This project is a joke! No contact with residents, and Intrepid is on its third excavating crew. Digging in wrong locations on private properties repeatedly. The City’s third party PM with Tate is useful in that regard. Sure hoping there is no infrastructure damage to various utility systems as a result.
Thanks for the info Karen. We have fiber through Quantam and it’s great. It’s above ground. Sounds like this may be buried. Also may be misinterpreting.
I had a few questions from folks so I combined them into one email to our public works director. I just got a reply so I am going to share his response with you.
Hi Karen,
The City is requiring that Intrepid carry insurance and a bond that includes coverage for private property damage. Residents with property damage will need to contact Intrepid to make a claim. If Intrepid fails to restore within the times outlined in the Master License Agreement, the City can pursue remedies allowed under the agreement.
Intrepid and other fiber optic providers are operating under state/federal telecommunications laws that exempt them from the franchise requirements imposed on electric, gas, and cable television. There have also been changes at the state/federal level that limit local government’s ability to regulate wireless facilities. While the underlying intent is presumably that unfettered competition is good for consumers, loss of the ability to efficiently manage use of public spaces (and easements on resident’s private property) presents some major challenges.
Easements are slightly different than City owned right-of-way. An easement is essentially a contract between the grantor (property owner) and the grantee (sometimes the City, sometimes a specific company) to allow certain activities (access, utilities, drainage) on the grantor’s private property. If an easement allows telecommunications facilities, the current owner (as a successor and assign of the original grantee) has a legal obligation to allow use of the easement for telecommunications purposes. Easements generally don’t have a limitation on the number of companies that can use them since that historically hasn’t been a big concern.
Thanks Karen for the update. I wish the City had more control over thus but it doesn't. Just pray when the installation gets started that there are minimal, if any infrastructure issues but that is just hopefull thinking on my part. 🤞
These kinds of agreements are great for the city to facilitate as future network upgrades from the Xfinity and others will rely on these wholesale fiber routes.
I thought folks might like the idea. I just wanted to be sure they knew some of the pitfalls related to installation and that is was not a city instigated action. :-)
This project is a joke! No contact with residents, and Intrepid is on its third excavating crew. Digging in wrong locations on private properties repeatedly. The City’s third party PM with Tate is useful in that regard. Sure hoping there is no infrastructure damage to various utility systems as a result.
Thanks for the info! This is the first I have heard, negative or positive, about this.
Thanks for the info Karen. We have fiber through Quantam and it’s great. It’s above ground. Sounds like this may be buried. Also may be misinterpreting.
There is mention of the potential that trees will be trimmed so it seems like it could be above and below ground.
Appreciate the head's-up.
Is the strip of ground between a sidewalk & a street considered an easement?
I had a few questions from folks so I combined them into one email to our public works director. I just got a reply so I am going to share his response with you.
Hi Karen,
The City is requiring that Intrepid carry insurance and a bond that includes coverage for private property damage. Residents with property damage will need to contact Intrepid to make a claim. If Intrepid fails to restore within the times outlined in the Master License Agreement, the City can pursue remedies allowed under the agreement.
Intrepid and other fiber optic providers are operating under state/federal telecommunications laws that exempt them from the franchise requirements imposed on electric, gas, and cable television. There have also been changes at the state/federal level that limit local government’s ability to regulate wireless facilities. While the underlying intent is presumably that unfettered competition is good for consumers, loss of the ability to efficiently manage use of public spaces (and easements on resident’s private property) presents some major challenges.
Easements are slightly different than City owned right-of-way. An easement is essentially a contract between the grantor (property owner) and the grantee (sometimes the City, sometimes a specific company) to allow certain activities (access, utilities, drainage) on the grantor’s private property. If an easement allows telecommunications facilities, the current owner (as a successor and assign of the original grantee) has a legal obligation to allow use of the easement for telecommunications purposes. Easements generally don’t have a limitation on the number of companies that can use them since that historically hasn’t been a big concern.
Jeff
That is an excellent question. The city website says: What is the public right-of-way (ROW)?
The right-of-way is any public street, way, place, alley, sidewalk, park, square, plaza, or city-owned right-of-way dedicated to public use.
Thanks Karen for the update. I wish the City had more control over thus but it doesn't. Just pray when the installation gets started that there are minimal, if any infrastructure issues but that is just hopefull thinking on my part. 🤞
I'm thinking if this happens without any issues we might see pigs flying over Lafayette!
These kinds of agreements are great for the city to facilitate as future network upgrades from the Xfinity and others will rely on these wholesale fiber routes.
I thought folks might like the idea. I just wanted to be sure they knew some of the pitfalls related to installation and that is was not a city instigated action. :-)