master PLANNING
Like Morgan Hill, Gilroy’s General Plan (2040) calls attention to
current and future telecommunications, and acknowledges the need
to be on the forefront of new telecommunications technologies in
order to attract and retain new businesses. Gilroy city offi cials break
it down into key focus areas.
First, there’s the provision of utilities. City offi cials seek to
partner with public and private service providers as practicable to
provi de adequate levels of service to Gilroy residents. While the City
didn’t take an offi cial position prior to the Governor’s veto of SB 649,
the goal is compatible co-location of telecommunication facilities
and collaboration with service providers in the process of locating
these facilities on City-owned property or public rights-of-way.
Second, when it comes to undergrounding, Gilroy aligns with
Morgan Hill in acknowledging the value of a Dig Once policy.
The City requires areas of new development or redevelopment to
include the undergrounding of utilities infrastructure, including
communications.
The City’s Communications Master Plan provides a framework to
guide the evaluation, planning, implementation, and management of
the City’s communications infrastructure. This includes support for
implementation of telecommunication technologies to attract new
businesses and meet the changing communication needs of
City residents and businesses.
Gilroy aims to maintain and enhance the coverage and band-
width of the wireless network, which provides free wireless data
service to residents, businesses, and visitors. When it comes to fi ber
optic cable access, the City will continue to explore opportunities to
expand its fi ber infrastructure consistent with the Communications
Master Plan.
A parting thought: If we build a better infrastructure, the world
will beat a path to South County.
Both Morgan Hill and Gilroy are committed to being “Dig Once”
cities. By approaching communications infrastructure projects as an
integral part of local and regional economic development initiatives,
and coordinating them with other infrastructure projects, our cities
aim to minimize the number and scale of excavations, and reduce
the disruption and overall cost of infrastructure development.
To accomplish this, each city must work to establish reasonable
conditions and procedures by which carriers and service providers
(and other utilities) perform their construction work in public right
of way spaces.
Morgan Hill’s Telecommunications Infrastructure Plan 2035 lays
out a clear model of best practices.
For example, if there’s a plan to dig a trench for a major in-
frastructure and construction project in the public right of way, it
makes sense to have several requirements in place: to give advance
notice to broadband and other utility providers; to maintain a
shared database; to explore cost sharing opportunities; and to foster
coordination of infrastructure deployment with other projects.
While our cities don’t generally have authority to review
proposed telecom projects for capacity or network design, they
can establish and communicate preferences for a minimum set of
specifi cations for conduit being installed.
City public works projects and utility undergrounding programs
might require placement of spare, city-owned broadband conduit.
With a Dig Once policy, our cities can minimize wear and tear
on streets. Such a policy might also incentivize telcos and other
utilities to upgrade or build infrastructure sooner rather than later
by setting a deadline and offering cost-sharing opportunities.
Requiring encroachment permit applicants to demonstrate that
alternatives do not exist, and giving cities broad scope to review and
inspect, helps ensure that telcos and other utilities provide access
to conduit and pole routes to other carriers; thus utilizing excess
capacity. To a certain extent, this is covered under state law and
cities can require this kind of cooperation.
22
GILROY • MORGAN HILL • SAN MARTIN
Revenues from
leases or rents of City
property, including
publicly-owned con-
duit, can be set aside
in an account dedi-
cated to communica-
tions infrastructure,
and be made avail-
able for construction
and maintenance
of public-owned
conduit.
By taking a
“future proof”
approach, cities can
encourage broadband
providers to size
underground and
overhead facilities
with technology advances and expanded service in mind. Standard
specifi cations could be included in building codes for new and major
remodeled construction. For work done in the public of right of way,
minimum sizes may be suggested, and encouraged by encroachment
permit policies.
Wireless facilities and supporting infrastructure, notably fi ber
optic networks, should be planned with future needs in mind. The
current trend is toward smaller cell areas and facility sizes, and this
trend will accelerate as 5G standards are fi nalized and network
upgrades begin.
Tap • Jazz • Ballet • Lyrical • HipHop • Acro
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2017
gmhtoday.com