ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8690-S9-200704900

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Letter

Ottawa, 18 April 2007

File No.: 8690-S9-200704900

BY E-MAIL

Mr. Jean Brazeau
Shaw Cablesystems Limited
Suite 900 , 630-3rd Avenue S.W.
Calgary , Alberta
T2P 4L4

jean.brazeau@sjrb.ca

- and -

Mr. Michael R. McAllister
Counsel for The District of Maple Ridge
Two Bentall Centre
1155-555 Burrard Street
Vancouver , British Columbia
V7X 1C4

mrm@murdymcallister.com

Dear Mr. Brazeau and Mr. McAllister:

Re:   Part VII Application by Shaw Cablesystems Limited seeking access to highways and other public places within the jurisdiction of the District of Maple Ridge

On 17 April 2007 , The District of Maple Ridge requested that the Commission adjourn Shaw Cablesystems Limited's (Shaw's) application.   The District of Maple Ridge stated that this approach would preserve all parties rights and, at the same time, would allow the parties to return to the negotiating table and attempt to resolve all outstanding issues needed to conclude a Municipal Access Agreement.

On 17 April 2007 , Shaw opposed the request for an adjournment but did not oppose a short extension of the deadlines for Answer and Reply.

Commission staff notes that in the circumstances, it would be appropriate to extend the time for Answer and Reply to April 30 and 10 May 2007 , respectively.   This extension would be consistent with the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure .   If the parties should enter into negotiations, the Commission would be prepared to consider a request by both parties to adjourn the application.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, and not merely sent, by that date.

Yours sincerely,

'Original signed by L. Fancy'

Lynne Fancy
A/Director, Competition Implementation and Technology
Telecommunications

cc:    J. Mullaney, CRTC (819) 953-5255

Date Modified: 2007-04-18
Date modified: