Key Points
- Board Approval: Supervisors unanimously adopted new rules on Sept. 17 for microtrenching, a faster way to install fiber cables.
- Streamlined Expansion: The standards are designed to speed broadband growth across Pinal County at lower cost.
- Changes Made: Requirements were adjusted after company feedback, including shallower trenches and curbside placement.
- Public Safeguards: Contractors must guarantee work for two years and notify residents at least two weeks before construction.
- Industry Support: Google Fiber praised the process and said it may expand locally once agreements are finalized.
Supervisors approve ordinance allowing faster fiber optic cable installation after months of industry input
The Pinal County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved new standards Tuesday, September 17, for microtrenching, a faster method of installing fiber optic cables that could help meet the county’s growing demand for high-speed internet access. Details about the adopted standards are available on the county’s microtrenching webpage.
This decision follows months of discussions that began in June when the board first explored the technology, as previously reported by the Pinal Post. The county published final standards on August 6 after incorporating industry feedback from earlier stakeholder meetings, then held a formal public comment period through September 2, receiving no additional comments during that period.
What the Board Approved
The board adopted Ordinance No. 091725-AD25-002, which establishes minimum standards for microtrenching as a method for installing fiber optic cables in public rights-of-way. Microtrenching involves cutting narrow, shallow channels in pavement to install fiber cables, typically measuring 1 to 3 inches wide and 10 to 24 inches deep.
County Engineer Christopher Wanamaker presented the final standards to supervisors, explaining how the process evolved since the initial stakeholder meetings in May.
Industry Feedback Shapes Final Standards
The county made several key changes based on feedback from approximately 50 industry representatives during stakeholder meetings in May and July.
“The request focused around shallower depths so they could install the conduits at a faster rate and at a lower cost,” Wanamaker told supervisors.
The county accommodated this by reducing the minimum depth from 12 inches to 10 inches. Companies also requested placing microtrench installations adjacent to the curb rather than away from it, believing this provides better results and reduces pavement damage risk.
The most significant change addressed industry concerns about costs associated with the “T-top” patch method, which would have made microtrenching “quite a bit more expensive than traditional trench and bore methods,” according to Wanamaker.
New Slurry Seal Alternative
To address cost concerns, the county added a slurry seal option as an alternative to the T-top patch method.
Vice-Chairman Jeff McClure asked for clarification during the presentation: “So, we went away from the T-top and we’re allowing it next to the curb and just filling it with the goop.”
“The T-top is still an option if someone wants to use it,” Wanamaker responded, “but we are now allowing an alternate option which places the trench against the curb and instead of using the crack seal or the mastic sealer, they would just seal the entire road with a slurry seal.”
The slurry seal method involves applying a polymer-modified coating over the entire pavement surface after microtrenching is complete, eliminating the need for mastic or epoxy trench sealing.
Cost Comparison Shows Savings
Wanamaker presented data comparing microtrenching costs to other installation methods, noting that the figures represent industry averages from his research rather than exact costs from specific providers:
| Method | Distance Per Day | Cost Per Linear Foot | *Utility Strikes Per Mile |
|---|---|---|---|
| Microtrenching | 2,000-3,000 feet | $5-$10 | 0.03 |
| Microtrenching + Slurry Seal | 2,000-3,000 feet | $8-$15 | 0.03 |
| Directional Bore | 500-1,000 feet | $20-$30 | 0.11 |
| Conventional Trench | 250-500 feet | $15-$30 | 13.97 |
* Accidental damage to existing underground utilities during installation
The data shows microtrenching remains significantly less expensive than traditional methods, even with the slurry seal addition.
Detailed Specifications
The approved standards include specific requirements:
- Maximum one microtrench on each side of the road
- Trench width: minimum 1 inch to maximum 3 inches (reduced from the previously proposed 4 inches)
- Depth: minimum 10 inches to maximum 24 inches
- Top of conduit no shallower than 9 inches deep for local streets and 12 inches for collector streets
- Location: placement adjacent to the curb, added as an option based on industry feedback requesting curb placement rather than offset positioning
- Up to two conduits per trench allowed
- Backfill with flowable CLSM (low strength cementitious material)
- Tracer wire required for identification
For pavement restoration, contractors can choose between two options: a MAG T-top asphalt patch (12 to 24 inches wide, 2 inches thick minimum, extending to edge of concrete, requiring tack coat, use on any/all streets) or the new slurry seal covering the entire pavement surface, which is approved only for local and collector streets.
Safety and Quality Controls
The county built in several safeguards to protect road integrity and ensure quality installations.
“We want to make sure all other alternatives are considered before we move into a micro-trenching option, because there may be situations where a fiber optic cable could be installed in the public utility easement via traditional methods with little to no impact to the public,” Wanamaker explained. “And so we would rather have that than tearing up the pavement.”
The standards also require evaluation of existing road conditions before permits are issued. “If the road’s already in very poor condition or if it’s not suitable for micro-trenching, we’ll simply just not allow it,” Wanamaker said.
However, Chairman Stephen Miller asked about flexibility: “To the scenario where the road is so bad we’re not gonna let them put it in, could we… Maybe we can work something out to put it in and then recondition the road?”
“Yeah. There’s always opportunity to find a way to make a deal or get something to work like that,” Wanamaker responded.
Warranty and Accountability
Board members discussed warranty requirements for the installations. Supervisor Rich Vitiello asked about warranty periods for potential failures.
“I believe it’s two-year warranty, and that’s in these agreements,” Wanamaker responded, though Chairman Miller also indicated it was two years.
Will Novak from Google Fiber, speaking during public comment, noted from his company’s experience that “if it’s gonna fail, it’s gonna fail earlier than later. So that’s kind of a good thing. We haven’t had it where it’s failing 10 years down the road.”
Supervisor Mike Goodman asked who would perform warranty work. Wanamaker explained the county would call the original applicant back to address any outstanding issues using their contractor.
Public Support from Industry
Will Novak, representing Google Fiber, spoke during the public comment period, praising the county’s approach and expressing support for the new standards.
“I just really wanted to mostly make a comment to really praise Mr. Wanamaker and his team. They have been excellent,” Novak said. “He is by far the most communicative. He’s on top of it, moving at the speed of business.”
Novak described how the process brought together diverse industry opinions: “When we started this, the diversity of opinions, people were borderline yelling at each other on Zoom calls. What he wanted was different than what we would have wanted. Nobody got exactly what they wanted, but he, in a very professional manner, led it so that we all came to a reasonable compromise.”
Google Fiber hopes to expand to Pinal County soon, with Novak noting: “No one internet service provider is going to be able to build out all of Pinal County. It’s physically huge. It’s diverse. It’s rural. It’s urban. It’s everything in between.”
Novak said the county’s legal team is already looking at the license agreement, and Google Fiber is talking through those details with them. He said they’re hoping to get a license agreement approved and maybe get something announced before the end of the calendar year.
Comparison to Other Jurisdictions
Chairman Miller asked how Pinal County’s standards compare to other government agencies adopting similar requirements.
Wanamaker explained the standards are similar to others in terms of depth, width, and location requirements. “The primary difference between what we’re proposing here and what pretty much everyone else is doing is the slurry seal,” he said.
Many municipalities have adopted standards similar to Mesa’s, which requires mastic sealer or crack seal methods. “We decided to go a little bit of different direction with the slurry seal because we believe that’s a better way to deal with all the issues that may come from having this… basically a crack or a cut in the pavement,” Wanamaker explained.
He noted the slurry seal represents “a good middle ground” between basic crack sealing and the more expensive T-top method used by agencies like the Arizona Department of Transportation.
Implementation Moving Forward
The adopted ordinance references Pinal County Standard Detail Drawings PC-700-1 through PC-700-5, which provide technical specifications for contractors and installers.
The standards require that contractors must provide public notification at least 14 days in advance, using door hangers, project site signage, and a contact phone number. Construction must occur in one continuous operation to minimize public disruption, with amendments to existing license agreements with providers.
With the ordinance now approved, fiber companies can begin applying for permits under the new standards.
