoring Worksheet
0)
o)
• C
N C
O R N
C D.
�3a
a
amc
0
d O 0)
c0
> N
C . D
a) C N
U U a)
U a) c
co
a) O N
E 3
as
E o •
v_
d
a) m n
a"
n N E
▪ m
r c
T N F
N = • N
m• � O
O
L D N
a) ac
m
E'
o c
N t0-. at
• O'
▪ '0 T
NCI) -
t a) ,Cr..
O C• 00 C) U
a�'.
d co
m E °
0 CO a
c
ca):5
a) 5, t
c o n --
° a a 0
N m E
:0 a N
t O
>, U oa
C c U .c
o
nT ofd
0 Er U .0
N of
EO
N L
0 N N
• c= 0
N E_
N N U
0 O c
E Yc,
O • C U _0
N 1 a)
L O m
«
0
cnU
cc
O) O.
c0
`n E
c
C
O.
7
E u2 co
r 0
ac)
E 1—
t
0) d
o.0
o 0.
N
c')
Prioritization
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cr)0
m
Cr)
c7
C)
M
N
N
N
1) Public health and Project needed to alleviate Project needed to alleviate Project would promote or No health or safety impact
safety existing health or safety potential health or safety maintain health/safety. associated with project.
hazard. hazard.
3) Protection of Project will save structural Project will repair systems Project will improve facility No existing facility involved.
capital facilities integrity of existing facility or important to facility operation. appearance or deter future
repair significant structural expenditure.
deterioration.
4) Operating budget Project will result in decreased Project will have minimal or no Project will have some Project will require major
operating costs. operating and maintenance additional operating costs additions in personnel or other
costs. and/or personnel additions. operating costs.
5) Public support Public expresses a strong City staff reports that the Public has not expressed a
desire for City to undertake the project is desired by the specific preference for this
project by way of surveys, N/A community or neighborhood to project.
petitions, etc. be served.
6) Environmental Project will improve Project may improve Project will have no effect on
quality environmental quality of the environmental quality of the N/A the environmental quality of
city and its neighbors. city. the city.
8) Relation to Project is included in a formal Project is included in written Project is included in written Project is not included in any
adopted plans plan which had mayor/council plans adopted by a city plans of city staff. written plans.
approval. board/commission.
9) Availability of Project revenues will support Non -city revenues have been Potential for non -city revenue No financing arrangements
financing project expenses. identified and applied for. exists. currently exist.
jurisdictions. jurisdictions.
7) Life expectancy Meets needs of the community Meets needs of the community M
of project for the next 20 years or more. for the next 15 to 19 years. fo
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
c ,a
E
`n E
CC rn
c
0. m
11
3 0
E
11
i N
C :,
1 O
0 6
rs0 a
0
0
Q
i
0
N
f7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
.-
r
10) Benefit -to -cost Return on investment for the Retum on investment cannot Retum on investment is
ratio project can be computed and N/A be readily computed. negative.
is positive.
11) Economic Project will encourage capital Project Does not encourage
development investment, increase tax base. Economic Development.
improve job opportunities.
attract customers, or produce N/A N/A
public/private revenues.•
12) Timeliness/ Project will allow the city to External influences do not
External take advantage of favorable affect the timeliness of this
current situation, such as the project.
purchase of land or materials N/A N/A
at favorable prices.
13) Prerequisite Project requires completion Project should be completed Project has no prerequisites.
• before implementation of a N/A before implementation of a
related project. related project.
14) Departmental Project fulfills all of the Project fulfills some of the Project fulfills at least one of Project does not fulfill the
Significance department's objectives and is department's objectives and is the department's objectives department's objectives.
ranked highly by the ranked midrange by the and is ranked low by the
requesting division. requesting division. requesting division.
irnpiemernea outing requestea partially implemented aunng awing uIe requesreu mutt
time frame. the requested time frame. N/A frame.
16) % of population 50% or more served. 25% to 49% served. 10% to 24% served. Less than 10% served.
served
17) Special need Project will serve a special This project does not meet
need of a segment of the city's particular needs of a special
population (low income, aged. N/A N/A population.
or minorities).
18) Energy/Water Project will reduce the amount Project will require no increase Project will require minimal Project will require substantial
consumption of energy/water consumed. in energy/water consumption. increase in energy/water increases.
consumption.
Total
Impact on Operations Cost
The majority of the projects planned in the CIP will have a minor impact on operational budgets.
Most of the projects planned over the next five years replace high maintenance water lines, sewer
lines, and street segments. Performing reconstruction of these items will free up maintenance
budgets to address areas that currently have a lesser priority. There are a few projects that will
have a significant impact on operational budgets. The most significant of these projects are
listed below:
• Vehicles & Equipment: The vehicles and equipment planned for 2006 in the Shop Fund will
reduce annual maintenance expenses. The savings in maintenance expenses will be offset by
increased parts cost on the remaining fleet. User divisions will reimburse the Shop Fund
more than $1.4 million over the five year period for the replacement, maintenance, and
overhead expenses for each unit.
• In -House Pavement Improvements: This project will reduce maintenance costs for each
street that is overlaid. In addition, this project is projected to save the City more than
$250,000 annually over contract pricing for the same work.
• Fire Station #3 and Apparatus: This project adds a new station for the City which will be
housed in the Joint Public Safety Command Center. In 2007, operational expenses will
increase with the addition of 12 new firefighters as well as the utilities and maintenance of
the new building and apparatus by approximately $683,000.
• Neighborhood Park Development: Development of new neighborhood parks will require one
Maintenance Worker III to be added in 2007. Initial year cost is $42,141, which includes
personnel services, uniforms, safety devices and minor equipment.
• Community Park: This project will significantly impact the annual operating budget. Once
developed, an additional three full time staff members, a vehicle, and utility expenses will be
required. These expenses are estimated at over $135,000 for the first year of operation. This
project will also increase revenue approximately $59,500 from registration fees and $20,000
from HMR Tax due to hosting new tournaments.
Following is a schedule illustrating the operating impacts and effects for the projects presented in
the 2006-2010 Capital Improvements Program.
12
City of Fayetteville. Arkansas
2006. 2010 CaMitai Improvements Program
Operating Impacts
Scurce/Dms n Prosed
2006
2007 2008 2009 2010 Taal
pryer! Fund
isnpal ImDrOvementy
Aviation & ENnrmC Davebpmen
Runway 34- PAPI S 100 S 100 S 100 S 100 S 100 S 500
Construction Eoupinem - Replacement 2001 2001 4002
Tractors/Mowers - Ropacenlore 5.016 5.016 10.032
Runway Overrun - Sbieh Eno (Revenue) (5.033) (5.084) (5.135) (5.187) (20.439)
Terminal Bolding Rehabilitation Project Phase II (Revenue) (44.000) (44.000) (4.000) (44.000) (176.000)
Runway Overrun - North Eno (Revenue) (5.084) (5.135) (5.187) (15.406)
High Intensity Runway UOhkrg (HIRL) 100 100 100 100 400
Tanway G Development Phase!!! 1000 1.000 1.000 1.030 4000
GA Sunscreens • East Side (Revenue) (14.400) (15.120) (15.120) (44.640)
GA Sunscreens • East Side 100 100 1.600 1.800
Airport Property Puc, ase . Southwest Side 1.000 '.000
East Side Corporate Apron (Revenue) (30.000) (30.000) (60.0001
100 (47 833) (67.268) (91.073) (88.677) (294.751)
Total Airpan Fund Impacts
community Develoonemt (lock Grant Fund
gine, Capital Improvements
Conenurvry ROsouces & Code Compliance
Lgh/Mednrrn Trucks - Replacement
Taal Community Development Block Grant Fund Prowls
Genn! Funs(
File Solely Inwavemaa6
Fire
Fire Apparatus Pucnase Program
Fire Department Vehicles - Replacement
Police/Passenger Vehicles - Expansion
Fire Facility Maintenance - Cosi Savings
Joins Public Safety Command Center (Fire Slaw 93)
Parks 6 Reoealien Inpwernea§
Parks & Recreation
Poh ePassegar Vehcles - Replacemen
TradosMT.lowers - Roplacem ort
Light/Medium Trucks - Repawme 1
Oanr VoFdos/Eoupment - Replacement
100 47 833) (67268) (91.073) (88.677) (294.751)
3.576 3.576 3.576 3.576 3.576 17.860
3.576
3.576 3.576 3.576 3.576 17.880
3.576 3.576
3.576 3.576
3.576 17 880
5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 25.000
372 1.224 1224 2.820
3.714 3.714 3.714 3.714 3.714 18.570
(2.500) (2.5001 (2.500) (2.500) (2.500) (12.500)
683.000 723.960 767.419 813.464 2.987 863
6.214 689.214 730.566 774.857 820.902 3.021.753
4068
2.448
6.516
6.668
3.888
2.448
8.868
7.40
12.756 18.756
2.448
8.868
7.440
2.448 7.34
8.868 39.540
7.092 28.308
252 252
18756 18.660 75.44
Other Coital Immrpvemerts
Bulling Safety
Lont/Mo0'um Trucks - Replacemere 144 2.052 2.052 2.052 6.300
Building Semces
Jam Pudic Safety Comnari Center 55.000 55.000 '22.622 124.678 128.992 484.292
Police/Passenger Vehicles- Replacement 2.446 2.448 2.448 7.344
LgnMedun Trtxks- Reyacemee 3.060 3.060 6.972 6.972 6.972 27.036
Community Resources 8 Code Compliance
UghrtAeaam Travis- Repaoemol 3.576 7.152 7.152 7.152 7.152 32.184
Curren Planning
LgnuMedevn Trucks • Reptacenem 1.392 1.392 1.392 1.392 1.392 6.960
Erguneenn9
LgItA.ledam Trucks - Replaceret 12.924 12.924 13.284 13.284 13.284 65.700
Parking & Telecommunications
LigIVMedwm Tracks - Replacement 4.308 4.308 4.308 4.308 4.308 21.540
POIiCe Sanely Improvement§
Peace
Police UIvnarked Vehicles
Command Post Vehicle
Police Handgun Replacement (Revenue)
Police Handgun Replacemnt
Replacement ol Mobile Video Recorders (MVR)
Police/Passenger Vevdes - Replacement
Light/Medium TruYu - Replacement
Police/Passenger Vehicles - Expansion
Animal Services
!mineralize Upgrale
Total General Fund Impacts
80.260 83.980 160.230 162.286 164.600 651.356
5.436 22.695
35 536 37.128 38.815
28.440
(22.500)
2.000
5.000 5.000
9.684 14.376 23.556 28.632 36.756
2.616 2.616
10.878 10.878 10.878 10.878 10.878
139.610
28.440
(22.500)
2.000
10.000
113.004
5 232
54.390
3.030 3.000
25.998 47.949 49.470 84.254 125.505 333 176
118.988 833.899 959.022 1.040.153 1.129.667 4.081.729
13