By: Mike Manfredi

Many new construction projects RealtyCom is involved with include utility relocation.  This often includes undergrounding existing overhead electrical and telecommunication lines or, in some cases, moving existing underground lines to a new location.  In California, most of this work is governed by the California Public Utility Commission’s approved tariff known as “Rule 20.”  Rule 20 consists of three parts: 20A, 20B and 20C.  Of these, Rule 20B projects are most often related to new development.  Typically, 80-85% of the costs associated with the relocation are paid for by the developer.

In order to prevent costly delays, any such relocation work should be identified in the design stage of the development, typically by the Dry Utility Consultant.  A resulting plan should be developed that details the following:

1. All the impacted utilities (e.g., power company, franchise cable television company, telephone company, etc.)
2. Contacts for representatives of each of the impacted utilities
3. Cost to bear by the developer and payment timing
4. Critical path from start to completion with timeframes for each activity associated with this work

Periodic check in calls with all stakeholders should commence a month in advance of scheduled work commencement and continue through completion.

RealtyCom’s Planning/Engineering Team works closely with […]

By Phil Veletzos

The FCC continues to consider changing current policies related to apartment communities and other multitenant environments.  What they adopt will have important impacts to private property rights of Owner-Operators, Managers and Developers of multifamily communities, as they construct and manage telecom facilities, and the Service Providers who deliver broadband services to their assets.

Limiting the Use of Telecom Infrastructure?

Among the issues up for consideration, are rules governing telecom infrastructure and if Owners should be prohibited from the current practice of granting limited use of infrastructure to select Service Providers at a property – either on an “exclusive” or “non-exclusive” basis.

Proponents of change argue that discontinuing the current practice of allowing limiting use contracts will spur competition by allowing many more Providers to use existing infrastructure.  How many Providers would depend ultimately on the desires of the resident population.  As conceived within one of the Nation’s first such initiatives (San Francisco Article 52) a resident’s express desire for a Service Provider would start a process where that provider, even over the objection of an Owner, could be granted the right to “install the facilities and equipment necessary to provide communication services or use any existing wiring” to reach the Resident’s […]