BbTF Minutes 07-28-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

• Catharine—NCDOT has rep as being slow; other permitting issues to consider—requirement that company can only block traffic on certain roads for a specific amount of time • Terri—get a jump by submitting engineering docs early; be proactive • Jim—incumbent on providers to tell us what their permitting process is, have exact knowledge of what it costs and how long it takes; ask vendors what specific training they're going to want to make available; • McKee—ACTION -ask our Planning staff to provide a memo of potential permitting delays and ways to expedite the permitting process (for H'boro, Chapel Hill, Mebane, etc); believes that Planning will have good handle on what other companies have done before-what they needed to do and how long did it take- ? • Comm Greene—have laid fiber recently in H'boro; how did that go? Jim—vendor says H'boro slowing down the permitting process; wasn't county slowing process, it was DOT; Netplanner lays fiber and connects buildings • Jim—towns (Chapel Hill and Carrboro)got google fiber; can go to Planning Dept as well as go to the towns;Todd—going to Town and County planning folks and ask about road construction that's coming in the future (master plan)—providing that info to vendor will help speed up the engineering process • Todd—asks Terri to elaborate on problems with Google; problems were on town's side;towns were overwhelmed with permitting requests; need a compromise between way permit requests come in and dept being able to do their regular jobs; define SLAB • Terri—invite Planning Depts and NCDOT to meeting to discern what will be needed for this project and anticipated bottlenecks; ACTION—Jim ask Craig B and/or staff(Michael Harvey?)to present about OC Permitting; is it possible to reduce SLA from 90 days to 60 days for example? • Catharine-question on training—are we saying there would be another line in the RFP regarding training? ACTION—see what OC did with Warnock???And what Durham Tech might be able to do?—on the job training program at Durham Tech • Victoria—ACTION—will check with Dean about training (currently has line training); asks Travis to provide what sort of training—Victoria and Travis to talk 7/29 • Terri—talk to OC and Alamance high schools for training • Comm Greene—how do we go forward without knowing where extra money is going to come from? Catharine—12 companies showed up with just knowing$5 million; suggests asking vendor for a match (skin in the game) • Todd—OC won't own fiber for$5 million; possibly some strands; will lose some of the smaller vendors if require a matching contribution • Catharine—need to figure out what model we're looking for re: County ownership; likely not OC owning fiber • Travis—RFP needs "claw back" clause for clawing back grant money; right of first refusal if they sell/close; Comm McKee—claw back gives us some leverage; doesn't see owning fiber • Pat Hull—to what extent can we put burden on vendors to come back with a plan (x numbers of households by x date)—they come up with schedule=> permitting will take x length of time; # of households will be; will cost x$$? If it's all just about the$$, may rule out smaller vendors; Jim describes it as a reverse auction strategy—don't put all weight on cost • Jim—ACTION hopes to have scoring/weighting matrix fleshed out in 2 weeks; probably want monetary requirement (match, etc) and ownership to be negotiable via scoring and weighting; RFP will be soliciting feedback, have to have criteria for interviews (must have 3 vendors versus 2, for example); can ask if vendor has allowed ownership before? • Catharine—vendors asked for 90 days for engineering study