HomeMy Public PortalAboutDouble PolesMichael J. Driscoll
Town Manager
TOWN OF
WATERTOWN
Office of the Town Manager
Administration Building
149 Main Street
Watertown, MA 02472
Phone: 617-972-6465
Fax: 617-972-6404
www.watertown-ma.gov
townmgr@watertown-ma.gov
To: Honorable Town Council
From: Michael J. Driscoll, Town Manager
Date: July 8, 2010
RE: Double Poles
As you are aware, as indicated in the attached excerpt from the draft Town Council
Minutes and related statement from Councillor Piccirilli, the Honorable Town Council discussed
and deliberated the double pole issue at the June 22, 2010 Town Council Meeting.
Subsequent to that meeting, enclosed please find the following:
➢ June 23`d e-mail setting a meeting to discuss how best to proceed with the double pole
issue.
➢ July 7th e-mail received at 7:27 AM indicating folks from Verizon, NStar, Comcast &
RCN have committed to attend the 11:00 AM meeting the Town is hosting to discuss
double poles.
➢ July 7th e-mail received at 5:54 PM outlining the discussion from the 11:00 AM
meeting and identifying action items related to double poles.
I will bring this up under Communications from the Town Manager at the July 13, 2010
Town Council Meeting.
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Steven Magoon, Director of Community Development & Planning
Gerald S. Mee, Jr., Superintendent of Public Works
George Pizzuto, Wire Inspector
Councilor Piccirilli moved to Suspend the Rules iri order to bring
forward agenda item 8A, a) Vote on a petition by Verizon
requesting permission to relocate a joint owned pole#3/22 Arlington
Street approximately 10 feet to the north of existing pole# 3/22 in
order to provide new access to new parking spaces at 190-192
Arlington Street at the property owner's request. The motion to
bring forward the agenda item was seconded by Councilor Falkoff
and adopted by voice vote. It is noted that the agenda items was
Tabled at the June 8th meeting after a public hearing was held on
the matter.
The Chair recognized Mr. Callahan who stated that he will do
everything in his power to get the poles removed by August.
Councilor Piccirilli read a statement regarding the disposition of
old/double poles, the incomplete list of streets containing such
poles and the August 31St removal date. He noted that the town
will take action, through the attorney general's office if the August
31st deadline is not met.
Councilor Lenk noted that many other communities are facing the
same dilemma with double/old poles remaining in the ground for
years. She stated that she is looking for more of an assurance
than what she is hearing from Mr. Callahan.
Councilor Kounelis ..requested that the commitment to have them
removed by August 31St be in writing.
Councilor Falkoff asked who the town liaison will be. The Manager
indicated that he will handle the matter.
President Sideris told Mr. Callahan that he should know that
Watertown means business and that should be conveyed to his
superiors.
Councilor Piccirilli moved the approval of the petition, seconded by
Councilor Kounelis and adopted by unanimous roll call vote.
Councilor Palomba stated that he voted against tabling of the
petition at the last meeting. He noted that he has strong feelings
against using a citizen's petition, who followed all the rules, meeting
all the standards set forth in the process, but was held up because
of this long standing problem regarding old poles. He indicated
that this is not how councilors should be using their power; to
thwart someone who has followed all the rules.
5. PUBLIC HEARING AND VOTE on a proposed Order establishing
Water and Sewer Rates and Charges for Fiscal Year 2011. The
Manager provided an overview of the rates and charges noting a
vote of either a one year rate of 4.5% increase or a two year rate of
6.2% increase. The Chair opened up the hearing to the public.
Re: Verizon Petition
To: Mr. John E. Callahan Jr.; Verizon Rights -of -Way Specialist
Thank you for your prompt response to my June 8th request concerning removal of double poles in Watertown
that have been left in place for more than the 90 days allowed under M.G.L. Chapter 164 Section 34B. The list
you provided on June 11th includes 214 poles that Verizon is required to remove. I am pleased by the recent
progress that Verizon has made in the past week by completing the wire transfer in 37 locations so that old
poles can be removed.
However, please be aware that in the past two weeks, many Watertown residents have contacted me about
their frustration over how long it takes for old poles to be removed, and what an ugly blight these have become
in our neighborhoods.
Therefore, last week, I spoke to Mr. Geoffrey Why, the Commissioner of the Department of Telecommunications
and Cable, and he indicated that his department was prepared to help the Town in dealing with Verizon about
the double pole issue. I also spoke with our State Representative Jonathan Hecht, who offered to contact the
Attorney General's office to assist the Town to pursue any legal action that may be necessary to get Verizon to
complete its work within the 90 days as required by law.
Rather than resort to legal measures, I would prefer that Verizon cooperate with Watertown's DPW and Wiring
Inspector to find a solution to this problem so the old poles get removed in a timely manner. 1 am cautiously
optimistic based on progress Verizon has made this past week, but I warn that there is still much to be done. I
note two examples:
1. The list of 214 poles appears to be incomplete. From my front porch I can see a double pole that was
not on your list. It is pole VZ 251/3 located on Springfield St on the corner of Fitchburg St. The new pole
has a date stamp of September 2002, and the RCN and Comcast wires need to be transferred. This
makes me wonder how many more double poles Verizon has missed.
2. The list of poles you provided shows each company's wires that need to be transferred before the pole
can be removed. The list has only one category of "Cable" when in fact there are two cable companies
in Watertown. In most cases, it is the transfer of the RCN cable that is holding up the work. I would
suggest that this may be a source of confusion and delay, and perhaps Verizon needs to update its list to
show categories for both RCN and Comcast to indicate which company is next in sequence to transfer
their wires.
I am prepared to vote for this petition based upon your affirmative answer to two questions:
First, is Verizon committed to providing the necessary resources to remove the backlog of all double poles that
are more than 90 days old, as soon as possible, but no case later than August 31, 2010? Second, is Verizon
committed to complying with state law and removing any future double poles within the 90 day time limit?
Thank you for coming to Watertown again this evening, and I look forward to working with you for a speedy
resolution to this problem.
VincentPiccirilli, District C Councilor
June 22, 2010
Driscoll, Michael
From: Driscoll
Sent: ednesda, June 23, 2010 5:59 PM
To: Mee, Gerald; agoon, S even
Cc: Tamber, Sue; Hand, JoAnna; Osmond, Marsha
Subject: FW: Comments on Double Poles
Attachments: VP Double Pole Comments 6-22-10.pdf
Good evening; as a follow up to the discussion at today's staff meeting; lets plan on meeting @ DPW on Monday June
28 @ 1100 am to review how best to proceed with the double pole issue. The discussion should include but not limited
to coordination in the following areas; Verizon's efforts, streetlight replacement & fire alarm relocation. Thanks.
From: Vincent Piccirilli [mailto:vincent.piccirilli@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:48 PM
To: Driscoll, Michael
Subject: Comments on Double Poles
For your follow up action
i
Re: Verizon Petition
To: Mr. John E. Callahan Jr.; Verizon Rights -of -Way Specialist
Thank you for your prompt response to my June 8`" request concerning removal of double poles in Watertown
that have been left in place for more than the 90 days allowed under M.G.I. Chapter 164 Section 34B. The list
you provided on June 11th includes 214 poles that Verizon is required to remove. I am pleased by the recent
progress that Verizon has made in the past week by completing the wire transfer in 37 locations so that old
poles can be removed.
However, please be aware that in the past two weeks, many Watertown revidents have contacted me about
their frustration over how long it takes for old poles to be removed, and what an ugly blight these have become
in our neighborhoods.
Therefore, last week, I spoke to Mr. Geoffrey Why, the Commissioner of the Department of Telecommunications
and Cable, and he indicated that his department was prepared to help the Town in dealing with Verizon about
the double pole issue. I also spoke with our State Representati'M Jonathan Hecht, who offered to contact the
Attorney General's office to assist the Town to pursue any legal action that may be necessary to get Verizon to
complete its work within the 90 days as required by law.
Rather than resort to legal measures, I would prefer that Verizon cooperate with Watertown's DPW and Wiring
Inspector to find a solution to this problem so the old poles get removed in a timely manner. I am cautiously
optimistic based on progress Verizon has made this past week, but I warn that there is still much to be done. I
note two examples:
1. The list of 214 poles appears to be incomplete. From my front porch -I can see a double pole that was
not on your list. It is pole VZ 251/3 located on Springfield St on the corner of Fitchburg St. The new pole
has a date stamp of September 2002, and the RCN and Comcast wires need to be transferred. This
makes me wonder how many more double poles Verizon has missed.
2. The list of poles you provided shows each company's wires that need to be transferred before the pole
can be removed. The list has only one category of "Cable" when in fact there are two cable companies
in Watertown. In most cases, it is the transfer of the RCN cable that is holding up the work. I would
suggest that this may be a source of confusion and delay, and perhaps Verizon needs to update its list to
show categories for both RCN and Comcast to indicate which company is next in sequence to transfer
their wires.
I am prepared to vote for this petition based upon your affirmative answer to two questions:
First, is Verizon committed to providing the necessary resources to remove the backlog of all double poles that
are more than 90 days old, as soon as possible, but no case later than August 31, 2010? Second, is Verizon
committed to complying with state law and removing any future double poles within the 90 day time limit?
Thank you for coming to Watertown again this evening, and I look forward to working with you for a speedy
resolution to this problem.
Vincent Piccirilli, District C Councilor
June 22, 2010
Driscoll, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Tom Steel [Tom.Steel@rcn.net
ndrew.Balta ns ar.com
'Neven.Rabadjija@nstar.com; Ken Bates; Driscoll, Michael; Thomas Hamilton
Re: Comments on Double Poles
Thanks Andy. I plan on attending and will make your points. Is NSTAR fully up to speed as to NSTARCOM's role in
moving RCN network?
Great week for vacation. Enjoy
From: Balta, Andrew <Andrew.Balta@nstar.com>
To: Tom Steel
Cc: Rabadjija, Neven <Neven.Rabadjija@nstar.com>; Ken Bates; mdriscoll@watertown-ma.gov <mdriscoll@watertown-
ma.gov>; Thomas Hamilton
Sent: Wed Jul 07 07:20:20 2010
Subject: RE: Comments on Double Poles
Hi Tom,
I am on vacation this week and therefore will not be attending.
We monitor the double pole databse and assign pole transfer work accordingly. I did check the database this morning
and see that there are 6 poles RCN "BIC". When I return to the office I'll get the 6 poles and any new ones, inspected
and trasnsferred. The 6 poles are listed below.
Michael, if you are aware of any additional poles, please let us know and we'll take care of them. As you know the PLM
database is the most efficient way to identify and schedule pole transfer work.
PLM ID Municipality Street Tel RouteTel Pole Elec Elec Pole
Owner
Pole Stage
Route Pole O
220107WATERTOWNACTON ST 181 9 181 9 Double VERIZON
Pole
242081WATERTOWNACTON ST 181 21 Double VERIZON
Pole
200895WATERTOWNELIOT ST 45 I Double VERIZON
Pole
203356WATERTOWNELIOT ST 215 3 Double VERIZON
Pole
212749WATERTOWNMARION RD 93 8 93 8 Double VERIZON
Pole
220223WATERTOWNTEMPLETON 228 12 228 12 Double VERIZON
PKWY Pole
Andy
From: Tom Steel [mailto:Tom.Steel@rcn.net]
Sent: Tue 7/6/2010 10:53 AM
To: Balta, Andrew
1
Cc: Rabadjija, Neven; Ken Bates; 'mdriscoll@watertown-ma.gov'; Thomas Hamilton
Subject: FW: Comments on Double Poles
Andy,
We have not spoken in a while, I hope all is well with you. Watertown is yet another of our towns seeking to coordinate
removal of double poles. Can I count on you to make sure that NSTARCOM clarifies to the Town that it is the only
company that may move the RCN network per our mutual agreement? In the past NSTAR has pointed at RCN as causing
delays in these matters. I trust that by now the parent understands the ongoing responsibility of its subsidiary when it
comes to moving RCN network wires to facilitate pole changeouts and the like.
Will you be attending the Watertown meeting tomorrow?
From: Driscoll, Michael [mailto:mdriscoll@watertown-ma.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:28 AM
To: Tom Steel
Subject: FW: Comments on Double Poles
Good morning Sir; thank you for leaving me a message late Friday and I am pleased we got to speak this morning. As I
indicated in our conversation a few minutes ago, the Town is hosting a meeting tomorrow morning @ 1100am at the
DPW Offices @ 124 Orchard Street to discuss the subject ( double poles ). Folks from Verizon, Nstar & Comcast have
committed to coming and I respectfully request a representative(s) from RCN join the meeting as well. Thank you for
your consideration and I will await to hear from you at some point today. — Michael.
From: Driscoll, Michael
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 1:34 PM
To: tom.steel@rcn.net
Subject: FW: Comments on Double Poles
Sir; please kindly call me @ 617-972-6465 to briefly discuss. Thanks. Michael.
From: Vincent Piccirilli [mailto:vincent.piccirilli@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:48 PM
To: Driscoll, Michael
Subject: Comments on Double Poles
For your follow up action
*************************************************************************.
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be
confidential and/or privileged. If you have received this email in error,
please do not further review, disseminate or copy it. Please delete it
and reply to the sender that you have received this message.
*************************************************************************
2
Driscoll, Michael
From:
Sent: I> ednesday July 07, 2010 5:54 PM. -'
To: Driscoll, Michael;'JOHN.E.CALLAHAN.JR@VERIZON.COM';
Frank Foss@cable.comcast.com; Lucas, Marc; ellen.m.cummings@verizon.com;
Tom.Steel@rcn.net; Andrew.Balta@nstar.com
Cc: Mee, Gerald; Haley, Mary; Pizzuto, George
Subject: double pole meeting
As a follow up to our meeting today I wanted to recap the discussion and identify the follow up that resulted.
Initially, I wanted to understand the process regarding utility poles and how it is supposed to function. It became
apparent that the utilities operate on an online database called PLM, which is where the utility pole information is kept,
and notifications are automatically generated for movement of service to each utility as the previous one has been
moved and entered in the system. This is a system that the Town has not been aware of and therefore not utilizing.
Mark Lucas of Nstar agreed to provide Watertown representatives an orientation to the system so that we can utilize it
for both notification of when our equipment needs to be moved as well as the status of other utilities. It also is
important to find out where these notifications have been going to date.
Comcast indicated that communication is the biggest issue, and that some Towns where the municipality keeps tabs
work the best. Mr. Mee suggested that the Town shouldn't be taking on a role that is Verizon's as responsible owners of
the poles. Comcast also indicated that they need more lead time for major projects to design the changes related to
fiber optic cable, which cannot be easily spliced and is more complicated than previous systems.
RCN indicated that they often get the blame for not moving their service, but they actually are precluded from moving
their service as Nstarcom (a subsidiary of Nstar) actually owns the lines and must move their wires, however they can do
limited emergency work or drops to individual homes. This also creates some confusing situations regarding
responsibility, which the Town was previously unaware of.
Verizon expressed concerns about conflicting priorities, limited resources, busy times of the year, and massive weather
events as all contributing to the persistent problems of eliminating double poles in a timely fashion. When queried
about the accuracy of the list previously generated, it was indicated that the foreman of the construction group is
responsible for entering new poles into the system, and they sometimes get missed. There also are some "chunks" that
are not on the list, as they have been reduced to a short piece of the former pole.
We all agreed that it was in everyone's interest to make some significant progress prior to reporting back to the Council.
Mr. Mee also expressed concern regarding the process needed to relocate street lights, which have to be disconnected
by Nstar, then moved by the Town, and then reconnected by Nstar. This would be much quicker if it could all be done at
one time by one entity. This is something we should revisit at a future meeting.
All agreed to report back on all progress made by August 13, so that I can then report back to the Council on what
progress has been made. We will also get the Town on the PLM system and make sure that we are part of the regular
reporting system. I will also schedule another meeting when it is warranted to further coordinate on this topic.
ACTION ITEMS
1. Nstar to provide Town representatives an introduction to PLM system
2. Watertown to determine where notifications have been going and redirect to appropriate personnel
3. All Utilities to provide corrected information to the system database to correct any errors
4. Verizon to add "chunks" to system database until removed
5. Future discussion of items to improve efficiency, like the process to relocate street lights
6. All utilities to provide substantial improvement to the outstanding list of poles that are awaiting their action and
report back to the Town on progress by August 13, 2010
Please let me know if you think I have missed an important point from the meeting or if anything is incorrect and I
appreciate your cooperation in this important matter. Lastly, I have sent this primarily to the members at the meeting,
feel free to pass along others who should be included.
Steve Magoon, Director
Community Development and Planning
Town of Watertown
149 Main Street
Watertown, MA 02472
(617) 972-6417
(617) 972-6484 fax
(617) 987-1136 cell
s magoon(7a,w a tertow n -ma. gov
2