Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br /> Council Meeting Minutes <br /> January 13,2016 <br /> • Abandonment of Facilities <br /> Staff felt that language should be included in the ordinances that require removal of abandoned <br /> facilities if and when the City reconstructs roadways above their facilities. <br /> Utility(ies) position is that the agreements general stated that they will remove abandoned <br /> facilities if they are in the way of the current project. <br /> Council questioned the probability of this and staff replied not often and reminded Council that <br /> the agreements are for a 20 year term. Council felt that sufficient language was already <br /> contained in the agreements to ensure removal if hindering our infrastructure, but if Staff desired <br /> it would be taken into consideration. <br /> • Location of Facilities <br /> Staff felt that language should be included to allow the City's standards and policies to guide the <br /> placement of utilities in the right-of-ways. <br /> Utility(ies)position is that they do not wish to have the City dictate the location of their facilities. <br /> City Attorney Glaser stated that if the City desired to adopt an ordinance dictating the location of <br /> facilities they could but currently have nothing in place. <br /> Council thanked Staff for their proactivity. Engineer Statz stated that the City has not <br /> experienced an issue in the past. Council felt that discussions could take place between the <br /> entities when construction was occurring and it behooves the utility(ies) to remove their <br /> abandoned facilities and work with City's when construction occurs. Council felt that an <br /> ordinance should be looked at in the future. <br /> • Advance Notice of Projects <br /> Staff position is to rely on current law which requires us to hold at least one Preliminary Design <br /> Meeting and a Preconstruction Conference to give utilities advanced notice of projects. <br /> Utility(ies)position is that they would like more specific language about advanced notification. <br /> Engineer Statz stated that staff has a good relationship with the utilities, that law addresses the <br /> issue but the utility(ies) desire something more lax than state law. Engineer Statz and Legal <br /> Counsel Glaser felt that the utilities have lobbyists to modify laws and they desire things in their <br /> favor. <br /> Attorney Glaser stated that the utilities have many franchise agreements with many cities and it <br /> is in their interest to have consistency with them for ease of compliance and substantial <br /> modifications to the agreements make it difficult for them. Attorney Glaser states that the <br /> utilities are successful partners with the cities and are regulated by bodies which take public <br /> input very seriously and they have a strong incentive to remedy situations that may arise. <br /> Page 7 of 12 <br /> 7 <br />