AGENDA #4h
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Response to Questions Regarding Three-Phase Power Lines
DATE: June 24, 2002
This report responds to concerns raised by petitioners Mr. Kyle Cattani and Mr. Joe Capowski on March 25 regarding the installation of electric distribution lines related to the expansion of Carol Woods Retirement Community (Attachments 1-2). Adoption of the attached resolution would expand Special Use Permit application submittal requirements to further describe the current Utility Plan requirement and require identification of all proposed utilities on- and off-site, as well as upgrades, and the nature of any proposed improvements (above ground and underground).
On March 25, the Town Council received a report from the Manager regarding concerns about construction of overhead electric distribution lines in connection with the expansion of Carol Woods Retirement Community (Attachment 3). The report was in response to a January 14 oral petition from Mrs. Dana Cattani expressing concerns about clear-cutting, herbicide use, and the presence of three-phase power lines along the Cattani property. The Manager’s report concluded that Duke Energy had a right to clear an existing utility easement on the Cattani property; that the Cattanis may elect to be “no-spray” customers if they do not want herbicides to be used on their property; and that three-phase power lines such as those involved in the Carol Woods expansion are not required by the Development Ordinance to be placed underground.
At the March 25 meeting, Mr. Cattani and Mr. Capowski petitioned the Council regarding various aspects of electric power distribution lines and their effect on development (see Attachments 1-2). An area map including the Cattani property is included as Attachment 4. Mr. Cattani’s and Mr. Capowski’s petitions were related to a written petition introduced by the Cattanis on February 25 (Attachment 5).
On March 25, the Council referred the petition to the Manager and Town Technology Committee and requested that items regarding the Development Ordinance be referred to the Development Ordinance consultant. We also requested response from Duke Energy, which is summarized below and included as Attachment 6.
DISCUSSION
Request for Modification of Development Ordinance
Mr. Cattani petitioned the Town Council to consider the following modification to the Development Ordinance (July 2000) 14.10:
“All utility lines, including three-phase electric power distribution lines but excluding lines used only to transmit electricity between generating stations, shall be placed underground. And all surface disruptions required for installation shall be rehabilitated to the original or an improved condition.”
The current Development Ordinance allows three-phase electric power distribution lines to be placed above ground. All new power lines other than three-phase lines are required to be underground:
“All utility lines other than lines used only to transmit electricity between generating stations or substations and three-phase electric power distribution lines shall be placed underground, and all surface disruptions required for installation shall be rehabilitated to the original or an improved condition.”
Manager’s Comment: Applications for development are required to provide a Utility Plan. The Council currently does not review plans for utility distribution systems and does not usually require that three-phase power distribution lines be placed underground. The Town may require underground burial of electric distribution lines at the expense of a property developer. However, regulations established by the Utilities Commission or the National Electric Safety Code (NESC) would have precedence over any rules established by the Council.
The Utilities Commission allows Duke Energy to pass along the extra cost to the third party requesting the burial of electrical lines. The NESC permits providers to operate and construct distribution lines using “least-cost” methods, and the standard method for power distribution is overhead construction.
We understand that Duke Energy has offered the Cattanis the option of relocating the power line section along the back of their property from overhead to underground for a cost of $25,000 to $40,000. The Cattanis can file appeals with the Utilities Commission to review these cost estimates. Appeal information can be accessed on the Utilities Commission’s web site: www.ncuc.commerce.state.nc.us.
We believe that the Council could consider modification of the Development Ordinance to require that all three-phase lines being installed as part of a proposed development be buried by the developer subject to these conditions: (1) there is a rational nexus between the impact of the proposed development and the proposed utility requirement; (2) the costs of placing the utilities underground is roughly proportional to the impacts of the development on the community; (3) placing the utility underground does not violate any provisions of the electrical code or other relevant safety standard; and (4) the developer’s having the legal right to do so if the lines are off-site. We recommend that the Council direct the Development Ordinance consultant to consider this change in the Third Draft of the Development Ordinance.
Duke Energy’s Comment: Duke Energy officials confirm that standard electric service rates reflect the cost of overhead service. Duke Energy will install underground service under a plan approved by the Utilities Commission at the expense of the requesting party (see Attachment 6). Duke Energy officials state that the cost implications of such a Development Ordinance change (from overhead to underground) would be significant, explaining that an underground installation for three-phase distribution lines is often cost-prohibitive for most customers.
Occupancy Permit for Carol Woods
Mr. Cattani also petitioned the Council to withhold occupancy approval to Carol Woods' new development until his concerns about his property have been addressed.
Manager’s Comment: We do not believe that withholding of an occupancy permit is warranted. We believe that this particular issue is a private civil matter and is a subject to be addressed among the Cattanis, Duke Energy, and Carol Woods. In the opinion of the Town Attorney, the requested action would not likely be legally defensible.
Special Use Permit Process
Mr. Capowski recommended that: “The Town should employ, on an as-needed, contractual basis, an individual with competence in electrical systems who could advise the Council on development matters where utility lines are impacted.” He further asked that the Council amend the wording of the Development Ordinance to “reflect the technical and economic reality of power distribution” and that the Council rely on experts hired by the Town who have reviewed the language of the Ordinance.
Mr. Capowski clarified his request through an email that is included as Attachment 7. Mr. Capowski recommended that a consultant with knowledge of power distribution review the language of the Town’s Development Ordinance, study how other municipalities handle power distribution issues, propose potential wording, and discuss the wording with the Town and Duke Energy officials. Mr. Capowski said that the consultant should represent the Town and possibly negotiate proposed language.
Manager’s Comment: The Council does not currently review plans for utility distribution systems and does not usually require that they be placed underground. We recommend that the Council consider a procedural change to the Special Use Permit application submittal requirements to require that applicants provide an expanded utility plan with each application. Such a procedure would require an applicant to show proposed placement of all utilities on- and off-site, including upgraded lines. From this information, we believe that the accompanying effect on neighboring properties could be determined and taken into account as part of the development review process. This change would allow interested persons the opportunity to present evidence regarding whether a project and its proposed Utility Plan meet the four findings required by the Special Use Permit (including, for example, whether it is “designed to maintain the value of contiguous property”).
It is possible to contract with an electrical engineering consultant to review the Development Ordinance text, propose changes, and discuss these changes with the Town and Duke Energy officials, as requested by Mr. Capowski. However, if the Council were to implement the above submittal requirement change to the Special Use Permit process, we believe that there would be no need to take such a step. We believe an expanded utility plan would detail the effect on nearby property.
Referral to Technology Committee
Mr. Capowski suggested sending the appropriate Development Ordinance text to the Technology Committee for review and suggestions.
Manager’s Comment: We referred the relevant Development Ordinance section and the March 25 materials to the Technology Committee for comment. At the Technology Committee’s June 18 meeting, the Committee:
· Concluded that the Committee has insufficient expertise in the area of power distribution to render a technical judgment on the issue. General consensus was that it is not a feasibility issue, but one of trade-offs between aesthetics and cost.
· Concluded that this item relates to a broader issue that should be addressed in the Development Ordinance by a qualified consultant. The specific issue is how to address easements with current language so that all of our utility right-of-way needs, including fiber optic lines and future innovations, are addressed.
· Endorsed Mr. Capowski's idea that a consultant with knowledge of power distribution review the language of the Town’s Development Ordinance.
We believe that the Special Use Permit application process could be amended to provide more information about utility distribution lines so that their subsequent impact on other property can be evaluated. Adoption of the attached resolution would expand the Special Use Permit application submittal requirements to further describe the current Utility Plan requirement and require identification of all proposed utilities on- and off-site, as well as upgrades, and the nature of any proposed improvements (above ground and underground). This would allow interested persons the opportunity to present evidence regarding whether a project and its proposed Utility Plan meet the four findings required by the Special Use Permit (including, for example, whether it is “designed to maintain the value of contiguous property”).
Furthermore, we recommend that the Development Ordinance consultant be directed to include language in the Third Draft of the Development Ordinance that would adjust the three-phase line provision to require that three-phase lines be provided underground unless it is demonstrated that the burial is not appropriate as it relates to the extent of the development proposed and when Duke Energy agrees to the burial. Burial by the developer would be required subject to these conditions: (1) there is a rational nexus between the impact of the proposed development and the proposed utility requirement; (2) the costs of placing the utilities underground is roughly proportional to the impacts of the development on the community; (3) placing the utility underground does not violate any provisions of the electrical code or other relevant safety standard; and (4) the developer’s having the legal right to do so if the lines are off-site.
ATTACHMENTS
A RESOLUTION EXPANDING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS TO INCLUDE AN EXPANDED DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT UTILITY PLAN AND DIRECTING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE CONSULTANT TO CONSIDER LANGUAGE IN THE THIRD DRAFT OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ADJUST THE THREE-PHASE LINE PROVISION TO REQUIRE THAT THREE-PHASE POWER DISTRIBUTION LINES BE BURIED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS (2002-06-24/r-6)
WHEREAS, the current process for Special Use Permit or Special Use Permit Modification applications does not adequately identify plans for off-site utility expansions and upgrades; and
WHEREAS, an expanded description of the current Utility Plan submittal requirement would provide needed information about the proposed placement of utility lines;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends the Special Use Permit and Special Use Permit Modification application submittal requirements to include an expanded description of the current Utility Plan requirement and require identification of all proposed utilities, on- and off-site, as well as upgrades, and the nature of the utility proposal (above or underground).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Development Ordinance consultant to consider language in the Third Draft of the Development Ordinance that would adjust the three-phase line provision to require that three-phase lines be provided underground unless it is demonstrated that the burial is not appropriate as it relates to the extent of the development proposed and when Duke Energy agrees to the burial.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that burial of three-phase lines by the developer would be required subject to these conditions: (1) there is a rational nexus between the impact of the proposed development and the proposed utility requirement; (2) the costs of placing the utilities underground is roughly proportional to the impacts of the development on the community; (3) placing the utility underground does not violate any provisions of the electrical code or other relevant safety standard; and (4) the developer’s having the legal right to do so if the lines are off-site.
This the 24th day of June, 2002.
7
From March 25, 2002 Minutes
Kyle Cattani: Petition to consider modification of Development Ordinance.
Mr. Cattani pointed out that the Town is much more visually attractive in areas where utility lines are buried. He noted that developers are not required to bury these lines but that many of them choose to do so because it looks better. Mr. Cattani explained that the opportunity is open for developers to run lines across their neighbors' properties rather than absorbing the added expense of burying them. He said that Duke Power had installed three-phase power lines through an existing easement within the confines of his property in order to provide service to Carol Woods.
Mr. Cattani pointed out that this "eyesore" is directly visible from his kitchen window. He said that herbicides had been used which are hazardous to his children. He reported that Duke Power and Carol Woods representatives had described burying the lines as "technically unfeasible," even though they do bury them on Carol Woods' property. Mr. Cattani petitioned the Town Council to consider the following modification to the Development Ordinance (July 2000) 14.10:
All utility lines, including three-phase electric power distribution lines but excluding lines used only to transmit electricity between generating stations, shall be placed underground. And all surface disruptions required for installation shall be rehabilitated to the original or an improved condition.
Mr. Cattani also petitioned the Council to withhold occupancy approval to Carol Woods' new development until the damage to his property has been addressed.
Electrical engineer and former Council Member Joe Capowski supported Mr. Cattani's statement, adding that the technical arguments made in a letter from Duke Power “fallacious." Mr. Capowski explained that electricity can be delivered at any voltage and with any number of phases. The danger, he said, comes from voltage. He remarked that Duke Power would only do more if some governmental body requires that. Mr. Capowski recommended that the Town employ someone to represent it and its citizens in these matters. He also suggested that the Town amend the new Development Ordinance to reflect the technical and economic reality of power distribution. Moreover, Mr. Capowski suggested sending the power graph of the Development Ordinance to the Technology Committee for review and suggestions.
Carol Woods Director of Facilities Jim Cole stated that Carol Woods had no choice in how it was served, since that was off their property and off the development plans. He said that Carol Woods had no intention of offending or harming anyone, but had no control of over how Duke Power runs its lines. Mr. Cole argued that withholding Certificate of Occupancy permits would be an unreasonable request by the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER JIM WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILL STROM, TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THE MANAGER AND THE TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE, AND TO REFER OTHER ITEMS REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO THE CONSULTANT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
