The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC AG PKT 2004-04-26 #GG r. k AGENDA REPORT 9 4k J � DATE: April 26, 2004 9 * ° ,, r1 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: Adoption of Ordinance 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code (2004 Edition) SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Adopt Ordinance Number 1515, An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach Adopting by Reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code (2004 Edition). Instruct Staff to continue to work with interested parties to resolve any outstanding issues regarding the new Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. BACKGROUND: The City Attorney and staff have been preparing revisions to the Seal Beach Municipal Code since late 2001. The City Council has been reviewing these proposed revisions and a re- formatting of the Seal Beach Municipal Code for approximately 18 months, and held 6 study sessions during that period to review and provide comments on the work as it progressed. The "Final Draft" versions of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code have been prepared and were introduced for adoption by the City Council on January 26, 2004. This process is the first comprehensive review of the general "laws of the City" that has occurred since 1961. It is worthwhile to recognize that a similar amount of time should not lapse between future comprehensive reviews of the general laws of the City. Staff would suggest that a goal of reviewing the Municipal Code on a 5 -year basis should be established by the City Council. This continuing review is necessary to allow for the City to be in a position to respond to changing circumstances, goals, and policies over time; and to reflect those changes within the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code needs to be seen as a dynamic document that evolves and is revised as the concerns of the City evolve and change over time. Upon introduction of these Titles of the Seal Beach Municipal Code by the City Council in January 2004, the following public review and adoption schedule was implemented: Agenda Item 6G1 Z:\My Documents\MUNICODE\Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report.doc\LW\04 -20 -04 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report April26, 2004 PUBLIC REVIEW AND ADOPTION SCHEDULE — SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLES 1 THROUGH 9 ❑ January 26, 2004 — City Council holds first reading and introduces ordinance to adopt by reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. ❑ January 27, 2004 — Copies of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code are provided to all libraries and made available at the City Clerk's office for public review and to allow comments to be provided to the Director of Development Services by April 6, 2004. ❑ February 10, 2004 - Copies of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code were posted on the City's website in a PDF format for public review and to allow comments to be provided to the Director of Development Services by April 6, 2004. At the same time a side -by -side comparison of Titles 1 through 9 in PDF format were also posted on the City's website and were made available at all libraries and the City Clerk's office. ❑ April 6, 2004 — Close of public review and comment period for proposed Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. ❑ April 26, 2004 — City Council holds second reading and Adopts Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. ❑ May 26, 2004 — Effective date of newly adopted Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. - In accordance with the provisions of Section 412, Adoption of Ordinances and Resolutions, of the City Charter, there have been typographical or clerical error corrections made to the provisions of Titles 1 through 9 as were necessary to clarify and/or correct clerical/typographical errors. These changes do not constitute an "alteration" pursuant to Section 412 of the City Charter and the ordinance may be adopted this evening. Comments Received During Public Comment Period and Responses to Comments: During the 71 -day public comment period the City received comments regarding the proposed Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. As a result of those comments a separate agenda item has been prepared that includes an ordinance for introduction that amends particular sections of Titles 5 and 9, based on the comments and questions submitted during the public review period. This proposed ordinance will also re- codify the existing provisions of Chapter 5, Building Code, as new Chapter 9.55. The revisions address concerns or comments received by the City regarding the general areas of concern: ❑ Pro - rating of business license fees; ❑ Other business license revisions based on Finance Department and Police Department comments; and r Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 2 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report April26, 2004 ❑ Water service fee revisions. The revisions indicated above, based on the public comments received, will be incorporated into the final version of the Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code, upon adoption of the Ordinance proposed for introduction to Amend Titles 5 and 9 • of the Seal Beach Municipal Code that are set forth in the following agenda item. Comments Received regarding Franchise and Public Property Issues: Comments have also been received from Southern California Edison, Verizon, the Gas Company and other franchise holders regarding concerns with provisions of Titles 6, Franchises, and Title 9, Public Property, Public Works, and Building Regulations. Copies of comment letters from Southern California Edison and Verizon, along with a response letter from the City Manager to Southern California Edison are provided as Attachment 3 for the information of the City Council. Most, if not all of the comments, are directed at existing provisions of the Code that have not been revised in connection with this re- codification. Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to meet and confer with all interested parties regarding the provisions of Title 6, Franchises, and Title 9, Public Property, Public Works, and Building Regulations. Based on those discussions, it is anticipated that additional revisions may be proposed to these two titles of the Municipal Code. Summary of General Subject Areas of Titles 1 through 9: Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code cover the following general subject areas: ❑ Title 1 — General Provisions ❑ Title 2 - Elections ❑ Title 3 - Administration ❑ Title 4 — Revenue and Finance ❑ Title 5 — Business Licenses and Regulations ❑ Title 6 - Franchises ❑ Title 7 — Public Peace, Morals and Welfare ❑ Title 8 — Vehicles and Traffic ❑ Title 9 — Public Property, Public Works, and Building Regulations Titles 1 through 9 are not provided with this Staff Report due to the length of these Municipal Code Titles, 483 pages. Copies have previously been provided and are not provided again due to the length of the document. Copies will be available at the City Council meeting, and the document, including a side -by -side comparison table, has been available since late January on the City's web site for viewing �r downloading. Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 3 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report Apri126, 2004 Municipal Code Sections Not Being Revised at this time: The following major sections of the existing Municipal Code will not be revised at this time and will be subject to future appropriate Commission and City Council review upon adoption of a "Local Coastal Plan" by the California Coastal Commission: ❑ Chapter 5 — Building Code ❑ Chapter 21 — Subdivisions ❑ Chapter 24 — Factory Built Housing, Mobile Houses, Recreational Vehicles, Commercial Coaches, Mobile Home Parks, Special Occupancy Trailer Parks and Camp Grounds ❑ Chapter 24A — Mobilehome Park Conversions ❑ Chapter 28 - Zoning FISCAL IMPACT: None. Adoption of the recommended Ordinance will complete an existing review and revision process of certain portions of the existing Seal Beach Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION: City Council action to: 1. Adopt Ordinance Number 1515, An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach Adopting by Reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code (2004 Edition). 2. Instruct Staff to continue to work with interested parties to resolve any outstanding issues regarding the new Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. N D APPROV'fl: e = ittenberg John :� Bahorski Director of Development Servic: Ci anager Attachments: (3) Attachment 1: Ordinance Number 1515, An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach Adopting by Reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code (2004 Edition) Attachment 2: Seal Beach Municipal Code, Titles 1 through 9. Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 4 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference . Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report April 26, 2004 Note: Not provided with Staff Report due to length, 483 pages. Document has previously been provided to City Council on January 26, 2004. Attachment 3: Communications Received and Response Letter Regarding Titles 6 and 9 of the Municipal Code , Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 5 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report , April 26, 2004 ATTACHMENT 2 SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TITLES 1 THROUGH 9 NOTE: NOT PROVIDED WITH STAFF REPORT DUE TO LENGTH, 483 PAGES. DOCUMENT HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN PROVIDED TO CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 26, 2004 Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 12 Adoption of Ordinance No. 1515, Adopting by Reference Titles 1 Through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code City Council Staff Report April 26, 2004 ATTACHMENT 3 COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED AND RESPONSE LETTER REGARDING TITLES 6 AND 9 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE Titles 1 -9 Adoption.CC Staff Report 13 --% SEA( BF',, io ¢; ",-.t om Z �1 4• R- Q 1eac4Z � t. 67,.....,:,9 q 27 -19' - CITY HALL :'211 _EIGHTH STREET SEALBEACH, CALIFORNIA 90740 (562)4312527 wwwci seal-beach .ca.us` a FILE COPY BY FACSIMLE TO (714) 895 -0271 Gh .f-- - AND FIRST CLASS MAIL March 5, 2004 Southern California Edison Attn: Jerry Dominguez, Region Manager 7333 Bolsa Avenue Westminster, CA 92683 Dear Mr. Dominguez: SUBJECT: CITY OF SEAL BEACH CODE, TITLE 6 - FRANCHISES I am responding to your letter of March 5, 2004 regarding the above - referenced portion of the City Code that is in the process of being re- codified and updated. I am including as an attachment a "Press Release" that explains the general purpose of the proposed re- codification process, and a timetable for final adoption by the City Council, including a public comment period for the "Final Draft" documents that ends on April 5, 2004. Title 6, Franchises, covers the following subject matters: ❑ Chapter 6.05 General Provisions ❑ Chapter 6.10 Cable, Video and Telecommunications ❑ Chapter 6.15 Pipelines ❑ Chapter 6.20 Solid Waste and Recyclables The "Final Draft" of Title 6, Franchises, may be downloaded in a side -by -side -_ comparison table format with the current Code language by going to www.ci.seal- beach.ca.us, click on "City Clerk ", click on "Municipal Code" and click on "Title 6 — Franchises" to view or download a PDF version of this title. - . Please provide any comments you may have on Title 6 to my attention by April 5, 2004, and the City will thoroughly evaluate and respond to any concerns you may have. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Z.\My Documents \MUNICODE\Edison Response Letter.doc \LW\03 -05 -04 • Response Letter to Jerry Dominguez re Seal Beach Code Revisions Title 6 - Franchises March 5, 2004 Please contact my office at your earliest convenience if you require additional information or have questions regarding the above information or the enclosed documents. I can be reached at (562) 431 -2527, extension 313, or by e -mail at lhittenberg@ci. seal- beach. ca.us. Sincerely, Whittenberg Director of Development Services Enclosures: (1) Enclosure 1: Press Release - Public Comment Period - Adoption of New City Code, February 20, 2004 Distribution: City Council City Manager City Clerk City Attorney • Edison Response Letter 2 p € � ` , ' PLANNING y ,5,'4i..."-.----,7;t. � DEPARTMENT PRESS RELEASE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - ADOPTION OF NEW CITY CODE On January 26, 2004 the City Council introduced an Ordinance that will amend and recodify the Code of the City as set forth in that certain document entitled "Seal Beach Municipal Code (2004 Edition)." This entails a complete updating and re- formatting of major portions of the Code. The following major sections of the existing Municipal Code will not be revised at this time and will be subject to future appropriate Planning Commission and City Council review upon adoption of a "Local Coastal Plan" by the Califomia Coastal Commission: ❑ Chapter 5 — Building Code ❑ Chapter 21 — Subdivisions ❑ Chapter 24 — Factory Built Housing, Mobile Houses, Recreational Vehicles, Commercial Coaches, Mobile Home Parks, Special Occupancy Trailer Parks and Camp Grounds ❑ Chapter 24A — Mobilehome Park Conversions ❑ Chapter 28 - Zoning To allow sufficient time for interested citizens to review and provide comments to the City on this major undertaking, the City Council has established the following public review and adoption schedule: REVISED PUBLIC REVIEW AND ADOPTION SCHEDULE — SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLES 1 THROUGH 9 ❑ January 26, 2004 — City Council hold's first reading and introduces ordinance to adopt by reference Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. ❑ January 27, 2004 — Copies of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code will be provided to all libraries and made available at the City Clerk's . office for public review and to allow comments to be provided to the Director of Development Services by March 26, 2004. ❑ February 23, 2004 - Copies of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code will be posted on the City's website in a PDF format for public review Z.1My Documents\MUNICODE12004 Code Adoption.Pubhc Comment Memo 2.docUMO2 -20 -04 Memorandum re: Public Review Process for Adoption of Titles 1 -9, Seal Beach Municipal Code February 20, 2004 and to allow comments to be provided to the Director of Development Services by April 5, 2004. At this time a side -by -side comparison of Titles 1 through 9 in PDF format will also be posted on the City's website and made available at all libraries and the City Clerk's office. ❑ April 5, 2004 — Close of public review and comment period for proposed Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. ❑ April 26, 2004 — City Council holds second reading and Adopts Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. This assumes that no significant changes are made based on public comments received by the City that would require re- introduction of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. If significant changes are made based on public comments, re- introduction of Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code would occur at this meeting. ❑ May 26, 2004 — Effective date of newly adopted Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code. Titles 1 through 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code cover the following general subject areas: ❑ Title 1 — General Provisions ❑ Title 2 - Elections ❑ Title 3 - Administration ❑ Title 4 — Revenue and Finance ❑ Title 5 — Business Licenses and Regulations ❑ Title 6 - Franchises ❑ Title 7 — Public Peace, Morals and Welfare ❑ Title 8 — Vehicles and Traffic ❑ Title 9 — Public Property, Public Works, and Building Regulations Please forward any comments regarding Titles lthrough 9 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code to Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services by 5:00 PM on Monday, April 5, 2004. Comments may be provided by letter, FAX or e -mail as indicated: Mail Address: Lee Whittenberg Director of Development Services 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Telephone: (562) 431 -2527, extension 313 FAX Number: (562) 431 -4067 E -Mail Address: Ihittenberg @ci.seal - beach.ca.us 2004 Code Adopbon.Public Comment Memo 2 2 -- - - - •' - t - r - ' °° tii: + x - � %s' = ~-V V 4" �s - .st' Z=4..a : ":- lam ° tars : ,:.; :t - -ft,22e' 5 '-:"' : ier - - - -i. - - -4•_° - -- T 'T - �2 :,i v�. � � h ':rr�' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Jerry Doming tez mosms1 EDISON Red on Manager Public Affairs An EDISON INTERNATIONAL'" Company John Bahorski April 8, 2004 City Manager City of Seal Beach 211 8 St. Seal Beach Ca 90740 -= -• - =. - • -- - : _ Ref_ T Title 6 Franchises,- video, telecommunications draft & Title 9 Public Works - _ � _ - -..=::„...:..._-,‘ - ..- -- „3;f:.12-;,; - . - -- - - - - • - i.,...-; � _ - _ - - - - • r' - - _ - - Dear Mr. Baho My meeting with Lee Whittenberg was very helpful in framing some of the issues contained in the revisions of the code. Considering the number of pages and revisions I would again respectfully request that these two areas be pulled from consideration at the April 26 council meeting until we can arrange a meeting between the city and stakeholders involved. A number of sections under the franchise area refer to "other utilities" which could result in a conflict with Edison's existing franchise. Areas of shared trenches, landscaping, size and colors of equipment, franchise assignment or sale, and defective street work do not appear to specifically exclude city franchised utilities where these issues are covered in detail. With regard to the Title 9 Public Works portion we would like more time to study the 99 pages of changes including the segments on excavation and encroachments since our franchise agreement might again come into play with the proposed changes. I appreciate your help in this matter. Sincere , ( — -ex ..- / r . , Cc: City Attorney ■ 7333 Balsa Ave Westminster. CA 92683 714-895-0271 Fax 714 -895 -0188 • David L. Mieike Orr OF SErl BPACH National Municipal Affairs Manager AP ; 8 ?OM LaPAr3TMENT veri q DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Mail Code: HQE02E70 . 600 Hidden Ridge P.O. Box 152092 Irving, TX 75038 April 9, 2003 Phone 972 718 -3435 • Fax 972 719 -7948 david.mielke@verizon.com Mr. Lee Whittenberg Director of Development Services City of Seal Beach 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Subject: DRAFT FRANCHISE ORDINANCE Dear Mr. Whittenberg: Thank you for the opportunity to respectfully submit Verizon California Inc.'s ( "Verizon ") comments on the City of Seal Beach Franchise Ordinance. Verizon agrees with the . City's authority to manage the right -of -way; however, Verizon believes that various requirements of the ordinance are invalid under state and federal law.' These items are outlined below. Article 6.10.070 (A)(1)(a) &(b) — This section should be deleted. Requirements to review information on available facilities and to provide a written statement describing the efforts made to obtain the right to use excess capacity exceeds the cities' authority to manage the right -of -way as a decision whether to issue a permit based on such 1 The Federal Communications Commission ( "FCC ") and several federal courts have found ordinances similar to Seal Beach to be unlawful under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. See, In The Matter of: TCI Cablevision or Oakland County, Inc., 1998 WL (F.C.C. Sep 04, 1998) (No. FCC 98 -216), 'Troy"; TCG New York, Inc. v. City of White Plains, N.Y., 125 F. Supp. 2d 81 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) "White Plains "; Bell Atl. v. Prince George's County, 49 F. Supp. 2d 805 (D.Md. 1999)(imposition of burdensome requirements and the vesting of significant discretion in local g overnment to grant or deny permission to use right -of -way), vacated on other grounds, 212 F.3d 863 (4 Cir. 2000), "Prince George County"; City of Auburn v. Qwest Corporation, 247 F.3d 966, modified, 260 F.3d 1160 (9 Cir. 2001), "Auburn"; Qwest Communications • Corp. v. City of Berkeley, 146 F. Supp. 2d 1081, 1092 (N.D. Cal. May 23, 2001), `Berkeley'; X/O Missouri, Inc. and Southwestern Bell Telephone Company v. City of Maryland Heights ( "Maryland Heights "), No. 4:99 -CV -1052 CEJ, issued on February 5, 2002; AT &T Communications of Southwest. Inc. v. City of Austin, 42 F. Supp. 2d 708,711 n. 4 (S.D. Tex. 1998), vacated as moot due to an intervening Texas statute (235 F.3d 241 (5 2000)): ;"Austin"; and AT &T Communications of Southwest, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 8 F. Supp. 2d 582, 588 (N.D. Tex. 1998) "Dallas" . Mr. Whittenberg — City of Seal Beach, CA April 9, 2004 Page 2 of 5 information is unlawful in that it attempts to manage how a telecommunication provider provisions its services and dictates that a provider must lease facilities rather than building and owning such facilities. Ownership of its telecommunication facilities allows Verizon to maintain the necessary control and flexibility to efficiently and effectively provide its customers with the services, and within the timeframes, that are mandated by the California Public Utility Commission ( "CPUC "). Specifically, Verizon is required to provide services to any business or resident within 30 days of any request. In addition, the leasing of capacity would impose uneconomical annually recurring expense obligations thatare contrary to Verizon's policy to construct facilities through capital type expenditures. This allows Verizon to own and maintain such facilities without the obligations that a lease imposes. Any requirements to purchase excess capacity would significantly and possibly negatively impact the operations of Verizon's business. Accordingly, as a facility based provider it is not Verizon's policy to lease excess capacity from 3� parties, as it is impossible to fulfill the requirements of the CPUC if Verizon must rely on others for the provisioning of telecommunication services. Article 6.10.070 (A)(1)(c) - The requirement to provide mapping information in an electronic -data format to be specified by the City should be changed to an electronic - data format as maintained in the ordinary course of business as a provider will not maintain different formats for each city that requests data of this nature. Article 6.10.070 (A)(1)(d) - This requirement should be deleted for the reason as outlined in Article 6.10.070 (a) &(b) above. In addition, it provides the City with the unfettered discretion to adopt requirements that are unrelated to the management of the right -of -way which was determined to be unlawful by the courts in the Qwest v. Auburn and Qwest v Berkeley decisions. Furthermore, to the extent that such requirement does not apply to all entities, including the City, that utilize the ROW is unreasonable and unlawfully violates Section 7901.1(b) of the California Public Utility Code. Notwithstanding the above, any authority for the City Manager to develop rules should require that a consultative process be established that will provide all affected utility and other service providers with reasonable advance notice and an opportunity to review and to comment on those policies and procedures prior to their implementation. Furthermore there should be a requirement for such rules to be approved, in a public hearing, by the City Council as an amendment to this ordinance. Accordingly, Verizon requests that the following be added as the last paragraph of Section 6.10.070 With regard to the policies and procedures to be developed by the City Manager in accordance with the authority delegated by paragraph (A), and the public works department in accordance with the authority delegated by paragraph (B) the City Manager /public works department shall ensure that a consultative process is Mr. Whittenberg — City of Seal Beach, CA April 9, 2004 Page 3 of 5 established that will provide all affected utility and other service providers with reasonable advance notice and an opportunity to review and to comment on those policies and procedures prior to their implementation. Such comments may address, without limitation, consistency with statutory and regulatory mandates and potential financial or technological burdens attributable to those policies and procedures. The City Manager /public works department will consider all comments submitted before exercising its discretion concerning the adoption and implementation of these policies and procedures. Furthermore, the respective policies and procedures as outlined in this subsection (D) shall be approved by the City Council and become an amendment to this ordinance prior to being implemented by the City Manager /public works department. Article 6.10.070 (A)(3) — This requirement should be deleted. A requirement of this nature imposes a barrier to entry to both provision telecommunication services and to • maintain the provisioning of such services as may be required of Verizon as the carrier of last resort. As a carrier of last resort, Verizon has limitations on the time in which it can provision services that are requested throughout the city. If a new customer moves into the city or an existing customer needs the likes of additional capacity or a private network, Verizon cannot be required to delay the provisioning of such services until the next "window ". As an alternative, in addition to deleting this section, Verizon proposes that Section 6.10.070(A)(2) be modified to read as follows: The City Manager is directed to ensure that all utility and other service providers, including telephone corporations and cable system operators, comply with all local design, construction, maintenance, and safety standards that are consistent with state and federal laws and regulations and that are contained within, or are related to, any permit that authorizes the construction of facilities within•the public rights -of -way, which standards may address without limitation, the following: restrictions on scheduled working hours in order to minimize adverse impacts on traffic circulation and on holiday shoppers; new construction within arterial or collector streets that have recently been resurfaced; advance information concerning City plans to reconstruct, rehabilitate, or maintain arterial or collector streets; insurance requirements; and the restoration or repair of damage to streets and public rights -of -way. Mr. Whittenberg — City of Seal Beach, CA April 9, 2004 Page 4 of 5 Verizon believes that this addition preserves the city's authority to manage the right of way without imposing unlawful barriers and allow Verizon to fulfill its responsibilities as the carrier of last resort. Article 6.10.070 (B)(3) — This section should be deleted. A requirement to identify the owner of the above ground facilities is unreasonable, unnecessary and would impose significant unnecessary costs on telecommunication providers. This requirement is unnecessary, as the City currently knows the owner of a facility through the construction permitting process and the associated mapping requirements. It would also be confusing as it would necessitate for poles and other facilities to have the names and numbers of all the providers that occupy the facility creating an unsightly object. Furthermore this requirement seems to have been made without discussing the extent of the problem with the facility based providers. Article 6.10.070 (B)(5) - The requirement to limit the number of aboveground facilities that can be installed in a geographical area should be deleted as a requirement of this nature is discriminatory and an unlawful barrier to entry as it will require new entrants to incur greater costs for the provisioning of facilities than that is required of existing providers. Furthermore, a requirement of this nature will discourage technological enhancements and the ability of the citizens-of Seal Beach to receive advanced telecommunications services due to the additional cost of undergrounding such facilities. Furthermore, to the extent that such requirement does not apply to all entities, including the City, that utilize the ROW is unreasonable and unlawfully violates Section 7901.1(b) of the California Public Utility Code. Article 6.10.070 (B)(6) - The requirement for limitations upon the dimensions or volume of above ground facilities should be deleted as such requirements are driven by the manufacturers specifications and the number of customers that are necessary for Verizon to provide service. Any restrictions on the dimensions or volume will impact Verizon's ability to provision advanced telecommunication services to the citizens of Seal Beach. Article 6.10.070 (B)(7) - The requirement for the specification of colors of aboveground facilities should be modified by adding "as are available from the manufacturer as utilized by the service provider" after "colors ". This change is necessary as each manufacturer of above ground facilities has a limited selection of available cabinet/facility colors and if a cabinet/facility is painted over the warranty becomes void. Article 6.10.070 (C) - This section should be deleted, as the requirement is unnecessary because state law along with Verizon's tariff specifically outline requirements for undergrounding of above ground facilities and the party that is responsible for such costs. Mr. Whittenberg - City of Seal Beach, CA April 9, 2004 Page 5 of 5 Article 6.10.075 - This section should be deleted as such penalties with respect to telecommunication providers has been determined to be an unlawful barrier to entry in violation of Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1934, as revised by numerous courts including: Qwest v. Auburn, ATT v. Dallas, ATT v. Austin, Prince George County v. Bell Atlantic, X/O & SBC v. Maryland Heights, MO. The requirements of the telecommunication section of this ordinance are identical to ordinances that Verizon has encountered in other cities in California. Verizon identified the same issues and the respective city worked with Verizon to revise the ordinance. The revisions are the basis for most, if not all, of the above requested changes. Accordingly, Verizon requests that the City hold a workshop to resolve the above issues prior to bringing the ordinance to the city council. If you have any questions, please call me at 972 - 718 -3435. Sincerely, /70 41 e, # / , .. / \41, 0 - 4/ 7 " - - - _. _ _ j L. Mielke National Municipal Affairs Manager c: Distribution List • Mr. Whittenberg — City of Seal Beach April 9, 2004 c: Distribution List Laverne Davis — Verizon, Thousand Oaks, CA Jim Greene — Verizon, Sacramento, CA Lyn Kamerman — Verizon, Irving, TX !, Mike Murray — Verizon, Long Beach, CA Richard Stewart — Verizon, Irving, TX Lee Whittenberg From: TAGAYUN, CAROL (PTHC) [ct1417 @sbc.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:53 AM To: Lee Whittenberg Subject: City Code Mr. Whittenberg, Due to organizational changes here, I have recently taken responsibility for Seal Beach representing Community & Governmental relations for SBC. • I am in the process of reviewing Title 6 of the proposed 2004 code. Please add me to your contact and e -mail list. Thanks. Carol Tagayun SBC Area Manager, External Affairs 1442 Edinger Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 Office - 714- 259 -6657 Fax - 714 - 259 -6698 E -Mail: ct1417 @sbc.com 1 Municipal Code Update Page 1 of 1 Lee Whittenberg From: Gonzalez, Jennifer [ JenGonzalez @semprautilities.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:49 PM To: Lee Whittenberg Cc: John Bahorski Subject: Municipal Code Update Hi Lee: I just spoke with John Bahorski and he suggested that I send you an email with any comments pertaining to the Seal Beach Municipal Code update since it will be considered for adoption on Monday. I understand that this update is the first since 1961 and is argely just a "clean -up" of existing regulations. As you know, the Gas Company has a Franchise Agreement with the City and are subject to many of the public works permit regulations. I was hoping that the 2 sections pertaining to the Gas Company (Title 6 and Title 9) could be pulled from the Council Agenda to allow more time for review. If that is not a possible option, we would still like the opportunity to provide comments or even propose changes where necessary. Mr. Bahorski mentioned that you might be conducting a meeting with other interested utilities to discuss any revisions to the code. I would love to be included in such a meeting. Please let me know when /where this might take place. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jennifer Gonzalez Public Affairs Manager The Gas Company, a Sempra Energy Utility 1919 S. State College Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92806 714-634-3054 (ph) 714 - 937 -7712 (fax) 4/91/9004 = y__ RP J ;r - r 1 lo' Q, . CITY HALL 211 EIGHTH STREET SEAL BEACff CALIFORI�ICtt 907=40 - ;'(562) 431 -2527 . www.ci- seal- beacfi.cns; c ri sit q =7.. -, l ' -E�" '_ ms `s i._ � ?i4 1 i, ;� e�. �:_ ,: :,1 r ' r cT -� K z - � _.: ' y x v a' '..r 3 c—j`i r , --�a w£ f' � / }^wt .-. h „ t' f 1 �. .0 c Y. 5,a �. - _ :» xc tt:r . ?�� -4e ' .--' r..;b r' s:. .., .:,;,' -.. n . cam :-'l , i -v' , I .,;: -.3 Cir - : :-. ri.;; ',', i ;7 ”.•, " :7∎ .ai;;- t ,rF < _. C-x .- " , . _ :I. , ,:t ;7: April 13, 2004 Mr. Jerry Dominguez Region Manager, Public Affairs Southern California Edison 7333 Bolsa Avenue - Westminster, CA 92683 Dear Mr. Dominguez: Thank you for your letter of April 8, 2004 concerning the proposed Municipal Code changes to Titles 6 and 9. As you are aware these code changes are part of a comprehensive review of the Seal Beach Municipal Code that has been underway for over two years. Numerous workshops were held and the City has extended the period of time between the first and second readings of the adopting - ordinance in order to receive comments. As you indicated in your letter my staff has been meeting with Edison representatives to address their concerns, and we will continue that practice until you fully understand the proposed changes. In reviewing your request for continuance, you suggest that there are 99 pages of changes in Title 9, but these are not necessarily changes to the existing code but rather a comparison of the old Municipal Code format versus the new with very few changes. Your request is so open -ended that the approval of the Municipal Code could be substantially delayed. At this point in time, my recommendation to City Council will be to adopt the entire Municipal Code Titles 1 through 9 as proposed. Staff will explain to Council -that several areas may require clean-up revisions and those changes will come back to City Council for approval. This approach will allow you the additional time needed for review April 13, 2004 Mr. Jerry Dominguez Region Manager, Public Affairs Southern California Edison Page 2 and meet with staff to discuss your concerns. Following this process any changes agreed upon by staff can then be developed into a clean-up ordinance to Titles 6 and 9. • Si r p ly, J B. Bahorski ity Manager C: Quinn Barrow Lee Whittenberg Doug Dancs