City staff outline schedule, grants and risks for the Merge mobility project

City staff reviewed the Merge mobility project at the February work session, describing project elements, grant awards, schedule constraints, cost estimates and delivery options.

‘‘The Merge project is a top priority of this city council,’’ Raymond (staff member) told the council, summarizing three major elements: interchanges at US 34 with 30th Avenue (30 Fifth Avenue in the presentation) and 40th Avenue (40 Seventh Avenue), plus a centrally located mobility hub and an underpass connection to CenterPlace. Staff said the city was awarded roughly $50 million in federal grants (a RAISE/RISE and MPDG award total described in the presentation) and that USDOT and FHWA oversight would apply to most project elements.

Staff presented a baseline project budget of about $131.2 million and said an independent cost estimate flagged a potential up-to-20% increase (about an additional $24 million). The presentation showed the grants would fund roughly 95% of construction in the city’s model, with TIFIA financing proposed as the local-match mechanism. Staff said costs and delivery depend on design and whether CDOT or the city leads delivery; CDOT delivery was modeled as adding $8–13 million more than city delivery because of agency overhead, while CDOT review staff time was estimated at $1.5–1.9 million for the city if the city delivers the project.

Staff stressed schedule constraints: federal grant agreements must be in place in time for a statutory obligation date of Sept. 30, 2028, and the city must have at least one construction package ready in early 2028 to meet that obligation. Staff said construction could begin in a phased manner as early as calendar 2027 (federal fiscal-year timing pushed some milestones into late 2026/early 2027 in the slide deck). Completion was discussed in council Q&A as around 2029 under the current schedule, though staff noted design, environmental clearance and right-of-way acquisition remain significant tasks.

Councilors extensively questioned risk and delivery choices. Several councilors urged moving the CM/GC (construction manager/general contractor) selection earlier to accelerate cost certainty and suggested hiring an owner’s representative or independent inspection and testing (I/T) contractors. Councilor Olson said he believed estimates would trend higher as the design and mobility-hub elements are refined and urged more aggressive scheduling and earlier contractor involvement.

A key policy choice in the presentation was project delivery. Staff described three delivery options and recommended that the city deliver the project under a CDOT permit as the least-cost, most-appropriate path in staff analysis; some councilors expressed concern that a permit-only approach shifts risk and that remaining with CDOT’s local-agency program could provide programmatic environmental reviews and steadier federal coordination. Councilor Wilson urged caution about going direct to FHWA without CDOT local-agency processes. Staff said they were conducting sensitivity analyses and would return with more detail.

Staff also said the project will track grant performance metrics through 2033 and planned a public dashboard to report schedule, budget and required grant performance measures. Staff emphasized the importance of phasing and traffic-management planning given traffic volumes on US 34 and at the interchanges.

The council asked staff to continue work on design procurement, reconsider phasing and timing, and accelerate contractor involvement where feasible; staff said they will return with more detailed schedules, risk registries, and refined cost estimates.