Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 24, 1998 <br />requiring all utilities to go undergirowid. Fahey asked Media One if they, <br />too, would go underground when ~Il the other utilities do so. <br />Gibbs reported that the cable commission h1s discussed this issue and <br />indicated that the franchise agreement does obligate Media One to go <br />underground as other public utilities are required to go under~round. <br />However, tl~e cost of doin~ so wiil ulti~nately be borne by the customer. <br />Gibbs reported thlt this undergrounding is referred to as "ordinary course <br />undergrounding". <br />Morelan questioned what is to be gained in makin~ just one utility ~o <br />underground when the others are not required to do so. However, Morelan <br />pointed out that the cable is the most obtrusive of the utility lines hangin~ <br />from the poles. It is typically the lar~est wire and hau~in~ the lowest with <br />the existence of large electrical boxes from time to time. <br />Gibbs pointed out that if the City required the new fiber to be placed <br />wider~round, the existin~ lerial plant would continue to exist. Ma~elan <br />stated that this would not be the case under his proposal. <br />Gibbs indicated that when the City mandates other utilities go <br />underground, this franchise agreemenC says thlt Media One would go <br />underground as well. <br />Morelan asked at whose expense undergrounding would occur. Gibbs <br />stated tl~at Media One would pay Yhe cost which would ultimately be <br />passed on to customers in the form of increased rates. <br />Morelan asked if the exisYing cable plant will be required throughout the <br />life of the franchise. Gibbs replied thlt it wouid be. Gibbs indicated that <br />the cable is the lifeb(ood of the system, it is the e(ectronic components that <br />would be changed. <br />Morelln asked if the colxial cable will be essentill throughout the life of <br />the franchise agreement. <br />Gibbs replied that it would be, statin~ th~t fiber may be more likely to be <br />replaced than would colxial cable. <br />Morelan asl<ed if the coaxial cable the company finds to be damaged <br />would be removecl. Gibbs replied that it woultl be, indicating that they <br />e~~vision less than l0% of the clble will need to be replacecl. Gibbs <br />indicated, however, that Medi~ One would not pl~n to remove existing <br />under~rowid caUle they find to Ue damaged, only overhead. Media One <br />would not want to tear up yards Yo removed tl~is under~round cable. <br />14 <br />