<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Dave. To summarize (which your digest will do, in a way), the network of overhead wires is more extensive than several people believe, <b><i>but</i></b> the costs to access them are likely quite steep. And that - plus resiliency - makes buried conduit more plausible. (Yes, conduit can flood or break in an earthquake, but poles actually have problem in both those scenarios, too. Plus I've experienced a Davis wind storm that broke a pole-based connection. So, buried fiber is more resilient, IMO.)<div><br></div><div>But I can't resist noting that the areas of Davis with no overhead wires would better be characterized as <b>half-vast</b>.<div><br><div><div>On Jul 24, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Dave Hart <<a href="mailto:davehart@dcn.davis.ca.us">davehart@dcn.davis.ca.us</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p><font face="Tahoma">If I missed it in the responses, I apologize,
but while there is a network of overhead wires in some of the
older areas of town, there are vast areas of Davis with no
overhead wires that would still require underground conduit.
So, there's that.</font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/24/19 12:00 PM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:davisgig-request@list.omsoft.com">davisgig-request@list.omsoft.com</a> wrote:<font color="#007316" face="monospace"><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">[snip]</span></font><br>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div><br><div apple-content-edited="true">
<div><font face="Futura">Doug Walter (home account)</font></div><div><font face="Futura"><a href="mailto:dawalter@dcn.org">dawalter@dcn.org</a></font></div><div><font face="Futura">"Wag more, bark less"</font></div>
</div>
<br></div></div></body></html>