<br />IX. ESTIMATED COSTS OF PRELIMINARY DESIGN
<br />
<br />X. PROJECT IMPLEMENTAl"IUN ANil PHASING
<br />
<br />Est"nal~'d coslS or the improvement. proposed in the preliminary dc.igns of this Masler PI~n arc presenled
<br />in Table -), Unil com (see Table - 2) for lhe various ilems are based on current typical COM! for Ihe
<br />improvements descril><:d COSIS of righHlf-way 0' easement acquisili,ms have nol been included as all
<br />pro[>Oscd faeilitics arc generally localed in public righls-of-way and casements. The unit COSIS include
<br />.Ilowanc", for inlel' manhole!. payemen! remov~l and replacement, IraI' I'" control. engineering. staking.
<br />inspcclionand malerial lesling.
<br />
<br />The pha.ling and implerTICntationof.\1asterPlanncd facilili.. arc gencrally governcdby.i. factors: public
<br /><3fely. publi" perception of problem area" projecl finallCing and "ost. right-of.w,1y acqui,ilion.
<br />devclopmcm prc,^ure. and jurisdictional control.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />II is nOledIha! significantcO!ldcvialions fromlhose presented in Table-) may heineurrcd during projecl
<br />implementalion due 10 Ihe acruallocalion of existing miliuc< and lhe need for utility relocalion. &<cd on
<br />available informalion, an allowance formilily relocalionha, l><:eninc1uded inlhecoslcslimales, However,
<br />a comprchensive desc,iplion of all mlderground ulililies along the prop osed alignmenls IS nOl available al the
<br />presenl mnc. Where known conflict' occur, ul'lity relocation costs are included for wmer lines and sanilary
<br />sewefli ide",ifled Jnthe p"'l"'s<:d "t""".ewcr promedrawings,
<br />
<br />Puhlic safely i.generally ranked in ,'arious orders of risk. Low priorilyprujcclsare Ihose where exisling
<br />eOnditions do nOl pose a serious risk to loss of human life "nd would c"use minimal damage to p,i,'ate
<br />properly or puhli, improvement.. High priorily projects are th",e where exi'ling condilions pose a high
<br />polential fOlios. of human life and/or would cause severe damage 10 publi, improvements or privale
<br />property.
<br />
<br />(
<br />
<br />Puhlic perceplion of problem arcas is impon~m ,ince it i" often a ga~e as 10 where Ihc general public
<br />believes ,heir la. dollars should be spcnl. Projecls which solve pubi,cally perceived problem areas
<br />generally recdve rn"republiesuppon whiCh aSSiSI! in lhe overall implemenlalion of the proje"t. especially
<br />,n difficull COtl'trUCllotl ~rea' (e.g, high-volume interseclions).
<br />
<br />In most municipalities. funds arc not oumcicm 10 wl,.e all "f the p"ol>lcm~ in " ,'ery ,horl lime frame (i,e,
<br />5 III 10 yc,rs), Thcrefore. avaihbilil)" of public improvement funds play' a 'ignificant role in
<br />determining the phasing and impkmcntalion "hedule. In man)' ='. scvc<al years of funding may need
<br />10 be eombincd hdore a Jarge cu'lly projeclean he funded forcon'lmclion,
<br />
<br />Riglll.Or-way plays a pan in project implementalion and pha.mg ,ince righl-of.way may !leed 10 be
<br />acqoir~>d in advance of a given projecl to aV<lid dd'Yl in fiMI wnl,ruclion implemem~liol1,
<br />
<br />Dcvcl()pmcm pre",urcs neate lwo oppoSilC effects on prajecl implementationipha,ing. Finl, devei"pmcnl
<br />occurring upstream of a problem arc" may increase lhe local problem for Ihe more frequenl SIOrm cvent..
<br />lhus crealing pre,^ure!O -mo,o-up' Ihe projecl s<:hedule, However. if properly planned. dc,'eiopmem can
<br />be used to leverage projeel funding 10 'olve a problem sooner lhan couid have been solved wilhom lhe
<br />developmem, This factor becomes null when .1 proj.e, i, in a full}' develorcd basiu withoul I""sihility of
<br />redevelopmcnt.
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />"
<br />
|