HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session
November 26, 2024
4:45 p.m. – 6:45 p.m.
Board Room
4:30 p.m. Dinner
ACCESSING MEETING TRANSLATIONS
(Accediendo a las Traducciones de la Reunión)
To access written translation during the meeting, please scan the QR Code or click
this link for up to 48 other languages (Para acceder a la traducción durante la
reunión, par favor escanee el código QR o haga clic en el enlace para hasta 48
idiomas más):
https://attend.wordly.ai/join/FLUL-1105
Choose Language and Click Attend (Seleccione su lenguaje y haga clic en asistir)
Use a headset on your phone for audio or read the transcript can assist those
having difficulty hearing (Use un auricular en su teléfono para audio o lea la
transcripción puede ayudar a aquellos que tienen dificultades para escuchar).
Public comment is not typically heard at Study Sessions, but may be allowed by the Mayor with agreement of a
majority of the Board.
This study session will be streamed live and available at www.estes.org/videos
4:45 p.m. Purchasing: Project Delivery Tools.
(Director Fetherston)
5:15 p.m. 2024 Paid Parking Season Results.
(Manager Klein)
5:45 p.m. Future Funding for the Bighorn Parking Structure.
(Manager Klein)
6:35 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
6:40 p.m. Comments & Questions.
6:45 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting.
Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this
meeting at approximately 4:15 p.m.
AGENDA
TOWN BOARD
STUDY SESSION
INTERNAL SERVICES Report
To: Honorable Mayor Hall
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Paul J. Fetherston, Internal Services Director
Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Derek Pastor, PMP, Project Manager
Date: November 26, 2024
RE: Project Delivery Tools: Construction Services
Purpose of Study Session Item:
This item is intended to provide the Town Board with information about and the
opportunity to address questions regarding the planned Town staff use of additional
procurement methods pertaining to delivering construction projects in a manner
consistent with the Town’s Purchasing Policy. These tools include:
• On-Call General Contracting Services for Town maintenance, repair and
remodeling projects
• Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Town construction, maintenance, repair and
remodeling projects
• Construction Manager General Contractor (CM/GC) project delivery method
Town Board Direction Requested:
What questions, concerns and feedback does the Town Board have regarding the
planned use of these project delivery tools in accordance with the Town’s Purchasing
Policy?
Present Situation:
On-Call General Contracting Services
Currently, the Town utilizes the Request for Proposals (RFP) and Invitation to Bid (ITB)
processes to secure services related to maintenance, repairs and remodeling of Town
facilities that are
(a) beyond the capacity or capability of Facilities Maintenance staff; and
(b) for projects with a value over $30,000 in accordance with the Town’s Purchasing
Policy.
While these processes are used by the Town typically on an individual project basis, the
Town currently utilizes on-call contracting in the following areas:
• General Engineering Services: Utilities Department/ Water Division and Public
Works Department
• HVAC Services: Facilities
• Plumbing Services (currently out for RFP): Facilities
• Debris Removal and Hauling Services: Facilities
• Janitorial Services: Facilities
In an effort to maximize time and resources relative to Town maintenance, repair and
remodeling projects, staff intends to use the on-call competitive process to create a list
of on-call general contractors from which general contracting services could be secured
in a timely fashion.
Job Order Contracting (JOC)
The Town does not currently use Job Order Contracting for project delivery purposes. It
is unknown if the JOC project delivery method has been used by the Town in the past.
This method would be used for Town construction, maintenance, repair and remodeling
projects with the intention of addressing current challenges related to staff resources,
timing of project completion, availability/ interest of qualified vendors, and response
times.
Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC)
Within the construction field, there are a number of project delivery methods such as
Construction Management / General Contractor (CM/GC), Design-Build (DB), and
Design-Bid-Build (DBB). The primary premise/benefit of using the CM/GC method for
certain projects is bringing the General Contractor (GC) into the Project Team early in
the design phase. The rationale behind this is to have the GC provide Construction
Management (CM) services by reviewing the plans for constructability, identifying
conflicts within the drawings, understanding the drawings versus reality, providing
another set of construction cost estimates (along with the architects/engineer’s
estimates), materials alternatives/value-engineering suggestions, and construction
schedule timelines. Reviewing the plans early and often will help to reduce
construction-related change order costs and shorten the overall time of design and
construction.
Over the last decade, the CM/GC project delivery method has made up nearly 40% of
construction-related projects. Additionally, this method has been used in approximately
15-25% of infrastructure projects (State DOTs, highways, roads, bridges, water, etc.)
There is precedent for using this method within Estes Park – the Town’s Visitor Center
Parking Garage and the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District’s Community
Center. This method would also be ideal for future upcoming projects – such as the
Museum Annex Expansion, Big Horn Parking Structure and the new Police Department
building (and possibly other projects from other Town Departments or Divisions).
Proposal:
On-Call General Contracting Services
One common method used to identify a provider for general contracting services as
needs arise is creating an on-call general contractor list. Using this method, a list of
qualified general contractors is created through a competitive process. Once the on-call
list is created, the Town can issue a task order or request for quotes to secure services
for projects within the contract scope. The project/service cost is based on the labor/
service costs outlined in the general contractor’s proposal. Purchase orders for projects
completed through this process continue to be bound by the Spending Authority &
Limits Purchasing Policy. As such, Town Board approval will be required:
• for any purchase order for a project that exceeds the staff spending authority as
outlined in Town policy; and
• if in any fiscal year the amount to be spent under the contract for a specific
contractor exceeds staff spending authority as outlined in Town policy.
Specifically, Town staff intends to utilize the on-call project delivery method to secure
general contracting services for maintenance, repairs and remodeling of Town facilities
that are beyond the capacity and capabilities of the Facilities Maintenance staff for
projects. This will enable the Town to secure a list of pre-qualified general contractors
that could be called upon to complete projects, increasing the capacity of the Facilities
Division to catch up on a backlog of capital projects and address smaller and
unexpected projects in a timely fashion, while still maintaining a competitive process.
The Town would continue to have the ability to issue RFPs and bids for individual
projects as it deems necessary and appropriate.
Job Order Contracting (JOC)
Another procurement method available to secure providers of construction services –
including new construction, repairs, renovations/ remodeling, maintenance, emergency
and time sensitive work – is Job Order Contracting. Through this method, the Town
utilizes a Cooperative Purchasing Program administered by a third party which secures
vendors, goods, and services through a competitive bid process. The third party is
responsible for conducting contractor outreach, advertisement, award and holding the
master contract. Preset costs are established with awarded, pre-qualified vendors
through a Unit Price Book (UPB) or Construction Task Catalog. These preset costs
include labor, equipment and materials based on regions and are updated annually.
Sourcewell, a service cooperative created by the Minnesota legislature as a local unit of
government, offers a cooperative purchasing program designed to help government,
education and non-profit entities save time and money. Members of the cooperative
can access a variety of services and goods that are secured through a competitive
process and result in pre-negotiated contracts with suppliers and vendors. One of the
programs offered by Sourcewell is Job Order Contracting that utilizes Gordian to
develop detailed scopes of work for projects and reviews contractor price proposals to
ensure they align with project requirements and budget. Currently, the Town is a
member of Sourcewell’s cooperative purchasing program and intends to utilize the JOC
program for appropriate projects.
Construction Manager/ General Contractor (CM/GC)
For specific projects, the process of selecting a General Contractor for
the CM/GC method begins after the architect/design team has completed the initial
conceptual drawings. A Request for Proposal for this CM/GC is advertised for Phase 1
(Pre-Construction/Construction Management Services) and a Professional Services
Agreement will be created between the Town and GC. Towards the end of Phase 1
(usually around the 90% construction set), the GC will provide a Guaranteed Maximum
Price (GMP) for the construction. This GMP will create Phase 2 (General Contractor) of
this process. An amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement will be
created with a Construction Contract for the GMP with the same GC who is familiar with
and has been involved in all aspects of this process since the early stages. The Town
would continue to have the ability to advertise through the Invitation to Bid process for
Phase 2 if justified.
Advantages:
On-Call General Contracting Services
• Availability: quick access to contractors when needed
• Reliability: established relationships can lead to more reliable service
• Efficiency: faster response times can reduce back log of projects and project delays;
reduced downtime
• Expertise: access to range of skills and specialties
• Resource Allocation: allows allocation of staff resources to making progress on
projects and moving towards more preventive maintenance measures
Job Order Contracting (JOC)
• Simplified procurement process
• Faster response time
• Preset pricing
• Local Sub-contractor participation
Construction Manager/ General Contractor (CM/GC)
• Decreasing overall project duration by streamlining collaboration in the design and
construction processes
• Reduced costs of change orders and other risk reductions
• Guaranteed Maximum Price for construction
Disadvantages:
On-Call General Contracting Services
• Cost: may incur higher costs for emergency and short notice
• Coordination: managing multiple contractors can be complex
Job Order Contracting (JOC)
• Potential for overpricing since costs are preset annually
• Complexity of management
Construction Manager/ General Contractor (CM/GC)
• Loss of competitive bidding process, however a GMP is provided, the overall
construction budget is known early in the process, and frequent construction
estimates are obtained throughout the design process
Finance/Resource Impact:
On-Call General Contracting Services and Job Order Contracting (JOC)
Projects and services secured through on-call general contracting would be funded
through the Facilities Division’s building repair and remodeling account or through
capital funds specifically appropriated to complete facilities related repairs and
remodeling.
Construction Manager/ General Contractor (CM/GC)
Projects in which the CM/GC project delivery method is utilized will be funded through
appropriations approved through the annual budget process.
Level of Public Interest
On-Call General Contracting Services/ Job Order Contracting (JOC)
There is public interest in ensuring facilities are maintained and repaired in an
appropriate and timely fashion to mitigate future costs in a manner that is consistent
with the Town’s Purchasing Policy.
Construction Manager/ General Contractor (CM/GC)
There is public interest for projects to be completed within the expected timelines and
budgets.
Attachments:
1. PowerPoint Presentation
Project Delivery Tools:
Construction Services
Project Delivery Tools:
Construction Services
Overview of:
• Current Project Delivery Construction Service Procurement
Tools
• Additional Project Delivery Tools
Request:
What questions, concerns and feedback does the Town Board
have regarding the planned use of these project delivery tools
in accordance with the Town’s Purchasing Policy?
1
2
Project Delivery Tools:
Current Tools
Competitive Process/ Standalone Request for Proposals (RFP) or Invitation to Bid (ITB)
•Formal process in which vendors submit proposals/ bids to provide specified service or product
•Example: Town Hall Visitor Restroom Remodel
State Term Contracts
•Pre-negotiated contracts established by state agencies for procurement through competitive
process
•Example: State of Colorado Commercial off the Shelf Software Price Agreement
Piggybacking
•Contracts – secured through a competitive process – that allow one government entity to use the
contract established by another government entity (interlocal, intergovernmental, etc.)
•Example: Larimer County Debris Removal and Hauling Services
Cooperative Purchasing
•Multiple government entities or public sector organization collaborate to purchase goods,
services and infrastructure more effectively and cost effectively
•Example: Purchase of Town’s Utility Bucket Trucks via Sourcewell
Project Delivery Tools
CURRENT CHALLENGES
•Staff Resources: Maximizing allocation of staff resources to achieve objectives
•Timely Completion of Projects: Process takes time and prolongs the completion
of funded and ‘emergency’ projects
•Availability/ Interest of Qualified Vendors: Securing vendors available for/
interested in work, process or providing quotes; starting to experience vendors
charging for quotes
•Response Times: Can experience delays based on vendor availability
OBJECTIVES OF ADDITIONAL TOOLS:
• Maximize Town’s ability to allocate staff resources, accomplish projects faster,
and create a resource pool of pre-qualified contractors
• Ensure contracts are presented for Town Board consideration and action as
outlined in Town’s Purchasing Policy
3
4
Project Delivery Tools:
On-Call Contracting
What is On-Call Contracting?
• Competitive process conducted by Town
• Secures access to pre-qualified contractors to perform specific tasks/
services as needed under pre-negotiated terms, rather than on a
regular, on-going basis
• Contract for a defined period
• Only pay for services that are used
• Typically used for professional or trade services
• Electrical, Plumbing, HVAC, Engineering, Design Services, etc.
• Repairs, renovations, maintenance and public facilities
Project Delivery Tools:
On-Call Contracting
Town’s Current use of On-Call Contracting
• General Engineering (“On-Call”) Services
• Water Department
• Public Works Department
• HVAC Services
• Debris Removal and Hauling Services
• Janitorial Services
• Solid Waste and Recycling
• Plumbing Services (currently out for RFP)
Potential Additional Uses of On-Call Contracting
• Architectural Design
• General Contracting
• Electrical Maintenance and Installation
5
6
Project Delivery Tools:
On-Call General Contracting
On-Call General Contracting Services
• Intention:
• Establish a resource pool of pre-qualified general contractors with
expertise, availability, and reliability
• Maximize Town’s ability to allocate staff resources; accomplish projects
faster
• Ensure contracts are presented for Town Board consideration and action
as outlined in Town’s Purchasing Policy
• Scope: Various renovation and maintenance projects, office renovations,
facility upgrades, emergency repairs, etc.
• Value
Project Delivery Tools:
On-Call General Contracting
• Examples of projects that could be completed through an on-call contract
• Town Hall
• Finance/ Central Reception remodel (funded)
• Town Hall Conference Rooms 201/202/203 remodel (future
proposal)
• Town Hall Crawl Space remediation (completed)
• Public Restrooms
• Tregent Public Restroom remodel (completed late November)
• Town Hall Public Restroom remodel (funded)
• Riverside Public Restroom improvements (funded)
• Town Facility Life-cycle Improvements
• Doors & Hardware
• Interior & Tenant Finish (carpentry, painting, etc.)
• Demolition
• Fencing & Signage
• Roofing and waterproofing
7
8
RFP ISSUED
(Seeking Proposals for
General Services to
Create List of On-Call
Contractors)
PROPOSAL
SUBMITTED &
REVIEWED BY TOWN
ON-CALL LIST
CREATED
ON-CALL CONTRACT
1-Year, Renewable up
to 4 Times; Outlines
Labor/Services Costs
PER PROJECT
TASK ORDERS
SERVICE
SECURED
Based on Contract
Labor and Materials
Costs; Not-To-Exceed
Cost
PO SIGNED
Based on Purchasing
Policy and Spending
Authority
PROJECT / SERVICE
COMPLETE
ON-CALL GENERAL CONTRACTING
PROJECT LIFE CYCLE
PO Authorization
by Town Board
for projects with
value >$100k
Project Delivery Tools:
On-Call General Contracting
On-Call General Contracting
Resource Allocation: Allows allocation of staff resources to making
progress on projects and moving towards more preventive
maintenance measures.
Availability: Quick access to contractors when needed.
Reliability: Established relationships that can lead to more reliable
service.
Efficiency: Faster response times can reduce back log of projects,
delays, prevent prolonged issues and reduce downtime.
Flexibility: Ability to handle unexpected issues promptly.
Expertise: Access to range of skills and specialties.
Advantages
Cost: May incur higher costs for emergency or short-notice work.
Coordination: Complexity of managing multiple contractors.
Disadvantages
9
10
Project Delivery Tools:
What is Job Order Contracting?
•Cooperative Purchasing Network
•Conducts contractor outreach, advertises bid and conducts pre-bid conference
•Awards based on the requirements/ terms set by the Cooperative
•Master contract for defined period held by Cooperative
•Pay only for services & goods purchased
•Pre-qualified contractors
•‘on-call’ for participating organizations for duration of contract to perform tasks and
services as needed
•Pricing: based on annually preset construction task costs in a Unit Price Book (UPB) – includes
labor, equipment and materials; pricing developed for specific region
•Allows for completion of substantial number of individual projects with single, competitively-
awarded bid
•Utilizes third party (Gordian) to ensure alignment of scope and cost in advance of each project
Project Delivery Tools:
Job Order Contracting (JOC)
Job Order Contracting
Resource Allocation: Allows allocation of staff resources to making
progress on projects and moving towards more preventive
maintenance measures.
Availability: Quick access to contractors when needed.
Efficiency: Faster response times can reduce back log of projects,
delays, prevent prolonged issues and reduce downtime.
Flexibility: Ability to handle unexpected issues promptly.
Expertise: Access to range of skills and specialties.
Simplified Procurement
Preset Pricing
Enhanced opportunity for local subcontractor participation
Advantages
Cost: Potential for overpricing depending on market fluctuations
Coordination: Complexity of managing multiple contractors.
Disadvantages
11
12
SOURCEWELL
Secures contractors
and services through a
competitive
procurement process
TOWN & CONTRACTORS
Utilizes Sourcewell contractors
to establish a multi-year JOC
contract with vendor(s) for
various construction tasks –
includes negotiated unit prices
TOWN
Identifies project
needing renovation,
repairs, construction
JOINT SCOPE MEETING
Gordian scheduled on-site
meeting for those involved to
discuss project and design
details
DETAILED SCOPE OF
WORK
Gordian helps prepare a
Detailed Scope of Work
that describes work
contractor will perform
PRICE PROPOSAL
Contractor prepares a
price proposal by
selecting appropriate
tasks from UPB/ CTC
PRICE PROPOSAL
REVIEW
Gordian reviews the price
proposal to ensure the
contractor has selected the
appropriate tasks and
quantities
TOWN
Issues a task/ job order
under the Umbrella JOC
contract
TASK ORDER SIGNED
Based on Purchasing
Policy and Spending
Authority
TOWN BOARD
Task Order
Authorization for
projects with value
>$100,000
CONTRACTOR
Executes work specified
in task order
COMPLETION &
PAYMENT
JOB ORDER CONTRACTING(JOC)
PROJECT LIFE CYCLE
Project Delivery Tools:
CM/GC Approach
13
14
What is CM / GC?
• Innovative, 2-phase approach aimed to speed up design and
construction processes, resulting in a shorter overall project
duration and with a defined construction cost
• Project owner contracts with a Construction Manager (CM)
during the design phase, who may become the General
Contractor (GC) in the construction phase.
• The contractor will provide feedback during the design phase
including constructability reviews, value engineering
suggestions, construction estimates, overall recommendations
to benefit the project and ultimately a Guaranteed Maximum
Price (GMP) for construction.
Design
Professional
Begins Design
CM/GC Proposal
Submitted &
Reviewed by
Town
Contract Agreement
with CM/GC for Phase
1 (Constructability
Evaluation Services)
CM / GC Reviews
Plans
Project Team
Completes 90%
Plans
CM/GC Provides
GMP for
Construction
Contract
Amendment for
Phase 2
(Construction)
Final Design &
Construction
Begins
CM / GC PROCESS
15
16
What is CM / GC?
• Phase 1 (Design / Constructability Evaluation Services)
• Advertise a Request for Proposal for CM / GC for Construction
Management (CM) services. Begin early in Design Phase (typically
around Conceptual Design – 30% design)
• Enter into a Professional Services Contract between Town and GC with
Town Board approval for Phase 1 Services
• CM is involved in plan reviews, cost estimating, schedule/timelines, risk
identification/mitigation, constructability reviews, material alternatives
• CM provides Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for construction
around 90% design
What is CM / GC?
• Phase 2 (Construction)
• Final design and other construction documents are completed
• Enter into a Construction Contract with a GMP for Phase 2 between
Town and GC as an amendment to existing Professional Services
Contract with Town Board approval
• GC begins construction
• GC ensures project remains on budget and on schedule
17
18
Pros & Cons of CM / GC
Delivery Method
CM / GC
Streamlined Communication: The CM is part of the collaboration from the conceptual
design phase.
CM has depth of knowledge of the plans to better execute during construction.
Job Cost Accuracy (GMP)
Shortened project duration – construction can begin before final design is complete
Flexibility in design
Cost refinements throughout design. Owner is involved with the designer and
contractor for early interception of design decisions that could escalate cost,
resulting in financial benefit to the Owner.
Advantages
GMP is set outside of the context of more timely competitive biddingDisadvantages
When to use CM / GC Method
• Each project is unique – CM/GC will not be used for every project
• Projects with large scopes of work with designs that are complex or
subject to change. Common in road/traffic engineering projects or vertical
construction projects
• Projects requiring coordination between stakeholders and/or trades that
are above and beyond the ability or availability of the owner to manage.
• Projects with elevated sensitivity or risk associated with schedule delays
or cost overruns.
• Projects where the owner may not have industry experience and wants to
have the professionalism and trade knowledge of an experienced CM.
• Has been used previously in 2 Town-related projects: Visitor Center
Parking Structure and Community Recreation Center
19
20
When to use CM / GC Method
• Town projects where CM/GC will be used:
• Museum Annex Expansion
• Big Horn Parking Structure
• Police Department Building
• Hydroplant Museum / Hydroplant House Renovation
Project Delivery Tools:
Construction Services
21
22
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Hall
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Dana Klein, CAPP, CCTM, Parking & Transit Supervisor
Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: November 26,2024
RE: 2024 Paid Parking Program Results
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Report on the 2024 paid parking program results and present the Public Works (PW)
staff recommendation for the 2025 paid parking program.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Town Board input on the PW staff recommendation for operating the 2025 seasonal
paid parking program.
Present Situation:
As authorized by Ordinance 30-19 (2019) and Resolution 17-24, parking fees were
charged in 682 total spaces for 150 days from May 24 through October 20, 2024.
Adopted objectives of the paid parking program are:
1.Support the Town’s business districts by making parking available and by
encouraging economic development
2.Maintain adequate turnover of Town-controlled parking spaces
3.Encourage an adequate amount of parking availability for a variety of parking
users; efficient use of Town-controlled perimeter parking locations (Parking
Structure and Events Complex Park-n-Ride); and enhanced use of the Town’s
free shuttle system and other transportation alternatives
4.Reduce congestion in travel lanes caused by drivers seeking available parking
2024 Program Highlights
Operational Logistics
As a result of construction activity, three lots were deactivated for most of the season:
•Riverside (91 of 94 stalls) – parking charges resumed August 9
•Post Office (86 of 99 stalls) – parking charges resumed September 26
•East Riverside (44 stalls) - not activated during season
Operational Improvements
•Primary focus in summer 2024 was on increased communication to help
residents and guests know how the heavy construction was impacting roadway
closures and parking lot access. Similar to 2023, Staff worked from a 40-row
spreadsheet of strategies that included enhanced signage, community
presentations, direct mail, and a successful partnership with the Estes Valley
Library to connect library card registration with local parking permit registration.
•Transitioned more pay stations to push/pull credit card readers in high-traffic
areas. This change dramatically reduced the credit card processing time by
allowing batch settlements versus real-time authorization.
•Increased the non-enforcement parking field team presence to provide more in-
person customer support.
•Issuance of warnings (instead of citations) on October weekdays when parking
areas were less full.
•An operational audit of the permits was carried out resulting in the purging of
hundreds of duplicate records.
Occupancy & Turnover Data
•In brief summary, 2024 data was expected to be similar to 2023 since there were
no increases to the number of paid parking areas, the length of the paid parking
season, or prices of any type.
•Overall average occupancy, including for the Parking Structure and Events
Complex, was down 4% compared to 2023. This is due in part to the fluctuating
parking counts during the construction period. Data was more difficult to obtain,
as some stalls were in construction zone areas for short and extended periods of
time during the season.
•The average occupancy in the paid parking areas was 80%, up 1% over 2023.
•The average occupancy in the free parking areas (including the Events Complex
and Parking Structure) was 58%, down 4% from 2023. As mentioned prior, this is
due in part to the fluctuating number of free parking stalls that were inaccessible
during the construction period.
•Parking Structure average occupancy was 25%, up 2% from 2023 and 6% from
2022. It was completely full or above 85% occupied 15 times in the season, with
most of those dates in September and October; by comparison, this occurred just
9 times in 2023 and 6 times in 2022.
•71% of parkers paid for two hours or less in the paid parking areas, an increase
of 1% over 2023. We saw parkers staying a bit longer in the lots. If they found a
space, they paid for it—and, in many instances, kept the space by adding time to
their original parking session.
Parking Permit Program
•The Local Permit time allotment was increased from 60 to 120 minutes in 2023.
No significant increase in utilization of the Local Permit was observed. However,
the data did show that Local Permits were utilized more during weekdays than on
weekends in 2024.
•Permit rates did not change from 2023 to 2024; however, the total number of
registered or purchased permits has increased approximately 45% since
program implementation in 2021.
o Local Permit (120 Minutes Free): 4,221 registered, a 31.6% decrease over
2023. The off-season permit audit and new permit application process
helped purge many duplicate and out-of-date records.
o Employee Convenience: 551, a significant decrease from our 2023
numbers. This was due in part to the delayed or non-activation of some
lots to Paid Parking. Many employees did not get permits this season.
•In 2024, permitted parkers occupied a peak of 15-18% of the total downtown
supply (flat/no change over 2023).
Customer Education & Outreach
•There were a number of formal and informal opportunities for residents and
visitors to provide feedback on the 2024 paid parking program, including:
o Training presentations for seasonal staff and volunteer teams, including
the Police Department Community Service Officers and Visitor Center
Ambassadors.
o Program materials were translated into Spanish.
o 88 locals registered for and actively participated in the Town’s Park-n-
Walk Challenge. Additionally, the Town partnered with the North Front
Range Metropolitan Planning Region’s “Shift Your Ride” campaign, which
promoted use of alternate modes beyond driving/parking.
o Targeted outreach to lodging partners, including an email with parking and
transit information to all licensed lodging establishments and short-term
rental license holders; directly dropped off materials throughout summer to
lodging locations and other businesses.
o Continued partnership with the Estes Valley Library.
Key Program Takeaways
•It was again a summer of constant change, largely due to the active construction
work downtown. Our field team did a great job of rolling with the adjustments and
answering tough questions about downtown construction disruptions.
•Guests and residents are learning the system. Our customer service interactions
are trending much more positive/neutral, and payment compliance is up, as
evidenced by our decrease in violations for non-payment.
•The current program was again generally adequate (near 82%) on the weekdays
(Mon-Thu); however, most parking areas (paid and free) are consistently full on
the weekend (Fri-Sun), with occupancies at or near 100%.
•The program began to break down (as in 2023) in the early fall months,
specifically on Bond Park event days in late August, September, and early
October. The Parking Structure filled more days and for longer periods of time.
Beautiful fall weather again this year also contributed.
•Ridership on The Peak was up dramatically this summer, especially on the Red
Route (downtown trolley).
Proposal:
Since the adoption of the Downtown Parking Management Plan (DPMP) in January
2018, PW staff have been committed to a data-driven approach to parking
management. Similar to the content of this report in fall 2022 and 2023, if staff were to
make our recommendations for the 2025 program based solely on data and our
professional training, recommendations would be to implement Phase 3 of the DPMP
and expand the paid parking program into all downtown parking lots, limit the use of
Employee Permits in the busiest lots on the weekends, and implement demand-based
pricing on the weekends in the core of downtown. This would allow the establishment of
documented cash flow for debt service to show investors, if bonds are to be used to pay
for the future Big Horn Parking Structure.
As was the case during the Town Board discussion regarding the 2024 program, there
are also intangible, subjective considerations that are necessary to factor into the
decisions regarding the 2025 program scope. Based on stated interest in evaluating the
changes to downtown traffic flow in 2025 attributed solely to completion of the
Downtown Estes Loop (DEL), staff are recommending no significant change or
expansion to the 2024 paid parking program. Expanding the paid parking program to all
downtown lots in 2025 would introduce another variable impacting downtown traffic
flow/congestion that would cloud the conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the
DEL. Instead, staff plan to focus their efforts in 2025 on delivering the same level of
parking management services provided in 2024. Expanding the paid parking program to
all downtown parking lots should be considered for the 2026 parking season.
Staff anticipate returning to the Town Board by March 11 with a resolution to set 2025
Paid Parking Program and Permit Fees. In the meantime, staff will request direction
from the Board on strategies for funding of the Big Horn Parking Structure project, which
is heavily dependent on parking revenue for debt service options.
Advantages:
•Seasonal paid parking continues the Town’s commitment to implementation of the
Board-adopted DPMP and the four objectives of the paid parking program.
•Implementation is designed to accommodate diverse user groups (locals, visitors,
and employees), is phased/incremental, and is in line with other Colorado
communities supported by tourism-driven economies.
•Paid parking fees will continue to reduce future reliance on the General Fund for
parking management, future parking infrastructure (e.g., new Parking Structure
downtown) and the heavily subsidized Town’s free transit service, The Peak.
Disadvantages:
•Implementation of parking management in downtown Estes Park, especially paid
parking, has been vocally opposed by some residents and business owners;
however, Town staff are committed to continuing to build trust with the local
community and to communicating effectively to our guests about all parking
options.
•Change is difficult, especially when that change involves taking something that
has been free and assigning a fee to it. However, Town-owned parking is a
limited public asset that carries a tangible cost to build and maintain, and it
should be managed and priced in a way that manages demand in the most
equitable way possible.
Finance/Resource Impact:
Current Impacts: In 2024, the program did not meet its financial goals:
1.Program costs were fully covered by program fees.
2.Revenue overall is down approximately $204,000 from the 2024 estimate, due to
the delayed activation of some lots impacted by construction.
3.We do not anticipate any revenues will be added to the Parking Fund.
Future Impacts: Due to the timing of the Town’s annual budgeting process, PW staff
projected no significant changes to the 2025 paid parking program from the 2023
program relative to income with $859,750 in anticipated revenue from paid parking fees,
permits and citations. Expenses were conservatively projected at $870,198.
The primary expense items that contribute to the increased expenses are the rebid of
the parking management contract (current one is from 2020 and not eligible for renewal)
from the 2020–2024 expense level of $450,000. An additional $28,500 capital expense
is anticipated for updating the LPR hardware used by our data collection vehicle. The
Parking Management Services RFP is currently being advertised with a proposal due
date of November 22, 2024.
Anticipating no additional revenues to the parking fund from the 2024 season presents
some challenges for transit operational funding and the design and construction of the
Big Horn Parking Structure (2025 Strategic Plan Objectives 5.A.1 and 5.A.2).
Level of Public Interest
Public interest in seasonal paid parking continues to be moderate to high.
Attachments:
1. Presentation: 2024 Paid Parking Program Results
Seasonal Paid Parking Program
2024 Year-End Results
Dana Klein, CPP, CCTM
Parking & Transit Manager
Town Board
Study Session
November 26, 2024
Presentation Overview
1. Current Program Overview
2. 2024 Program Results
•Operations
•Data
•Financial Performance
•Customer & Community Input
•Key Takeaways
3. Next Steps / Q&A
Current Program
Overview
1. Support the Town’s business districts by
making parking available and by
encouraging economic development.
2. Maintain adequate turnover of Town-
controlled parking spaces.
3. Encourage an adequate amount of parking
availability for a variety of parking users.
•Efficient use of perimeter parking locations
•Enhanced use of the Town’s free shuttle
system and other transportation alternatives
4. Reduce congestion in travel lanes caused
by drivers seeking available parking.
*Defined in EPMC Ordinance 30-19
Paid Parking
Program Goals*
Dates:
•150 days
•May 24 – October 20, 2024 (daily)
Paid Parking Locations:
•Town Hall (224 paid stalls)
•Bond Park (73)*
•E. Riverside (41) **
•Riverside (91)**
•Wiest (132)
•Post Office (86)**
•Virginia (19)
•Tregent (16)
Hours:
10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
69%
31%
Percentage of Total Supply:
Free vs. Paid
Free Paid
2024 Program
* Impacted by special events – 13 during season
** Impacted by DEL project – stall counts varied
67%
33%
Percentage of Downtown Supply:
Free vs. Paid
Paid Free
Total paid stalls: 682
Total free stalls: 340
Total stalls: 1,022
2024 Program
Results
2024 Operational Focus:
Communications
•40-row spreadsheet of strategies to help
residents and guests know what to expect
Parking Structure banners
Community presentations
Library partnership
•Further transitioned pay stations to push/pull
credit card readers in high-traffic areas
•Increased non-enforcement parking field team;
transitioned to warnings only on Oct. weekdays
•Updated payment signage to focus on text2pay
PARKING STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY UP 42% OVER 2019
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
PAID LOTS
Season Average:
2021 – 91%
2022 – 92%
2023 – 93%
2024 – 93.3%
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
Key Definitions:
•Occupancy: Vehicles parked divided by the total number of stalls available.
•Peak Occupancy: Average of daily peak demand during the observation period (10am-5pm, 150 days).
•Average Occupancy: Average of daily occupancy during the observation period (10am-5pm daily over 150 days).
Season Average:
2021 – 79%
2022 – 78%
2023 – 78%
2024 – 74%
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
FREE LOTS
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
PAID LOTS
(Mon-Thu only)
PARKING STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY UP 42% OVER 2019
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
FREE LOTS
(Mon-Thu only)
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
PARKING STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY UP 42% OVER 2019
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
PAID LOTS
(Fri, Sat, Sun)
**********
Bond Park Event
Closures: 13
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
PARKING STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY UP 42% OVER 2019
PEAK
OCCUPANCY:
FREE LOTS
(Fri, Sat, Sun)
2024 Results – Data (Peak Occupancy)
2021 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
LENGTH OF STAY
(DURATION)
71% PAID
FOR 2 HOURS
OR LESS
2024 Results – Data (Turnover)
T2 and ParkMobile
purchases during
season.
1 hr.
2 hrs.
3 hrs.
2021 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
LENGTH OF STAY
(DURATION)
2024 Results – Data (Permits)
In 2024, permitted
parkers occupied
a peak level of
15-18% of total
downtown supply.
Average of
157 out of 1,305
available spaces
were occupied by
permit holders.
1 hr.
2 hrs.
3 hrs.
2021 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
BUDGET
VS.
ACTUALS
Community & Customer Input
Feedback trending more positive
2024 Opportunities
Presentations to CSOs & Visitor Center Ambassadors
All materials translated into Spanish
Park-n-Walk Challenge (80+ participants); partnership with NFRMPO’s
“Shift Your Ride” campaign
Outreach to lodging partners – material drop-off throughout summer
Purging of permit records eliminating duplicates
Assisting with Farmers Market setup and takedown, traffic control
Continued Library partnership**
Library Partnership
Multi-pronged approach, including:
Library staff training
Integration of library card sign-up/renewal
and Local Permit registration
Coordination on library program timing,
location(s)
Library board member and staff
involvement
Library staff were actively involved in the
Park-n-Walk challenge
2024 Highlight: Library Partnership
Thank You!
Key Takeaways
•It was a summer of constant change. Our field team did a great job of rolling
with the adjustments, answering tough questions and trying to help.
•Guests and residents are learning the system. Our customer service interactions
are trending much more positive/neutral and payment compliance is up.
•The current program was generally adequate (near 82%) on the weekdays (Mon-
Thurs); however most parking areas (paid and free) are consistently full on the
weekend, with occupancies at or near 100%.
•The program began to break down in the early fall months, specifically on Bond
Park event days in late August, September and early October. The parking
structure filled more days and for longer periods of time. Beautiful fall weather
for a third year contributed as did the wrap up of the construction project.
•Ridership on The Peak was up dramatically this summer, especially on the Red
Route (downtown trolley).
Next Steps / Q&A
1. 2025 Paid Parking Program Planning
2. Town Board Regular Meeting – March 2025
•Present 2025 Season Paid Parking and Parking Permit Fees
3. Board Q & A
PUBLIC WORKS
Report
To: Honorable Mayor Hall
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Dana Klein, CPP, CCTM, Parking & Transit Manager
Derek Pastor, PMP, Public Works Project Manager
Date: November 26, 2024
RE: Big Horn Parking Structure Update
Purpose of Study Session Item:
Provide update on status of Big Horn Parking Structure design proposals and obtain
direction regarding the future of this project.
Town Board Direction Requested:
Does the Town Board wish to move forward swiftly in 2025, delay until 2026 (or later),
or take no further action on the Big Horn Parking Structure Project?
If the Town Board still wishes to pursue this project:
• Does the Town Board prefer to identify the construction funding strategy prior to
commencing work on the project design?
• Should the design contract include the added cost of about $50k to equip the structure to
accommodate a future fourth level for future housing?
• Should Finance Department staff return with a budget amendment to use General Fund
money and proceed on the design in 2025?
• Does the Town Board prefer to delay design and construction and use 2025 parking
revenue to pay for the design in 2026?
• Should the design contract be pursued at the $150k increased cost with the top-ranked
consultant or advanced with second-ranked consultant who is similarly qualified?
• Should Finance Department staff return with details on lease/purchase financing
(approvable by the Town Board) or revenue bond financing (approvable by the voters)
for the construction of this project?
• Does the Town Board wish to expand the paid parking to all downtown parking lots in
order to generate sufficient revenue to pay for the debt service for this parking structure
or use sales tax revenue instead? When?
Present Situation:
Based on recommendations from the Board at the May 14, 2024 Study Session, a
formal Request for Proposal was announced for the design of a 3-level parking structure
(delivering approximately 136with an alternative to include costs for designing the
structural and utility components for a future additional level for housing.
The top-ranked candidate based on qualifications provided a negotiated fee proposal of
$544,395 - $600,395 for the design of the Big Horn Parking Structure. The second-
ranked candidate provided a fee proposal of $394,862 – $440,362. The Town’s parking
fund has about $300k available for the design. Additional funding for design was
anticipated to be provided by the 2024 Parking Revenue funds; however, this additional
revenue did not materialize due in part to waiving parking fees in three lots during DEL
construction impact (East Riverside, Post Office and Riverside). There is currently no
funding allocated or planned to cover the full design cost or the construction of this
structure.
Proposal:
Three options are offered for consideration:
•Option 1 – 2025 Design. Fund the design in Q1 with additional General Fund dollars.
Complete the design and obtain updated estimated construction costs in 2025. Secure
financing and start construction in 2026 using increased paid parking revenue (Phase III of
the Downtown Parking Management Plan) to service the new construction debt.
•Option 2 – 2026 Design. Use 2025 parking revenue (assuming a net positive) to fund the
design. Design would begin in Q4-25/Q1-26. Use increased paid parking revenue in 2027
and beyond to service the new construction debt.
•Option 3 – Table this project. Take no further action on the design or construction of the
parking structure at this time.
Advantages:
•Add 136 new parking stalls in inventory to replace the 44 on-street Cleave parking
stalls removed by the Cleave Street Improvements project.
•Offering additional ADA parking opportunities in the covered parking area
•Additional parking in downtown and reactivated Cleave Street area for businesses
and visitors
Disadvantages:
•Sales tax revenue spent on this project could be used other Town priorities.
•Additional construction in Cleave Street Area / Impact to businesses and visitors
•Possibility of utility relocation required
Finance/Resource Impact:
•Immediate Impact: The funding for design is short by $95k to $300k depending on
the design scope and consultant selected. This must be remedied in order to move
forward with this project.
•Future Impacts: The cost for construction and loan brokerage fees is estimated to be
$5.5M - $7M in 2026 depending on the design option scope selected. This assumes
a unit cost of $39,000/stall and $300k in brokerage fees. The funding strategic for
the capital funds and 15 years of debt service have not been identified.
•A new structure will bring ongoing costs for repairs and maintenance.
Level of Public Interest
Given the scope and ultimate impact/benefit to the surrounding properties and
businesses and the high turnout for the public meetings, the level of public interest is
expected to be high.
Attachments:
1.Big Horn Parking Structure Discussion Power Point
Big Horn Parking Structure
Current Status Update
Dana Klein,
Parking & Transit Manager
Town Board
Study Session
November 26, 2024
Where We Started
•May 14, 2024 Study Session presented 3 options for design of the
Big Horn Parking Structure:
•Option #1 -2-level ‘microstructure’ (approximately 93 parking spaces)
•Option # 2 -Ground + 2 levels structure (approximately 136 parking
spaces)
•Option # 3 -Ground + 2 levels structure + structural design for upper-level
workforce housing
•Town Board direction was to move forward with a Request for
Proposal (RFP) for Option #2 with alternative pricing for Option #3
1
2
Where We Are Now
•RFP process produced five (5) qualified proposals
•Selection process and ranking was based on qualifications
•Fee proposal/negotiation for top vendor was $544,395 (+$56,000
for Option #3)
•#2 vendor based on qualifications fee proposal was $394,862
(+$45,500 for Option #3)
•Estimated end of year parking funds available for this project are
$300,000. The project cannot move forward without additional
funding.
Where Do We Want To Go?
Option 1 – 2025 Design. Fund the design in Q1 with additional General Fund
dollars. Complete the design and obtain updated estimated construction
costs in 2025. Secure financing and start construction in 2026 using
increased paid parking revenue (Phase III Downtown Parking Management
Plan) to service the new construction debt.
Option 2 – 2026 Design. Use 2025 parking revenue (assuming a net positive)
to fund the design. Design would begin in Q4-25/Q1-26. Use increased paid
parking revenue in 2027 and beyond to service the new construction debt.
Option 3 – Table this project. Take no further action on the design or
construction of parking structure at this time.
3
4
Direction Needed
Scope of Design. Does the Town Board wish to pay the extra design and
construction costs to equip the ground+two level parking structure to
accommodate future housing on a future fourth level? Added design cost is
about $50k. Added construction cost is estimated to be about $1.5M.
Design Consultant Selection. The top two design firms are nearly equally
qualified, but the top-ranked consultant design fee is about $150k greater
than the second-ranked consultant’s fee. Does the Town Board wish to pay
the added cost to move forward with the top-ranked consulting team?
Direction Needed
Timing of Design. Does the Town Board prefer to identify the construction
funding strategy prior to commencing work on the project design?
Funding of Construction. The estimated $5.5M -$7M construction cost can
be obtained through a bank loan/lease purchase agreement (approved by
Town Board) or through revenue bonds (approved by the voters). In either
case, the debt must be repaid over a 15+ year period. Does the Town Board
wish to expand the paid parking to all downtown parking lots in order to
generate sufficient revenue to pay for the debt service for this parking
structure or use sales tax revenue instead? When?
5
6
Other Discussion
Questions and input from the Town Board.
7
December 10, 2024
•VEP Dark Skies Initiative
•2025 Funding Proposal for Tuition
Assistance
•Multimodal Transportation and Transit
Development Plans
January 28, 2025
•Scoping Project for Capacity
Improvements on the Big Thompson River
and Fall River
February 11, 2025
•Stanley Park Master Plan and Performing
Arts Center
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
•OHV/Golf Carts on Roads
•Annexation Policy
•Town Board Email Listing on Website
•Hosted Short-Term Rentals
•Police Department Facility Financing
•HB 24-1175: Local Government Rights to
Property for Affordable Housing
•Parking Enforcement Ordinance Updates
•Curb and Gutter Philosophy
•Liquor License Process
•Stanley Park Master Plan Implementation
Items for Town Board Consideration:
•Law Enforcement Event Security MOUs
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
November 26, 2024