Councilman takes aim at utility pole placement

[musicman]

In his battle against utility poles, Wes Tipton can seem like a modern Don Quixote.

To Tipton, the wooden poles that march down his street in Magnolia Grove are intrusive and ugly, and represent everything that's wrong with the city's unplanned growth.

"It's really unsightly," he said. "There's no reason we should have to look at these poles."

"I call it 'litter on a stick,' " Councilman Peter Brown said. "There's no rhyme or reason to it."

Councilwoman Pam Holm knows where the blame lies.

"The city of Houston has allowed the densest development without rules," she said. "It's not CenterPoint's fault, it's not the residents' fault. It's our fault."

Brown, an architect and urban planner, wants to write an ordinance that would require new developments larger than a half-acre to place utilities in the rear or along the side of property lines.

That would come much too late for Tipton, whose older bungalow neighborhood already has sprouted three-story townhouses and condo buildings.

One solution is to bury utility lines underground, as the Holy Rosary Church did in 2005, when it built a new office adjoining its church on Milam. The parish paid about $50,000 to get rid of four poles.

"Most clients can't afford it," said Bob Fretz Jr., the church's builder. "But when you see them removed, it's a huge difference."

Mayor Bill White said he'd explore a long-term plan to bury utilities throughout the city, sector by sector, perhaps as roads are resurfaced. But he cautioned it could take "decades" and would have to be paid for with a utility bill fee.

full article

[editor]

"The city of Houston has allowed the densest development without rules," she said. "It's not CenterPoint's fault, it's not the residents' fault. It's our fault."

Well, at least he has that part right.

Burying utilities isn't always the solution. Recently I noticed that in some cities, utility poles run down alleys. Houston doesn't have many alleys, but maybe there's another solution.

[TheNiche]

In his battle against utility poles, Wes Tipton can seem like a modern Don Quixote.

To Tipton, the wooden poles that march down his street in Magnolia Grove are intrusive and ugly, and represent everything that's wrong with the city's unplanned growth.

"It's really unsightly," he said. "There's no reason we should have to look at these poles."

"I call it 'litter on a stick,' " Councilman Peter Brown said. "There's no rhyme or reason to it."

Councilwoman Pam Holm knows where the blame lies.

"The city of Houston has allowed the densest development without rules," she said. "It's not CenterPoint's fault, it's not the residents' fault. It's our fault."

Brown, an architect and urban planner, wants to write an ordinance that would require new developments larger than a half-acre to place utilities in the rear or along the side of property lines.

That would come much too late for Tipton, whose older bungalow neighborhood already has sprouted three-story townhouses and condo buildings.

One solution is to bury utility lines underground, as the Holy Rosary Church did in 2005, when it built a new office adjoining its church on Milam. The parish paid about $50,000 to get rid of four poles.

"Most clients can't afford it," said Bob Fretz Jr., the church's builder. "But when you see them removed, it's a huge difference."

Mayor Bill White said he'd explore a long-term plan to bury utilities throughout the city, sector by sector, perhaps as roads are resurfaced. But he cautioned it could take "decades" and would have to be paid for with a utility bill fee.

full article

If it's that important, at least have the City, a TIRZ, or a Management District do it systematically throughout particular neighborhoods rather than creating a disorganized zig-zagging patchwork of moved-around poles. The Uptown Managment District has done a good job at this.

[Double L]

As of right now, I think that Mayor White's plan will prove to be the most effective for the elimination of this blight across our city. The best place to locate the utility poles will be underground; attempts to efficiently regulate them above ground will eventually prove futile, as there are too many physical obstructions above ground. Unfortunately; the mayor warned that his plan would take decades and would lead to a rise in our utility fees, which are the major provisions holding the plan back and could lead to opposition. Although I'm sure that we will run into engineering problems and we may not be able to bring all the utility poles beneath the ground in the long run.

I think we have a way to systematically organize the correct neighborhood associations needed so that we can execute the plan; in a fashion that can be enforced across the entire city. It's called the City of Houston Super Neighborhoods system.

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/nbhd_svc...ap_w_links.html

[TheNiche]

As of right now, I think that Mayor White's plan will prove to be the most effective for the elimination of this blight across our city. The best place to locate the utility poles will be underground; attempts to efficiently regulate them above ground will eventually prove futile, as there are too many physical obstructions above ground. Unfortunately; the mayor warned that his plan would take decades and would lead to a rise in our utility fees, which are the major provisions holding the plan back and could lead to opposition. Although I'm sure that we will run into engineering problems and we may not be able to bring all the utility poles beneath the ground in the long run.

I think we have a way to systematically organize the correct neighborhood associations needed so that we can execute the plan; in a fashion that can be enforced across the entire city. It's called the City of Houston Super Neighborhoods system.

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/nbhd_svc...ap_w_links.html

Look at Uptown. Most of their lines have been run above-ground in low-visibility rights-of-way.

If the SNs were turned into taxing entities so that each neighborhood paid for its utility relocation (or had the ability to allocate their funds to alternate investments, as the locals saw fit), I'd be OK with that. If River Oaks residents want their utilities relocated and are willing to pay for it, then so be it. If 5th Ward would rather spend the money on social services or just not be taxed at all, then so be it.

[musicman]

running them underground can cause other problems. i know it is sure harder to find problems when lines are run underground. the lines must be shielded too. having rear easements seems to be the best workaround to at least minimize the street view.

[MidtownCoog]

Is this the best Peter Brown can do?

So we have some less than smart townhome owners who have to look at utility lines. Cry me a river.

With townhomes using every inch of land on a lot what do you expect?

[Jax]

Another problem with above ground poles is that they can more easily be knocked down during a storm. I heard once that lines are often buried in urban areas after a storm takes down large numbers of poles rather than replacing the poles. Does anybody know if this is accurate?

[CDeb]

There is a trade-off in burying your utility poles. You tend to have less outages, but those outages tend to last longer as they are harder to diagnose and take longer to physically get to.

[musicman]

Another problem with above ground poles is that they can more easily be knocked down during a storm. I heard once that lines are often buried in urban areas after a storm takes down large numbers of poles rather than replacing the poles. Does anybody know if this is accurate?

the poles themselves usually aren't the problem but the trees around them. that is why they have a fairly aggressive tree maintenance program which of course leads to other "visual" concerns in some areas.

[Double L]

What I see the SNs doing is establish a mode of communication between the neghborhood and the utility company to plan how they want the utility line laid out. Perhaps we should make the super neighborhoods become a political representative for the people towards improving the utility line system in these neighborhoods.

[TheNiche]

What I see the SNs doing is establish a mode of communication between the neghborhood and the utility company to plan how they want the utility line laid out. Perhaps we should make the super neighborhoods become a political representative for the people towards improving the utility line system in these neighborhoods.

It's usually better to figure out how many resources we want to allocate to the issue and to particular neighborhoods first and plan around that. No sense in having Kashmere plan for utility pole replacement if it ain't going to happen anywhere in that area in the next 15 years or more.

[Double L]

Maybe you misunderstood my post.

I propose that we use the SNs as a political voice between the people and the utility companies to discuss the design of the utility lines. The SNs can make a localized plan for the redesigning of the utility pole placement in that neighborhood and then work with the utility companies to get it done. It would not cost tax dollars, if tax dollars are needed it can be taken to the city council for approval. The responsibility would be put on the maintainers of the utility lines.

[TheNiche]

Maybe you misunderstood my post.

I propose that we use the SNs as a political voice between the people and the utility companies to discuss the design of the utility lines. The SNs can make a localized plan for the redesigning of the utility pole placement in that neighborhood and then work with the utility companies to get it done. It would not cost tax dollars, if tax dollars are needed it can be taken to the city council for approval. The responsibility would be put on the maintainers of the utility lines.

So the costs are recouped through higher electric surcharges, differing depending on costs incurred in each individual SN, is that right?

[Double L]

We have a few options.

One option would be allowing each SN anonimity. They can choose whether or not they want to do the plan. If we do this, we would have to use contracting. We can make contracts between the SN and the company, stating that if the business takes part in the SNs plan; they can raise the fees in that neighborhood alone and we can let the neighborhood residents decide if they want the utility line placement plan to be implemented.

Or, we can have every super neighborhood take part in the program and allow the entire city to suffer higher charges. This way the SNs are utilized as no more than localized managers of the program without say in whether or not it happens. What I'm saying is that if the SN's manage the project instead of the city of Houston then we can get it done faster, and more importantly; overcome engineering setbacks more expediently.

[editor]

Another problem with above ground poles is that they can more easily be knocked down during a storm. I heard once that lines are often buried in urban areas after a storm takes down large numbers of poles rather than replacing the poles. Does anybody know if this is accurate?

Seems likely. Whenever I've lived in rural areas, there was always the chance of something (wind, ice, drunk driver, etc...) knocking down the power lines and it happened at least once or twice a year. Whenever I've lived in urban areas I've never had a power outage, except twice. Once (not in Houston) when a crew building a tower next door dug through the feeder for my building, and once in Houston when a warehouse collapsed into the street and hit the above-ground utility pole.

[TheNiche]

We have a few options.

One option would be allowing each SN anonimity. They can choose whether or not they want to do the plan. If we do this, we would have to use contracting. We can make contracts between the SN and the company, stating that if the business takes part in the SNs plan; they can raise the fees in that neighborhood alone and we can let the neighborhood residents decide if they want the utility line placement plan to be implemented.

Or, we can have every super neighborhood take part in the program and allow the entire city to suffer higher charges. This way the SNs are utilized as no more than localized managers of the program without say in whether or not it happens. What I'm saying is that if the SN's manage the project instead of the city of Houston then we can get it done faster, and more importantly; overcome engineering setbacks more expediently.

I still like the idea of using special districts with taxing authority, personally. That way, any neighborhood that wants to do it can do it, they can do it how they want it, and every neighborhood that does it has to pay for it (i.e. be accountable for their expenditures). And instead of paying for it in their electric bills, they pay for it as a property tax--a measure that is probably less confusing than an obscure surcharge on the electric bill.

If each SN gets to decide what they want to do and they know that the costs of whatever they do will be spread throughout the City with only a tiny margin of those costs coming back to haunt them, then every single SN has an incentive to select the most expensive possible arrangement. It is the same reason that when it gets cold in my condo during the winter, I used to turn on the shower and use the condo association's scorching hot water to heat my place like a sauna than bother turning on the heater. I had to pay electricity myself. My neighbors paid the water bill. ...now, I make more money, so I can afford morality.

[Double L]

I think the money is much better paid for by utility bills then property taxes because the cost incurred on each individual is so much less.

I think this will prove to be a city-wide problem. I don't want to see river oaks residents benefit with less utility poles in their neighborhood while fifth ward residents have to suffer because they are less willing to pay.

[TheNiche]

I think the money is much better paid for by utility bills then property taxes because the cost incurred on each individual is so much less.

I think this will prove to be a city-wide problem. I don't want to see river oaks residents benefit with less utility poles in their neighborhood while fifth ward residents have to suffer because they are less willing to pay.

Priorities, priorities! Perhaps 5th Ward would rather use money allocated to utility beautification to install curb and gutter? Or flood control? Or grafitti abatement? Or extra police patrols? Or parks? Or [FILL IN THE BLANK]. I can think of a lot more important things that would reduce their suffering than making things look pretty. Whatever the case, I like the idea of letting the citizens of 5th Ward figure out what they want rather than have some yuppie outsider that can't fathom their own position in the world dictate what they should and should not want.

I'm not clear on how you concluded that it would cost individuals less to pay for utility relocation by electric bills rather than by property taxes. One way or another, all of the costs will be passed on to the consumer. Additionally, since the primary aim of utility relocation projects would be to make nicer neighborhoods, and the marginal benefit of the project should be reflected by rising property values caused by increased demand for those neighborhoods (another aspect that may not sit well with the 5th Ward crowd), wouldn't it make sense to tax the very same property owners that stand to benefit from the project?

[editor]

I think the money is much better paid for by utility bills then property taxes because the cost incurred on each individual is so much less.

I think this will prove to be a city-wide problem. I don't want to see river oaks residents benefit with less utility poles in their neighborhood while fifth ward residents have to suffer because they are less willing to pay.

I think River Oaks has already buried its utilities. So no worries about the rich getting something for free -- they've already paid their share.

[musicman]

It would not cost tax dollars, if tax dollars are needed it can be taken to the city council for approval. The responsibility would be put on the maintainers of the utility lines.

in the article, the mayor states the cost would be passed on to us. most likely then people won't want it.

[RedScare]

I've already saved enough money from electricity deregulation. I don't need the savings from buried utility lines, too.

Here's a suggestion, though. When buying a house, stand in the front yard and look up. If you see power lines, consider looking elsewhere.

[Guest Marty]

What is the lifespan of buried power lines something like 15-25 years?

[MetroMogul]

LMAO @ this. The utility poles that are so vilified by the yuppie crowd have more characters than their cheaply constructed and offensively bland townhomes. I do envy them though; their lives must be a breeze if a wooden pole and power lines are the bane of their existence.

[Subdude]

I wouldn't say utility poles are the bane of anyone's existence, but they are ugly and they seriously contribute to Houston's visual pollution. "Cheaply constructed and offensively bland townhouses" can be ugly too, but they have nothing to do with utility poles. It is a ridiculous to think that if you live in an ugly townhouse you somehow shouldn't mind ugly utility poles. Are they the worst thing in the world? No, of course not. But they are still ugly.So does that make me a "yuppie"?

[plumber2]

I wouldn't say utility poles are the bane of anyone's existence, but they are ugly and they seriously contribute to Houston's visual pollution. "Cheaply constructed and offensively bland townhouses" can be ugly too, but they have nothing to do with utility poles. It is a ridiculous to think that if you live in an ugly townhouse you somehow shouldn't mind ugly utility poles. Are they the worst thing in the world? No, of course not. But they are still ugly.So does that make me a "yuppie"? I wouldn't say utility poles are the bane of anyone's existence, but they are ugly and they seriously contribute to Houston's visual pollution. "Cheaply constructed and offensively bland townhouses" can be ugly too, but they have nothing to do with utility poles. It is a ridiculous to think that if you live in an ugly townhouse you somehow shouldn't mind ugly utility poles. Are they the worst thing in the world? No, of course not. But they are still ugly.So does that make me a "yuppie"?

Could you repeat that please?

[Subdude]

Could you repeat that please?

Sorry about that! Corrected.

[editor]

LMAO @ this. The utility poles that are so vilified by the yuppie crowd have more characters than their cheaply constructed and offensively bland townhomes. I do envy them though; their lives must be a breeze if a wooden pole and power lines are the bane of their existence.

When you spend half a million dollars on something you want it to look nice. You wash your car, don't you? If you get a stain on your new suit, you clean it, don't you?

[MetroMogul]

The utility poles predate the townhomes. If they want a view without the bane of utility poles, why not move to the suburbs where most of the utilities are buried? If you move into the inner loop, I'm going to assume you want urban living and that includes telephone poles and power lines. And I definitely do not think it's fair to increase electricity rates across the board because yuppies want an unobstructed view from their box. The minority and poor populations have enough problems paying the light bill as it is; why charge extra for an issue they do not care about?

[webdude]

The utility poles predate the townhomes. If they want a view without the bane of utility poles, why not move to the suburbs where most of the utilities are buried? If you move into the inner loop, I'm going to assume you want urban living and that includes telephone poles and power lines. And I definitely do not think it's fair to increase electricity rates across the board because yuppies want an unobstructed view from their box. The minority and poor populations have enough problems paying the light bill as it is; why charge extra for an issue they do not care about?

Poles are a prerequisite for urban living? Just because something predates don't necessary mean they have right of way. The city has got to improve. And why pay extra? Cause ppl like their city clean and not ugly, and they care about public spaces.

And there is so much litter everywhere, there is no sense of pride or belonging.