My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2024
>
121724
>
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2024 11:39:08 AM
Creation date
12/11/2024 11:13:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/17/2024
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
893
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 2 of 8 <br />maintain all City assets. <br /> <br />Pleasanton adopts a new five-year CIP on a two-year cycle and may modify the program <br />annually by City Council action or through mid-term CIP budget adjustments. The approved <br />and adopted CIP Process and Prioritization Strategy will establish guidelines for the City in <br />developing the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program. <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br />To deliver on the multiple strategies outlined in ONE and growing infrastructure needs at a <br />time of increased budget constraints, a strategic approach is needed to guide the selection of <br />projects for the development of the CIP to ensure they meet community priorities and goals <br />within the available funding capacity. <br /> <br />The Capital Improvement Program Prioritization Process (CIPPP) strategy was developed <br />through research on Bay Area cities facing similar challenges, including aging infrastructure, <br />continuous growth, and limited budgets and funding sources. The study included a total of <br />eight cities, including the Tri-Valley cities, to identify best practices in evaluation categories, <br />prioritization processes, and the weighting factors used in their strategies. The evaluation <br />revealed that the number of prioritization categories varied, ranging from three in smaller cities <br />to ten in larger cities with more complex needs. The study helps form a weighted score system <br />on the prioritization categories that reflects the most common challenges in the cities. Across <br />the eight cities, common prioritization themes included public health and safety, regulatory <br />compliance, infrastructure needs, grant opportunities, and initiatives that promote economic <br />and business growth. <br /> <br />Prioritization Categories <br />As proposed, the Pleasanton CIPPP incorporates six key categories, each with a weighted <br />score based on “focus factors” to help establish a consistent scoring system. The scores in <br />each category address the priorities in ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan and are aligned with <br />staff studies on similar cities’ CIP scoring methods. The importance of the categories is <br />denoted by the number of possible points a project can score under each category; the <br />combined total weighted scores of all six categories equal 100 points. Details of the categories <br />and weighted factors are outlined in Attachment 1 and described below: <br /> <br />Page 301 of 893
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.