I know I can find a lot of contractors (general and sub) for one-off instances, but I didn’t know if anyone on FHB happens to specializes in or has a focus on developing planned communities (i.e. subdivisions). Have a couple of questions about planned communities and local codes, ordnances, etc.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
From building boxes and fitting face frames to installing doors and drawers, these techniques could be used for lots of cabinet projects.
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Fine Homebuilding Magazine
Fine Home Building
Follow
-
Fine Homebuilding
Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.
Start Free Trial Now -
GBA Prime
Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.
Start Free Trial Now
- Home Group
- Antique Trader
- Arts & Crafts Homes
- Bank Note Reporter
- Cabin Life
- Cuisine at Home
- Fine Gardening
- Fine Woodworking
- Green Building Advisor
- Garden Gate
- Horticulture
- Keep Craft Alive
- Log Home Living
- Military Trader/Vehicles
- Numismatic News
- Numismaster
- Old Cars Weekly
- Old House Journal
- Period Homes
- Popular Woodworking
- Script
- ShopNotes
- Sports Collectors Digest
- Threads
- Timber Home Living
- Traditional Building
- Woodsmith
- World Coin News
- Writer's Digest
Replies
Past 5 years we have worked for a developer. Two townhome projects, one 200 units on 18 acres & the present 225 units on 30 acres.
We were in charge of All of the Water,Sewer, Elect, Gas,Storm water system, Streets & Bridge work.
I might be able to answer some of your questions.
What don't you like about developements and developers? DanT
Damn, Dan- that's cold......lol.
Bob
I never said I had any problems overall. :)
LOL.Speak the truth, or make your peace some other way.
Software developer -- does that count?
happy?
Nuke, I can't claim to be an expert because I'm now in the process of doing my first subdivision. I've spent some considerable time in the clerk's office lately though....
Shoot those questions out...there's always someone that knows something about this sort of stuff.
blue
Blue, I think I need to take you out to lunch. I would like to follow the path you're on. While I enjoy what i'm doing now,I dont wish to die with a hammer in my hand.
Name the place and the time. I think your operating in Warren and I'm flying near there quite often these days.
I'm scheduled to start back on a job site sometime next week, so we better hurry. I'm going to be busy with carpentry and property stuff.
blue
I may have a day this week, probably wednesday. Yeah, i'm in warren. Maybe we can hit a coney island or something, i'll let you know.
Or actually, if you're coming this way anyhow, stop on by my Ferndale property. Its still on the market. Are you in town tomorrow? I have two morning appointments then i'm free.
Edited 3/24/2006 10:10 pm ET by MSA1
Were going to have to exchange numbers to make a connection.
My cell is 586 292 7974
Jim
aka blue
Heres mine: 586-709-4853
Mark.
Call if you're in the area or i'll give you this week when I free up.
Mark, you are on my schedule.
blue
Sounds good. I give you a call tues or wed.
I don't have any paper handy, so I'll write those down on this men's room wall.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
Great, I guess that means i'll still get calls even in the slow season.
Jim/Blue, thanks for the offer. I'll take anything learned as an example of localized (city/county/state) that you are in. :)
I'm curious as to what the local governing bodies require of a developer when you setup to building a planned community in that controlling bodies' neck of the woods. I take it there are sewer or septic requirements, maybe storm-drain, electrical (service entrance and street lighting), plumbing (water into), roadways, easements, maybe even lot layout constraints, what can be landscaped (treed, graded), and so on and so forth.
I am curious if you are limited in what you might wish to put into the ground for those planned homes that otherwise would PSC/PUC-approval. For instance, telephone company and cable companies are approved to place their infrastructure into these planned communities using the 'right of way'. But what if you, the builder, wanted to run jacketed fiber optic cable trunks from the mouth of the planned community and have fiber-optic pairs run to each planned home?
If you attempt to place this in the 'right of way' inside the planned community do you have to seek PSC/PUC-approval? If you do, is this only if you intended to use the right of way (what if you chose to run these fiber optics through the non-easements)?
Thats a good question Nuke! I kinda figured you'd be asking something that would be way over my head! LOL! That's okay, though because its a qood question that I want to know the answer to.
My first instinct would be to say that the utility companies won't allow a private network of cables or pipes buried in their easements. In the future, if they had to dig, they wouldn't know to get your stuff staked out. I would think that the PUD would be able to set aside the area adjoining the right of way for their own easement area.
The next time I'm in the planner's office, I'm going to ask this question. She probably won't know the answer, but she'll know who I need to talk to to get my question answered.
blue
"If you attempt to place this in the 'right of way' inside the planned community do you have to seek PSC/PUC-approval? If you do, is this only if you intended to use the right of way (what if you chose to run these fiber optics through the non-easements)?"When you layout the developement you can put your own easements anywhere that you want. You could run the FO down the middle of each lot. Of course that may make them a "little" hard to sell <G>.I don't know the details, but around my area I know that one of the suburban cities has basic zoning rules that requre so much land per house, certain amount of landscaping, etc.However, they also all for planed developements where the same amount of land might be used for same amount of houses. But it allows for smaller lot size and the additional land be used for green spaces - trails, parks, ponds, etc.I have heard of developments the developer supplies (or license) cable and internet and it HS internet is limited to that provider. Don't know how they do that.First you need to look at what the state will allow. But also how the developement is platted. Although it might be sold as individual homes the exterior and land could still be owned by a condo association.Probably lots of variations.
I do work for a large commercial developer. Typically, you cannot run private utilities in an easement dedicated to a utility. This is dependent upon how the easement is granted and titled. For example, we have a pipeline running underground through our front yard. The easement is such that we cannot have trees of certain species or sizes within the easement. On one project, we had to move the water meter vault about 6' because it was inside of the county water company easement. It ended up on private property which caused a problem with the city water company (who actually read the meter - the city bought the county's water and resold it). We ended up having to grant a second easement for the city to be able to access the meter.
As far as having a single utility company allowed and purchasing the utility for resale(cable, HS internet, etc), IMHO it sounds like a large headache with maintenance issues, pricing, billing, collecting, etc. But I'm sure there are some companies out there who provide this service, for a fee :)
Folks, I think some of you may be misinterpreting what I am seeking. I do not wish to restrict or prohibit and existing utility company from continuing to install their twisted-pair (telco) or coax (cable). I only wish to add to these physical infrastructures some fiber optical cable. The cable trunk at the mouth of the planned community would unbundle to feed each home in the community, and each unbundled fiber-pair be owned by the respective homeowner.
So, the resident phone company can still offer voice and DSL over their installed twisted-pair. Likewise, the resident cable company can still offer their video and cablemodem service over their coax. But, if the homeowner and either the cable company or telephone company come to a private, one-to-one, agreement to use the homeowner's installed fiber then the telephone company can now easily offer fiber-based video service if they happen to have fiber just outside the subdivision.
So, this isn't a replacement of infrastructure, but rather an added infrastructure, but where the NID (network interface device, or demarcation point between provider and homeowner's property) is no longer at the side of the house, but at the mouth of the subdivision.
In a sense what you have is a fiber optic condominium -- property that's held in common by the property owners, as a green space or tennis court might be. It might be best to approach this through condominium laws.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
Dan, while I think your approach is interesting and worth investigating, I cannot help but think that someone out there will find nothing common about individually owned cables. Is it just because an added cable would need to run either through someone else's property, in an easement, or right or way, that makes complex?
Also, I'm curious as to the current environments by municipalities considering that many of them are deploying municipal broadband infrastructure in the last mile to compete against private enterprise. I'd find it surprising that the municipality would prohibit new competition while it, itself, brings competition to the telephone and cable companies.
Also, couldn't these cables be done in non-road side of properties? Looking at my planned community, the only cul de sacs are at road termination points--as opposed to nothing but cul de sacs. Most of the properties butt up against one another at the backyards. That abutment seems like a nice place for non-telco/cableco interference.
The individual fibers may be individually owned, but the cables and conduits they run in won't be, and it's those conduits you're really burying. Suppose in the future someone wants to pull out their fiber and put in fiber that can maintain a terabit data rate? Suppose that one fiber goes bad, so a spare needs to be allocated? Or suppose the conduit develops a leak and needs to be repaired? These are the types of issues that one deals with in a condominium situation.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
Dan, you provide another good point. I guess then it would be wise to retain the NID on the side of the house and to make the fiber from the side of the house to the mouth of the subdivision the common property as suggested. BTW, I'm trying to determine what application within the next 15-20 years would require a terabit (to the home) beyond the mouth of the subdivision.
Currently, HDTV in common video encoded form (that most providers are seeking to use in IPTV) is about 9Mbps. Even with 200 HD TV channels that is only a multicast of 1800 Mbps, or 1.8 Gbps. This is well within the abilities of todays Single-Mode Fiber. In fact, the 10 Gbps ability over 1 Gbps is nothing more than the plugs that you insert into a router's card and in which the same fiber gets attached to.
Getting more technical, I can example how Mitsubishi has started production on 10 Gbps (10GigE) 'plugs' for Extended Long Range (XLR) that can transmit at 80 kilometers (~50 miles). This makes it relatively easy to multicast a couple of gigabits of data streams under a 200-channel simultaneous broadcast down a fiber optic pipe.
The biggest bandwidth application right now is HD television. HDTV came along in 1995, but I doubt a revision to this UHDTV before 2020. Conversely, the other applications thus far use less bandwidth. But, the luxury of cheap video deployment and transmission is not easily or reliably achieved with copper and satellite. The interference, crosstalk, and rainfade issues in themselves require jumping through hoops, and grow is limited requiring continual upgrading of infrastructure.
Comcast even stated that they could get Fios*-like bandwidth to the home by coupling RG6 coax cables, but that is a Band-Aid approach based on a corporate philosophy of leveraging antiquated technologies against building new infrastructure (fiber). If the costs to them were cheap (or non-existent) then their attitudes change quickly. I've seen this at BellSouth, unfortunately.
* Fios is Verizon's marketed brand of BPON system, which is a Broadband-grade Passive Optical Network.
BTW are you familar with what your "new bosses" are doing with Lightspeeds?A lot of discussion about it on dlsreports.com including comparision to Verison's programs.
Lightspeeds? Project Lightspeed is an SBC (ok, AT&T) initiative based on using VDSL/2 (copper) into the home. Again, its is another limited-bandwidth, no fiber into the neighborhood solution that, again, seeks to leverage existing twisted-pair facilities to deliver 1/20 (at most) the bandwidth that fiber can deliver.
Why they call it 'light' speed is beyond me. Also, they've gotten critics to question their seriousness about it as their targets are falling way behind. I'd much prefer Verizon's solution of using a PON system. The SBC/BST initiatives remind me of that scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark in which Indy is confronted with a bunch of Egyptians with swords. Then a big bad dude in black comes out with the mother of all swords for their knife-fight.
What does Indy do? He shoots them with someone a little more modern. Let the telephone and cable companies have their knife fights. I'll take something a little more modern. :)
My point re the terabit fiber is simply that you could have some situation in the future where some subset of HOs want a change in the system and others don't (or don't want to pay for it). There has to be some sort of condominium authority (in a generic sense) to resolve this.A probably more realistic example would be with regard to the "head end" setup. There needs to be some sort of patch panel and possibly amplifiers, etc. That needs to be in an enclosure (building, manhole, or some sort of "outhouse" structure), and it likely needs power. Some applications that HOs may want may be incompatible with others, in terms of the head-end equipment that is used. Or if you have five different vendors connecting to the head end there may be a simple conflict over space in the enclosure.I think what you have is kind of like a shared pool -- every HO has a right to use it. Re the fiber, every HO has a right to a fiber channel. They wouldn't own the specific fiber, though, but just that right to a portion of the shared system, and they have some rules set up to manage the system without conflict. Some "authority" must decide how the system is managed and maintained.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
In telecom we call it an LGX panel, and its a pure passive device. Passive, meaning unpowered. It is what makes PON systems so damn attractive. :)
The nature of the beast would leave the LGX to patch into a service provider's equipment. Passive optical switching isn't difficult thankfully. And even if it did need power, I'm betting the telephone or cable company would rather install something at the mouth of the subdivision rather that at every house where they cannot tap power at all.
I'm just saying that if there's power then there's a meter, and someone has to pay for it every time it goes around.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
Have you thought about talking to someone at a utility (phone, cable or whomever) about doing the install for them, having them not put in their lines, or perhaps in addition to their lines, and deeding the fiber optic cables over to the utility? That may let you use their easement, possibly same trench, and it would take the maintenance and any power company charges out of the HO's hands and leave it with the utility - who may actually maintain the system.
Out of curiosity, at the end of the subdivision, is there something for the fiber to tie to?
Here I was thinking this forum was a bunch of good old boys (and girls) who could help me with the occasional problem I run into and I find you discussing high end electronics and ways to create value to the consumer that weren't even around when I was taking my electrical engineering courses. Born, raised, and living in Georgia, I am a good old boy, but it sure is nice to get the brain around a question and see all the well thought out and well reasoned opinions and ideas. I think I found a new homepage :)
Welcome Scott.
2 days and addicted to Breaktime already.
Oh you poor, poor man.
(|:>)SamT
Its sad isn't it Sam.
Another human wasting his life away....
blue
Its not that one seeks to displace an already forwarded effort, but rather make effort where no one else wishes to make one. The phone and cable companies really do not want to deploy the last-mile fiber infrastrcuture. This is where the most mileage will be generated, and incur the most costs.
The enticement, again, is to migrate the effort/costs to the home-builder as a more complete product. By displacing the costs of last-mile fiber away from the network service providers (cable/phone companies) they are more apt to deploy fiber to the mouth of the subdivision, and in turn offer the more advance killer apps.
BTW, I've found that this is not an original idea. A company out of Texas is already doing this. It looks like someone else is also willing to do what telco and cable companies are not looking to do.
Nuke,
I agree with you. I think it's a great idea.
AS the developer you have to use your imagination when doing something for the first time.
As you layout the lots, you will have to layout the RoWs.
Ya-no? with GPS you could keep each utilities ROw down to about 18" wide.
It would only need a couple of benchmarks for calibration.
SamT
I have a question. What is the typical order for installation of the water, sewer, storm drains, natural gas, electricity, and finally the common conventional telephone and cable infrastructures? Is there a rule of thumb for which come before the other?
I'm thinking that fiber jacket(s) could be run underneath what would be planned sidewalks and driveways for natural protection, but knowing the common or typical order of install-events is questionable to me.
They all get laid out generally in order of pipe size, biggest to smallest.
Drains are gravity fed (usually) so they go first.
Keep gas and electric apart.
Gas pipe can change the effective "size" of pipe with pressure. Water pipe too, in a limited way, but you can still wind up with 18" or more. Depends.
Telephone cable size is dependant on number of conductors, but is always relatively small.
TV cable is always small.
Gas, elec., telly and TV are flexible and can go anywhere, usually within inches of the surface. Gas and elec. a little deeper
The layout is the tricky part and all the above and all the flatwork and footings have to be laid out at the same time.
This is one biiiig jigsaw puzzle and not (IMHO) really for the first time DIYer (|:>)
It takes civil engineering firms a year(s) to layout the infrastructure for a couple of hundred units.
It's just like structural engineering a house. First you decide what it looks like, then you engineer it from the ridge down to the footers.
Well, first you decide the plat layout, then you engineer the utilities back to the sources/dumps.
SamT
What can be community owned depends on the locality. I believe that most anything can be as long as there is a common aspect, such as maintainance.
A common utility RoW can be set up where one like a private network was included
The deciding factor is of course, money.SamT
In 40 years of dealing with utility companies I have found that common sense and logic are not ever allowed into the conversation or planning. They each guard their easements and right of ways with every tool available.A lot like the railroads in years gone by.
I know what you mean, Pete, but I'd be catering to municipalities that are pro muni-broabdand, or at least anti-corporate establishment.
As I interpret the rules in our town you'd need a charter from the city. This may include specifics as to where in the RoW your cable is to be located. In theory other utilities must let you cross their space as needed, and must even let you share their poles if allowed by code (though you have to pay rent), but in practice the other utilities can be a PITA in terms of giving you clearance.You could not legally run your fiber through a "non-easement", since that would be occupying someone else's property without permission. But you could probably write into development rules a SEPARATE easement for your service.Whether or not the PUC gets involved probably depends on state law and several other factors, including whether one of the other utilities makes a stink.
If ignorance is bliss why aren't more people
happy?
Dan, the effort being forwarded here would actually be of great benefit to both the cable and telephone providers. Please see my last reply to Scott. By installing the infrastructure ahead of selling the community, the telephone and cable companies don't have to install their own infrastructures. The whole reason why there is so little FTTH (fiber to the home) is that the providers find it cost prohibitive. And it is easier to get that wonderful fiber installed during the communities construction than retrofit later.
The idea is that is saves and entices at the same time. It saves the utility entities the cost of deploying last-mile infrastructure, but because its still being deployed (and passively paid for by the consumer) they are more opt to sell newer services that require much greater bandwidths than copper-solutions can provide. And because the cost are embedded in the whole-house price, this still affords targeted-marketing to modern planned communities where people seel out these kinds of communities.
BTW, I took the liberty of posting a small poll on a discussion forum that would represent a typical 'targeted market consumer' and asked if they'd pay $2-3K more on a new home if it was installed with redundant, fiber-based infrastructure. Three out of four said yes. Again, this was a targeted poll--ahem, I would target Bortz Rednecks. :)