The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOctober 29, 1996 4 • • ARCAD l 11PORASE9' MEMORANDUM • OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Date: October 29, 1996 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: RIGHT OF WAY ENCROACHMENT ORDINANCE -SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Introduction of proposed ordinance 2057 was continued from the last City Council meeting at the request of TCI Cablevision. In response to their review, various revisions have been made to the ordinance to address their letter of October 23, 1996 (attached). Most of these involve clarifications that do not in any way detract from the purpose of the ordinance. For example, the revised code sections still cover cable t.v. even though specific wording referencing"cable television" has been eliminated from various sub-sections of the ordinance. . See section 7300(a)-Definitions. TCI's concern regarding restoration of the right of way to "original condition" has also been clarified by adding a sub-section h to the Definition Section-7300. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to introduce ordinance 2057. . C ,t ;47 R^ 'ARCAyD =. RPORAT0 MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Date: September 26, 1996 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MICHAEL H. MILLER, CITY.ATTORNEY 1 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 2057 - RIGHT-OF-WAY ENCROACHMENTS INTRODUCTION Cities are faced with increased requests for encroachment permits due to new technologies. A significant concern for cities is to assure an adequate permit process to cover various types of encroachments and related costs. The proposed Ordinance and related fee resolution is a step in the direction of providing adequate coverage for City streets. If legal developments authorize more comprehensive cost coverage methods, the.City can consider ordinance amendments. The Ordinance has been reviewed with revisions provided by the Engineering Division of the Development Services Department. SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE The attached Ordinance is a comprehensive revision to the City's Municipal Code provisions relating to encroachments on City property. The current Code contains fairly broad requirements for anyone wishing to perform any sort of encroachment on City right-of-ways. The proposed Ordinance sets forth a very specific definition of what constitutes an encroachment on public property and is designed to protect the City in the event someone wishes to do any work on such property. The Ordinance retains the current requirement for a permit for work on public property but the application for a permit will elicit a considerable amount of information so as to,assist City staff in evaluating the applicant and the type of work to be done. The bonding requirements are also more specific and are provided in order to ensure that the right-of-ways are returned to their original condition. • rTh Honorable Mayor and City Council September 26, 1996 Page 2 FISCAL EFFECT. The Ordinance protects the City by making sure that the City is fully compensated for all costs incurred due to work performed by persons other than the City itself. To this end, a companion resolution setting forth updated fees for encroachment work is presented to the City Council. CONCURRED: ,L William R. Kelly City Manager Attachments c: City Manager Acting City Engineer 17220 Cablevision lane P.0 8ox 710 .. Redlands.CA 923773 (909)729-3,588 TCI Cablevision of California, Inc_ October 16, 1996 Mr. Michael H. Miller • City Attorney City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive P.O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 VIA FACSIMILE Dear Mr. Miller: I want to thank you for your recommendation to the City Council last evening that we be provided with time to comment on proposed Ordinance No.2057. Although I understand that the City had no obligation to delay the first reading, we appreciate the spirit of cooperation and communication\ that your comments and the City Council's action indicated_ Accordingly, I sent the ordinance out for review this morning, and have asked for a quick response from our technical personnel and legal counsel so that you may have time to consider our comments prior to the next City Council meeting. I can say from my limited review of the ordinance today that i am hopeful our concerns will be few. I also want to apologize for any misunderstanding regarding our request for advance notice of the draft ordinance_ I acknowledge that we did not make this request specifically of you, and I am sorry if my letter to the Council implied such. in the future,we will make every effort to communicate our concerns on such issues directly with you, as well as Cindy Rowe and Bill Kelly, unless notified otherwise. Si.cerely, 4111 , o-_ _ Teri A.Scott Director of Franchising cc: William Kelly Cindy Rowe --- • • TG Cablevision - 1722 Orange Tree lane. ) l P.O Box 710 Redands,CA 92373 ( )7983538 0 VTCI Cablevision of California, inc. October 23, 1996 Mr. Michael H. Miller City Attorney City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive P.O. Box 60021 I Arcadia,CA 91066-6021 ViA FACSIMILE Dear Mr. Miller: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on proposed Ordinance No.2057 regarding right-of-way encroachments. On the whole, it is our opinion that this ordinance contains fair and reasonable provisions for management of the public rights-of-way. We would, however, appreciate your consideration of the following edits and comments (suggested deletions are shown in etrikeelif,additions with double underlines): Section 7300 (c)(3): 'Erecting or maintaining any flag,banner, decoration, post,sign, pole,fence Ji guard rail,wall, loading platform,mailbox,eable-televielea pedestal or pull-box, or any other structure on, over,under or within a right-of-way.' Pedestals and pull-boxes are used not only by the cable television industry, but by telecommunications companies and other utilities as well. Section 7300.3: The permit should be issued or denied within a reasonable time frame, such as 30 days or less, so that construction and repair are not unnecessarily delayed. Section 7300.4: If a permit is denied, the grounds for denial should be given to the applicant in writing so that any appropriate corrections or appeals can be made. Sections 7300.7,7300.8 and 730022: These sections as well as the staff report accompanying the proposed ordinance discuss a companion resolution setting forth updated fees and deposits for encroachment work. We would appreciate the opportunity to review this new schedule of(eels) Sections 7300.8, 7300.9,7300,23 and 730026: These sections all contemplate the restoration of / the right-of-way to its'original condition.'As a practical matter,we are unclear as to how we can do this. We would suggest that'original condition'be defined to include the specific desired and achievable outcome, i.e.safe, usable and reasonably aesthetic restoration. Section 7300.15: Should the Development Services Director establish standards which exceed those contained in the latest edition of the standard specifications for Public Works Construction, we would appreciate the opportunity to review them. . . s Page 2 Mr. Miller: Ord.2057 October 23, 1996 Section 7300.16: ."CA-121J PEDESTALS AND/OR PULL-BOXES—GA-74-wevidera rmi shall locate their pedestal and/or pull-boxes and other equipment within existing utility easements. if no utility easements exist, then the CATprevidor permittee,shall negotiate with the property owner of record, if on private property, or with the City, if in a public right-of-way, to establish one This requirement should apply to all users of pedestals and pull-boxes, not just cable providers. Section 7300.23(b): "Upon the refilling and temporary patching of an excavation in the manner / and within the time specified in the permit,the surface torn up or damaged by such excavation i/ shall be replaced to the reasonable satisfaction of the Development Services Director or his/her designee." Section 7300.29 (c): "...The hearing shall be heard by the City Manager or his designee. At the hearing,the appellant shall establish to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager or his designee that he is entitled to the issuance of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter or to the reinstatement of a permit previously revoked__ Please let me know if you have any questions regarding these comments. Thank you again for considering our input. Sincerely, Teri A. Scott Director of Franchising cc: William Kelly Cindy Rowe • Frank Maldonado Keith Cooper - •