Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCauseway Resource Protection Project Phase 1A Final Report~ , RECEIVED ~AFI 1 3 2007  $outhold To,tn Ciera March 5, 2007 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CA USEWA Y RESOURCE PROTECTION PROJECT PHASE IA FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Raod S°uth°lPd,ON~Xlll1977~  Prepared by': · Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 (631) 669-0693 (631) 669-1599 (FAX) Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CA USEWA Y RESOURCE PROTECTION PROJECT PHASE IA FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Section No. Title 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SCOPE OF WORK 3.0 METHODOLOGY 4.0 PROJECT EXECUTION AND FINDINGS 4.1 INITIAL iNVESTIGATIONS 4.2 UTILITIES 4.2.1 CABLEVISION 4.2.2 VERIZON 4.2.3 LIPA 4.3 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 4.4 BICYCLE PATH 4.5 KAYAK LAUNCH RAMP 4.6 COST ESTIMATE 4.7 SOURCES OF FUNDING 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.0 APPENDICES 6.1 COST ESTIMATE 6.2 PROPOSED ROAD PROFILE DRAWING 6.3 PARTIAL UTILITY PLANS 6.4 PROJECT AERIAL VIEW Page 1 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The project scope includes the relocation of L1PA distribution, LIPA transmission, Verizon and Cablevision cabling along Route 25 in Marion (Town of Southold) underground. The project scope starts at the west side of the bridge over the Dam Pond inlet, and extends to the utility pole just west of Pete Hill Rd. The undergrounding will require conduit runs on both the north and south side of Rt 25 in order to comply with LIPA's separation requirements for transmission and distribution lines. DEC is not likely to approve construction activities in or immediately adjacent to the wetlands that exist along much of the project route. DOT has indicated that all trenching within their paved shoulder will require tight sheeting, and the sheeting must be left in place, cut immediately below grade when backfilling. This requirement alone has more than doubled the cost of the overall project. The utilities have been reluctant to provide firm costs associated with their respective cable work, however we believe that the costs provided are a fair indication of the value of the work to be performed. No source of significant outside funding for the project has been identified. The current cost estimate for the entire project is approximately $24 million. Of this amount, it is anticipated that an optimistic estimate of currently identifiable grant funding is under $100,000. This funding would primarily be related to efforts associated with the limited bicycle path and kayak launch area improvements. The utilities have indicated no desire to discount or absorb any portion of their costs. It is not expected that significant private sources of funding would be available. ~ Page 2 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SCOPE OF WORK The Town of Southold is seeking a means to address visual impacts and improvements to the natural resources in the vicinity of the Causeway between East Marion and Orient. This project is know as: THE NORTH FORK TRAIL, SCENIC BYWAY: RESOURCE PROTECTION PROJECT, CAUSEWAY BETWEEN EAST MARION AND ORIENT - PIN #: SB09.03.321. The North Fork Trail Scenic Byway is designated a New York State Scenic Byway. It is situated on the eastern end of Long Island, on a narrow peninsula known as the North Fork. The North Fork is approximately Thirty (30) miles in length, and is less than one hundred miles from New York City. This project will implement a key element of the Corridor Management Plan that was submitted during the nomination and designation process, and presented to the New York State Scenic Byways Advisory Board in 2002. Southold proposes to develop a comprehensive action plan using the results of work as described in this report. The action plan may include acquisition of certain private properties or easements necessary for implementation of the preferred plan as well as other management actions to be determined by the Town of Southold. Property acquisition may include reconstruction of the easterly end of the existing seawall to provide public access and minimize shoreline erosion. The project plans for the protection of the scenic, historical and natural resources adjacent to the byway along the causeway in Orient, NY. This will enhance the traveler's experience and prevent the degradation of various resources. This will be done through the planning, development and construction of a major construction project to underground the overhead utility wires, improve bicycle and kayak access, and to replace and modify the asphalt outside the shoulder with native seaside vegetation along the Orient, East Marion Causeway. The purpose of the contract that resulted in this report is to analyze the cost and feasibility of the proposed project which will allow the Town to decide upon possible alternatives it can support and prepare the necessary support for project management, New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) compliance, permitting, engineering, design and mitigation of impacts as deemed necessary. Design services for the project will be required in two parts. (Phase lA and Phase lB). The complete scope of work will include: Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 1. Identifying all project design parameters and environmental impacts with regard to the Scenic Byway Resource Protection Project. 2. Identifying all potential project costs with regard to the Project 3. Identifying potential bidders and contractors capable o£performing the Scope of Work and Construction requirements. 4. Identifying potential governmental and private funding sources for construction implementation (Phase II) The Town of Southold retained the services of Island Structures, a professional design- engineering firm, to assist in the Phase IA scope of work of the project. The Phase IA Scope of Work consists of the following: 1. Develop a consensus with regard to project approach that will determine a course of action that would be in the best interest of the Town of Southold; 2. Conduct a series of interviews with but not limited to the following agencies: NYS Department of Transportation, LIPA, NYS DEC, US Army Corp of Engineers, Cablevision, Verizon, NYS Department of State and various Town Departments; 3. Obtain utility information, including identifying the locations and types of all utilities within the project area, the ownership of these utilities and prepare an inventory of same; 4. Develop a consensus on a conceptual plan to underground the overhead utilities, improve the bikeway, and define kayak access to the harbor and filter storm water runoff; 5. Verify data collected from all governmental agencies and ascertain the overall Project Cost to complete the Phase II Construction Project; 6. Determine the need to apply for any required permits, including U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, DEC, SPDES, NYSDOT, Highway Work Permits and any other required permits or approvals; 7. Identify potential realistic funding sources for implementation of the Phase I! Construction Project; 8. Verify potential environmental impacts through and adjacent to the project area where related or associated to the proposed project; 9. Where required by the Town of Southold, or as necessary for the performance of the Services, coordinate, co, operate and consult with the Southold Transportation Commission and the Town s Engineering Department or other Consultants as directed by the Town of Southold. 10. Review, circulate and submit a written report and other project data to the New York State Department of Transportation and the Town of'Southold to obtain the necessary review, approval, and/or secure the approval and/or authorization to Island Structures Engineering, PC proceed. This written report shall outline all of the data gathered under Phase IA of the project. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 3.0 METHODOLOGY A principal objective of this project is to take utility lines that are currently overhead in the Orient-East Marion Causeway and place them underground. Early research and discussions with the Town determined that the preferred routing would have been along the north side of Route 24. Subsequently, as the result of LIPA separation requirements, it was determined that trenching on both sides would be necessary. The north side of the road was determined to be advantageous due to the following characteristics: · The initially identified starting point of the existing lines is on this side of the road. · Most service connections are also on this side of the road. · The potential for erosion and/or scouring of the topography during a severe storm is lower since this side of the road is not directly exposed to the open bay. · The potential impact on wetlands and other enviromnentally sensitive property appeared less on this side of the road. · Restoration costs within extensive paved or rip rapped areas are minimized. Successful implementation of the Scope of Work required the active participation of the utilities whose lines would be involved; these are LIPA, Venison and Cablevision. To achieve this, early in the project, a series of meetings were set up with these utilities. The purpose of these meetings was to: · Determine the type and quantity of the existing lines for each utility · Determine the requirements for duct bank, buried conduit or direct buried lines so that trench, duct bank sizes, separation criteria and other physical construction requirements could be established. · General methods to be used for individual service taps from the new underground feeders to the ultimate customers for each utility. · Confirmation of the acceptability of the locations of the start and end points of the underground lines. Identification of any special requirements associated with the crossing of the inlet bridge near the west end of the project A list of questions and requests for information was given to the utilities prior to the meetings to facilitate and expedite their efforts. In parallel with this effort, contact was established With NYS DEC, NYS DOT and other agencies to address the issues of permit requirements and approvals. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 NYS DEC input was required to address the issues of distance of construction activities fi'om wetlands and other enviromnentally sensitive areas. NYS DOT input was required to address required distances and easements from the existing and final roadway, as well as any issues associated with the placement along, attached to, or near the bridge at the west end of the causeway. Roadway lighting requirements were also investigated. Army Corps of Engineers input was required to address issues associated with construction near open bodies of water. The NYS Department of State and The NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation were contacted to determine what assistance and concerns they would have with respect to the project as well as to pursue potential sources of funding. In addition to the above, numerous site visits were conducted to familiarize us with the project, take measurements and confirm information shown on drawings received from several utilities and agencies. Once the data gathering was completed a cost estimate was prepared for the implementation of the project. The results of the findings and the cost estimate are discussed in the remaining sections of this report. ~ Page 7 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.0 PROJECT EXECUTION AND FINDINGS 4.1 INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS Initial investigations included site visits and a walk-down of the project route. It was determined that four utilities were involved in the area: LIPA, Keyspan, Verizon and Cablevision. LIPA and Keyspan were contacted together, and it was determined that Keyspan had an underground natural gas main in the route. It was also determined that this gas line would not be relocated. LIPA's facilities included both transmission and distribution. Meetings were held with representatives in order to determine exactly what facilities already exist, and what additional facilities would need to be incorporated int,o the proposed underground system. It was determined at an early stage that LIPA s transmission and distribution separation requirements would dictate that discreet trenches, located on opposite sides of the roadway, would be required. Cablevision and Verizon were similarly contacted and ensuing meetings defined both their existing facilities and needs for the underground system. Requests for NYS DOT drawing files along the proposed route were also requested, for use in determining the extents of right-of ways and the other underground features that exist along the proposed route. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.2 UTILITIES Many discussions were held with representatives of all three utilities. Cooperation and willingness to provide infoImation varied with Cablevision providing a fairly good estimate of their costs and the other two providing at best high level estimates with very little written backup and detail. We were able to determine the overall needs of the three utilities in order to size the trench and quantify the type and number of conduits required to install all their cables. A drawing indicating the results is provided in the Appendix. 4.2.1 Cablevision , Meetings were held at Cablevision s offices in Port Jefferson with Mr. David Cervone, Long Island East Construction Manager. Cablevision provided an estimate for converting the existing facilities between East Marion and Orient of $120,000 with a number of conditions as follows. Southold Town or their agents would obtain all permits for construction at no cost to Cablevision · Southold Town or their agents would open the trench for Cablevision at no cost ,, · Southold Town or their agent would place two cables in 1-1/2 conduits (cable supplied by Cablevision) along with 2 empty 1-i/2" conduits (total of four conduits to be supplied by the Town, after their i.,n, stallation to become the property of Cablevision) in the trench,at a depth of 30 of cover over the conduits and place warning tape at 12 above the conduits at no cost to Cablevision. o The Town ~vill place 16 pull boxes and 8 manholes for Cablevision (pull boxes to be supplied by Cablevision, manholes by Town), once pull boxes and manholes are installed to become the property of Cablevision). · Cablevision would remove the existing aerial lines, once underground construction is complete and activated, at Cablevision's cost. · Cablevision is a Non-Union contractor and all Cablevision labor may be subcontracted to a non-union contractor. · System mapping would be supplied when requested once project moves forward to verify number of existing cables, customer laterals and start and end point poles. It is obvious that this relatively low cost from Cablevision assumed that most of the installation of the infrastructure for their cables would be included in the cost of work Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 provided under a separated contract to be performed directly for the Town. All Cablevision would provide are the cables themselves some pull boxes (minor cost) and the labor to hook up the customers and remove the existing overhead cables. Cablevision did not offer to discount or share in any of the costs for the project. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.2.2 Verizon Several meetings and discussions were held with Verizon engineering personnel. The objectives of the project were discussed in detail. At the end of the day Verizon provided an estimate of $2,575,000 "...for future budgeting purposes" only. This did not include any directional drilling under the bridge. They also estimated about an additional $315,000 of shared costs between the three utilities for miscellaneous costs associated with the directional drilling activities such as dewatering, road signs and traffic control etc. These estimated shared costs are covered in the quantity takeoff and estimate provided for the "Bridge Reach Undergrounding" in the Appendix. Their total cost proposal of $2,575,000 was comprised of $1,590,000 for cost of new conduit, and $985,000 for the cost of new and removed telephone facilities. Only the direct cost of $985,000 was included in the pricing included in the Appendix, as the other costs ($1,590,000) are included in the line item takeoffs and estimates for the common trench work. When pressed for details and backup for their estimate, Verizon did not provide any other than the assumed number of cables and conduits that were required to be provided. We also asked Verizon if they would be able to provide for some or all of the costs associated with the project from internal sources and they replied that they would not be able to do so due to corporate and PSC regulations. ~ ~1 Page l l Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.2.3 LIPA The discussions with LIPA took place over a number of weeks, via telephone conference calls and working meetings. LIPA made it clear all along that generally, the cost of placing line underground would cause it to raise rates, so they have been reluctant to do so. It was explained to LIPA that the intent of the project was for all utilities to share the cost as much as possible by performing certain tasks in a cooperative maturer, such as digging a common trench. Another approach discussed was to have all the work associated with their own lines done under their direct supervision, either by their own force account labor or their own contractors. In order to limit the c?,sts incurred by the utilities another approach would be to have the Town of Southold s contractors execute all strictly non-utility related tasks. The work would have to be done to the utility companies' construction specification requirements. This approach had some buy in from LIPA and the other utilities, but LIPA was reluctant to provide a breakout cost under such a scenario. As such, the LIPA estimate that was provided ($7,400,000) w,a,s discounted in the final cost estimate included in the Appendix to account for the common trench by others" concept. A significant amount of time was spent with LIPA understanding the current configuration of the existing lines since there are a number of different voltage levels being carried across the causeway that are classified as transmission and distribution voltages. LIPA did provide us with good information on the existing lines including detailed drawings of the existing lines. Other subjects discussed with LIPA included the criteria for separation between their own Iines at different voltage levels, as well as separation requirements from other utilities cables. This allowed us to come up with an overall requirement for the quantity and size of duct banks and conduits required, the number of manholes required, the maximum pulling distances and other criteria. A drawing indicating the results is provided in the Appendix. As mentioned above, LIPA provided a verbal estimate to underground their lines of $7,400,000 and committed to give us a written description of what was included in the scope of work for such an estimate. The written description of requirements was received, however the estimate has only been provided verbally. ~~ Pagel2 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.3 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Interface with governmental agencies revolved primarily around the New York State Department of Enviromnental Conservation (DEC) and the New York State Department of Transportation. Proximity to navigable waters also places the United States Army Corp of Engineers (Army Corp) in a review position, however the Army Corp is expected to have no objection to the proposed project, as there are no direct impacts expected to the navigable waterways. , The project is located along a narrow reach of Long Island s north fork, where it is bounded by the Long Island Sound to the north, and Peconic Bay to the south. The easternmost portion of the project traverses a small inlet from Peconic Bay to Dam Pond. The state highway traverses this inlet with reinforced concrete bridge, rebuilt in the nineties. The south side abutments for the bridge are armored with rip rap. The north side abutments slope toward Dam Pond. The project involves significant environmental issues. The impact of these enviroarnental restrictions, when juxtaposed with the NYS DOT requirements pose the most significant cost impact to the project. The western extent of the project is i,mmediately adjacent to the south shore of Dam Pond for a distance of approximately 2000 . This area has wetlands all tbe way up to and encroaching in the DOT right of way. For all practical purposes there is virtual no constructible area north of the road shoulder that would not be in or abut the wetlands. highway paved over as a shoulder, with an The south side of the is widened accompanying concrete wall and rip rap armoring along the shore of Peconic Bay. At the eastern end of this widened and rip rapped area, a small extent of natural sand beach lies immediately along the roadway. This area has been subject to repeated shoreline erosion, and is the object of a current DOT project in the plarming stages for additional erosion protection. This area has repeatedly scoured to a point where the roadway has been in jeopardy. DEC and DOT are currently in consultation regarding possible solutions to this problem. Consideration is being given to extending the concrete wall and rip rap for a distance further to the east, where the beach widens and is not as proximate to the roadway. Portions of this remediation will likely impact private property owned in conjunction with the lots on the north side of the highway. DEC and DOT are still reviewing alternatives. Until such remediation is undertaken, the area continues to be replenished with additional native dredged material provided by the Orient Ferry from its dock area. ~~ Pagel3 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 Further to the east of the existing widened shoulder and rip rap, the roadway curves slightly to the north and runs al,o, ng the north side of an extensive wetland area. This area extends for approximately 4000 , with wetland ponding, flora and fauna extending typically within several feet of the highway shoulder. The north side of roadway in this area contains some municipal bayfront beach property and numerous private residential properties. Further east yet, the south side of the roadway abuts open farmland and several isolated businesses. The north side continues to about individual residential lots. Ms. Karen (Darcy) Graulich, the regional director for DEC, has reviewed the proposed project scope and indicated that construction within the wetlands areas would not be considered for approval. Some relaxation of construction setback requirements from wetlands may be considered if both a compelling need and significant sediment and erosion control measures were implemented to protect the adjacent wetlands. The result of these conditions is to effectively dictate that the excavations for underground utilities lie within the paved shoulder of the roadway in all areas proximate to wetlands. This category includes most of the project. More specifically, this constitutes the western- most 2000 ft of the north side trenching, as ~vell as the eastern-most 4500 ft of the southside trenching. trenching work and virtually all of the manhole excavations are expected to Most of the be performed to depths at or below the normal ground water table. This not only poses stability prob,!ems and increased excavation and backfill costs, but will also necessitate dewatering. Open cut" dewatering involving pumping from the bottom of the excavation is not expected to be viable. The soils to be encountered are expected to be of a fine to coarse sand with some gravel. Such a system in this material fosters both the removal of fines in the subsurface strata, and results in a high potential for trench bottom "blowout". Linear well points may be employed to address these concerns. The dewatering may not need to be operational continuously (i.e. during off-shift hours), however it will most likely be required to some extent through,o, ut the construction term. Proper control of flow rates, prevention of excavation bottom blow out" and best management practices for stilling and silt removal will be required. With such controls in place, the work should be permittable, however the costs of such are not insignificant. Discharge permits will be required. The DEC requirements have forced the excavations into the areas within the paved shoulder. DOT (primary contact: Mark Wolfgang) has reviewed this proposed trenching schematic design and determined that they would not consider such a proposal unless tight sheeting were installed at all such locations in or immediately proximate to the shoulder. DOT has further indicated that such tight sheeting would be required to be Report No. 2005-128-Rpt-O1 Page 14 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West lslip, NY 1 I795 abandoned in place and would not be permitted to be removed after backfilling. It should also be noted that DOT standards provide that all underground utility work shall be at the edge of the right-of-way unless a special exception is granted. As DEC has precluded this possibility because of wetland infringement, the project is left in the unfortunate position of having to account for rather costly conditions of permitting. Even with this condition, DOT still reserves the right to impose additional conditions on the construction, so as to preclude potential damage to the adjacent traveled roadway surface. The imposition of the requirement for such abandoned in place sheeting for all shoulder trenching is significant. It has the ultimate effect of potentially doubling the cost of the work. State Regulations, specifically 17NYCRR Part 131 and Section 2.01 of the Requirements for the Design and Construction o,f Underground Utility Installations within the State Highway Right-of Way, states that no open cuts will be allowed unless no other means is feasible. The increased cost of alternative m,,ethods shall not be considered as sufficient justification for open cut excavations. 17NYCRR Part 131.8a(2) also dictates that ail underground facilities must also be located outside the shoulder, next to the edge of the right-of-way, unless a specific exception is granted. DOT has expressed a general reluctance ~vith respect to the proposed work in the shoulder, and it is generally felt that they would be unlikely to relax the costly sheeting requirement as a condition of permitting DOT s roadway and bridge drawings were also obtained through a freedom of . information request. These documents indicate that the bridge at the west end of the project was reconstructed in the nineties. The construction documents indicate that 2 conduits were embedded in the concrete construction to accommodate the LIPA underground I3.8 kV transmission line and the existing gas main. The electrical conduit can be reused for one (1) of the four (4) required underground conduits to be installed for distribution. DOT will not permit the attachment of conduits to the exterior of the bridge structure. This will require that these conduits be directional drilled, bored or jacked under the bridge structure. DOT also has significant restrictions with respect to the proximity of jacking and receiving pits to the paved roadway. The proposed work will not be able to comply with these requirements due to limitations of real estate in the area of these pits. DOT will have review authority over the design and installation of these pits, and it should be assumed that their requirements will be stringent at best. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise High~vay West ][slip, NY 11795 4.4 BICYCLE PATH The project scope includes the implementation of improvements in the use of the causeway area for bicycling. The narrow public areas adjacent to the roadway, the close proximity of the wetlands along much of the route and the private property ownership of other areas largely precludes the establishment of discreet separated bicycle path in all but one location. This isolated location is the area of the old highway alignment, where it diverges along the north side of the current roadway for a distance of approximately 1000 ft. in the middle of the project. This former roadway alignment could be utilized, with some minor clearing and pathway paving for a separated bicycle path. The widened shoulder area of the causeway, located at the western end of the project can easily accommodate a separated use designated bicycle path marked along the extreme south edge of the widened shoulder. Portions of this widened shoulder could conceivably also be re-landscaped to eliminate some of the paving, in lieu of more environmentally pleasing plantings. In these isolated areas where the shoulder is ,,vide enough to accommodate this, the elimination of the need for costly sheet piling might be realized. The potential cost benefit of this approach could be as much as several hundred thousand dollars. In most other areas, a simple marked bicycle path along the shoulder is the only accommodation feasible. Bicycle path design guidelines for such bicycle path marking call for a 5' wide marked lane on the shoulder of the road. The existing shoulders are typically wide enough to accommodate this. Only isolated areas where tums are made exist along the route, particularly if the south side of the road is typically utilized. Two concerns, however, arise from this acco ,m, modation along this roadway. The first involves the relative proximity of such a designated" path along such a highly traveled and fast moving highway. It would normally be our recommendation to site such a designated pathway more remotely from such a roadway. Wetlands, narrow right-of way widths and private property constraints preclude this. The second concern is that the project will involve the removal of the current street lighting, when the poles on which the lights are mounted are removed. This street lighting is not a DOT requirement, and DOT has indicated no requireme, nt to reinstall such lighting. It is DOT feeling that the lighting was placed at the Town s request. Once again, the designation of a bicycle path along such an unlit highway gives rise to safety concerns as well. Report No. 2005-128-Rpt-O1 Page 16 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 1 I795 4.5 KAYAK ACCESS Several locations within the project site boundaries were inspected for use as an improved kayak launch area. These included the south side of the causeway at the widened shoulder areas both just east of the Dam Pond inlet and bridge, and at the eastem end of the widened shoulder area further east from this inlet. The requirements for such an improved launch site are not severe, however, they do include the ability to park in close proximity to the launch area, the ability to portage the kayak conveniently to the site from the parking, and a shoreliue that is relatively calm, shallow and only mildly sloped. The best area for parking exists at the west end of the project, adjacent to the bridge, on the south side of the roadway. The waterfront in this area, however, is fully armored with heavy stone rip rap making portaging from the roadway all but impractical. While better launching access conditions exist on the north side of the roadway and on the south side of the bridge along the west bank of the inlet, no adequate area for parking is available. DOT had obtained a temporary easement on the property at the southwest side of the bridge, during the bridge reconstruction, however this area does not remain in the DOT right-of-way at this time, and is therefore under private ownership. Removal of the rip rap on the south side, to create a convenient portaging path, is not feasible and would not be considered by DOT. The eastern end of the widened shoulder, approximately 2000' further east from the bridge site, is immediately adjacent to the open sand beachfront. This location is at the eastern terminus of the concrete seawall and riprap shoreline armoring. This site is also the location ora current project feasibility study and schematic design by DOT to eliminate the scouring problems associated with the sandy beachfront close to the road. DOT has indicated that it most likely will try to permit and install a continuation of the concrete seawall, along with some attendant riprap installation. It was suggested that the new reach of sea~valI could possibly be offset several feet either north or south of the existing wall, to create a walk through area where a or shallow could be ramp steps installed to gain access to the sandy beach to the east. This would have to be incorporated into the yet undefined DOT improvements for this area. Both this plan and DOT's schematic approaches involve potential infringement on private property owned in conjunction with the three (3) lots on the north side of the road. Appropriate further development of this location for a kayak launch site will require coordination with DOT as they continue to develop their scour protection plan. potential a kayak launch ramp is on Dam Pond, in the Dam An alternate location for Pond Maritime Reserve. The most appropriate location would be along the west side of Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 the pond. Vehicle access limitations to this area preclude parking close to any such ramp site, however, and this is would create a significant deterrent to such usage. Extending automobile access to a launch site would be inappropriate in such a preserve, as it is felt the intrusiveness of such vehicle traffic would outweigh the potential benefit of the launch site. Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.6 COST ESTIMATE Included with this report is a detailed cost estimate. The estimate is based on 2007 dollars and should be escalated accordingly. The underlying construction approach for the estimate is that the Town would provide all of the civil work involved in the establishment of underground conduit runs for use by the various utilities. In so doing, these costs would be assumed once for all utilities, particularly on the north side where LIPA, Verizon and Cablevision must all locate their cables. The utility responsibility would lie in the actual cable installation within pre-installed underground conduits, terminations, service connections and general oversight of the To~vn's work to ensure compliance with utility standards. The estimates provided by the utilities have been adjusted where necessary to account for the common trench work to be performed directly by the Town. By far the most costly aspect of the project is the provision of the tight sheeting for most of the project length.' This requirement arises out of the combined regulations of DEC and DOT as noted above. Initial utility budget estimates for performing the work independently did not include this costly requirement, as their schematic construction estimates did not fully explore the regulatory restrictions of the specific area. The total installed cost, as indicated in the attached spreadsheet is $24 million. Of this amount, approximately $14 million is directly attributable to tight sheeting installation for roadway protection. A conceptual scheme involving the removal of asphalt shoulder paving, and re-vegetation along approximately I000 feet of the widened shoulder area could reduce the costs by several hundred thousand dollars as the result of the potential elimination of the sheeting requirement in this area. Report No. 2005-128-Rpt-O1 Page 19 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 4.7 SOURCES OF FUNDING Several of funding where investigated. These included utility contributions to the sources effort, governmental grant programs and private fund raising. Of all of the sources investigated, none were optimistic or significant with respect to ameliorating the costs of the project. Each of the utilities was approached with a request to review their costs with a mind to discounting such costs. The potential benefits of increased reliability, public relations, environmental condition improvement and future capacity were raised. In each case, the utilities indicated a disagreement with the basic tenet that reliability would necessarily be increased as a result of undergrounding effort. Although underground utilities are not subject to the same effects of high winds and falling branches, they are more susceptible to problems resulting from water table intrusion and potential storm breaching of this narrow spit of land between Peconic Bay and the Sound during a major storm. Both normal maintenance, and post storm damage repairs also have the potential for being considerably more costly on such underground systems, particularly if the area is breached in a storm. Such repairs can also be considerably more time consuming as well, resulting in longer outages. Although the project would result in a public relations benefit from those individuals who live and/or visit the areas, each of the utilities were also quick to point out that any costs incurred would also be subject to scrutiny by the ratepayers, not all of whom may feel such costs are justified from a cost/benefit perspective. This is often compounded by the "why not in my area instead" attitude regarding undergrounding. The cun'ent managements of Verizon and Cablevision indicated no desire to underwrite any portion of the costs. LIPA, similarly indicated no desire to discount any of its costs, and has more recently become even more cautious about unnecessary expenditures in light of its proposed purchase by National Grid, and the recent change in upper management. Contacts with governmental agencies included the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP) and the New York State Department of State. Carolyn Casey, of N YSOPRHP indicated that of all the work proposed, only a relatively small amount of grant money might be available for the kayak launch area. Even this was tenuous at best. She did not feel any funds would be made available for the general undergrounding, and further noted that the bicycle path costs would not be fundable if the work were done in the roadway or sidewalk areas. It is likely that the ~~ Page20 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 costs associated with grant funding application from NYSOPRFiP for this project would outweigh the ultimate grant. The New York State Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources has several programs available that have at least a limited potential for being adapted to portions of this work. The range of funding, here again, however, will be extremely limited from a percentage of overall project cost perspective. Funding through grants from programs such as the Waterfront Revitalization Program, Quality Communities Grant Program, Land and Water Conservation Fund were investigated. None of the programs have a significant track record (if any) of applying grant funds to a project such as this, with the exception of the bicycle path and kayak ramp aspects. It is unlikely that funding on the order of magnitude of a significant percentage of the project cost would be forthcoming. Contact was made with a prominent private fund raising firm, M3 Development, to determine the potential for private funds. It was the opinion of M3 that the potential was limited, and that any expectation for funding in excess of potentially tens of thousands of dollars was unrealistic. ~ Page21 Island Structures Engineering, PC 325 Sunrise Highway West Islip, NY 11795 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The project scope includes the relocation of LIPA distribution, LIPA transmission, Verizon and Cablevision cabling underground. The project scope starts at the west side of the bridge over the Dam Pond inlet, and extends to the utility pole just west of Pete Hill Rd. The undergrounding will require conduit runs on both the north and south side of Rt 25 in order to comply with LIPA's separation requirements for transmission and distribution lines. DEC is not likely to approve construction activities in or immediately adjacent to the wetlands that exist along much of the project route. DOT has indicated that all trenching within their paved shoulder will require tight sheeting, and' the sheeting must be left in place, cut immediately below grade when backfilling. This requirement alone has more than doubled the cost of the overall project. . The utilities have been reluctant to provide firm costs associated with their respective cable work, however we believe that the costs provided are a fair indication of the value of the work to be performed. No source of significant funding for the project has been identified. The current cost estimate for the entire project is approximately $24 million. Of this amount, it is anticipated that an optimistic estimate of currently identifiable grant funding is under $100,000. This funding would primarily be related to efforts associated with the limited bicycle path and kayak launch area improvements. The utilities have indicated no desire to discount or absorb any portion of their costs. It is not expected that significant private sources of funding would be available. ~~ Page22 Island Structures Engineering, PC 6.0 APPENDICES Page 23 Island Structures Engineering, PC 6.1 COST ESTIMATE Report No. 2005-128-Rpt-O1 Page 24 :)rient Causeway Scenic Byways Project ~chemaEc Design Cost Estimate: I I MATERIALS LABOR & EQUIPMENT ;OMBINED LABOR & MATERIAL EXTENDED REMARKS TASK Quan Units Unit Price, Extension Quart Units Liner Price Extensiol Quart Units TemporaryPole Guying Where Req'd 10 each $1 0~1 $10,000 $10,000 Pdmar~ Trenching-North Side (8500 If) For LIPA: 4-6" Dia (Sch 40 PVC) 34000 $1 For Cablevi$ion I ~Warning Tape I 85 :If $25 $2,12~ $2,125 For LIPA: -- Distdbuliol~ PuIlir~.~ Ma,holes (C M--0) [ 15lee $510001 $75.000 375.000 Dislribution Se~ice Handholes Transmission Pulling Manholes (CM 11-~ For Verizon: $50,000 ~P ulling Manholes (Ins(all Only) Dewa~tedng Removals BackPlI.Manholes and Handholes Service Entrance Trenching (470~0 Ir*) Brfdge Reach Underg~rounding (nodh side): Pavement Removals Approach and Receivin( Pit Excavation Trench Dewalering Selu~p Trench Dewatedng-OPeration Trench Dewaterfng-Removars Directional Drilling Ear LIPA: 4-4" Die For Cablevision 2-Ceble-in-cand uil (install only) Backfill Pit Approach a~nd Receivin, Pit Excavation Trench Dewa~ Trench Dewatedng Operation LIPA Underg~rOund Removals Verizon Aerial Removals Cablevlsion Aerial Removals Exi~sting Pole Removal cable cost below C~ble cost below cable work below cable cost below cable cost below Pavemenl/Shoulder As~phall Restoration General Site Restoration Private Properly Restoration allow I $500001 $50,000 $50,00( __ ~icycle Palh Markings -- - ! 8500 if , $5' $42,500 $42,50( Kayak Launch Ramp Access Amenities - -- Is $10,000 $10,000 $10,00( Subtotal General Contract O&P (15%) $2,404,90E $22,042,5~5 -- Construction Management (4%) 4 % $22,042,565 $881,703 $881,703 Misc Permitting $25,000[ ~$25,00£ $25,000 I Island Structures Engineering, PC 3W2 ess tS ~sTir~ ~q~ i glhl~5Y 6.2 PR POSED ROAD PROFILE DRAWING Report No. 2005-128-Rpt-O1 Page 25 NORTH (TYPICAL UJESTEP-.N SECTION) NORTH (TYPICAL EASTERN $ECTION) P~POSED ROAD ~ILE 50UTHOLD t.~DE~ROUND UTILITIES LONG tSLAND, NE~J ¥0~ ISLAND STRUCTURES ENGINEERING, P.C. [ PR-1 / / / / / A~A PLAN - PART C~NE ISLAND STRUCTURES ENGINEERING, P.C, Island Structures Engineering, PC 6.3 PARITAL UTILITY PLANS · Page 26 ~. 0g AP. EA PL~'~ - pA~T TWP. EE ISLAND STRUCTURES ENGtNEEF~ING, P.C. 0 0 A~EA I~L~ - pAInT F~ ISLAND STRUCTURES ENGINEERING, P.C. A4 / ,/ PARTIAL UTILfTT PLAN AREA ONE 5OUTHOLD UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LON~ I~LAND, NE~I TOR~ / / / / / / PARTIAL UTILITY PLAN ",REA 2 PP'gJ~T 50~JTNOLD UNDEF~RO~JND UTILITIES LCNG 15LANID, NE~II ¥0~ tSLAND STRUCTURES ENGINEERING, P.C. UTILITIES Island Structures Engineering, PC 6.4 PROJECT AERIAL VIEW Page 2 7 Orient - East Marion Causeway Project Beginning Project Ending Scale: 1" = 1,000'