Key Biscayne Master Plan 043944000.18w_Key_Biscayne_MP(forJooMag) | Page 88
VILLAGE OF KEY BISCAYNE UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES — MASTER PLAN
the surface. Certain soil conditions and shallow drilling depths increase the
likelihood of hydrofracture. By planning conduit routing properly and using
deliberate decision making regarding when it is appropriate to employ
horizontal directional drilling, the risk of increased restoration costs can be
mitigated. fixtures and poles would be acceptable for use as an alternative to the
lighting that is currently being installed under the Village’s lighting program.
If the Village desires to pursue FPL standard lighting, it is recommended
this determination be made prior to beginning final design of the
undergrounding project.
Another method that can be used to reduce restoration costs, specifically
paving costs, is to share those costs with other infrastructure projects
in a given area. For this project, it is known the Village has separately
budgeted infrastructure projects that could be programmed into the
undergrounding project. Additionally, the Village has requested a number of
aged Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department water mains be replaced
throughout the project areas. Our recommendation is to allow these Village
infrastructure projects and those otherwise desired by the Village to share
in the roadway restoration costs. This provides a benefit to both the Village
and the other entities in that no single agency is responsible for the amount
of roadway repaving they would be required to perform if they performed
their project on a stand-alone basis. To mitigate the risk that increasing labor and material costs are passed on
to the Village from the utility owners, we recommend two review activities
occur during the design phase of each portion of the project. First, the
design team should work with each utility owner during the design process
to value engineer their network designs so the final design is an efficient
and cost effective “like for like” system, so the Village does not become
responsible for the costs of upgrading utility owner assets. Secondly, a
review of the costs presented by the utility owners to the Village and design
team should be performed to determine if it is reasonable, accurate, and
provide a level of assurance that it does not contain costs for network
upgrades or betterment, but rather only those costs to provide a “like for
like” system.
Another cost saving measure related to paving that can mitigate risks to
the project budget is the deferral of milling and resurfacing until after a
number of phase areas have been completed. In this manner, miles of
streets can be bundled into a milling and paving bid package that will gain
the interest of the larger highway paving contractors and allow the Village
to achieve volume pricing that only large paving projects can provide.
During the project the Village may encounter improvements that are
necessitated by the undergrounding program, such as replacement of
street lighting currently installed on utility poles. The primary way to mitigate
these costs is to review Village plans for infrastructure improvements and
existing conditions within work areas to determine those elements most
likely to be impacted by the undergrounding and determine planning level
costs for each element. For impacted street lights not included in any
separate Village replacement program, there exists an option to engage
FPL to replace these street lights under their street lighting program.
Within FPL’s line of standard lighting, the Village would be responsible
for a nominal Cost in Aid of Construction (CIAC) of approximately $1,200
per pole, as well as operating costs. However, the standard line of FPL
lighting is limited in selection and the Village would need to decide what
84