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