City Council Minutes 2001 03 06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting March 6, 2001 Page 6 le. "That the proposed upgrade will not increase the width of the required right-of-way or easement, nor will additional lines be added to the system." Diehl stated that he would like to add "in the same general location to the existing location." 2c. "Pole heights shall be evaluated on a location by location basis and poles shall be installed so as to ensure minimum pole heights consistent with required clearances." Diehl asked that rather than stating the maximum height, the range be indicated. 2d. "Upon request of the City, applicant shall provide a letter of credit to secure such restoration work, in an amount equal to the estimated costs of restoration work." Diehl suggested that this was not necessary and that the City can condition the Resolution to stipulate that repairs or replacement of existing landscaping or sidewalks shall be to the satisfaction of the City. 2e. "Pole locations in the vicinity of South Boulder Road shall be compatible with the pedestrian underpass constructed for that location." Diehl stated that they have already moved that structure to accommodate the underpass and have no intention of relocating poles within the pedestrian underpass. 2f. "The capacity of the existing infrastructure is 135 MVA. The maximum capacity of the proposed infrastructure, as represented after rebuild, would be 247 MVA." Diehl clarified that each circuit has an existing capacity of 135 MVA, so each circuit for the upgrade will have a capacity of 247 MVA. Diehl stated that based on technology and the needs of the future, the capacity can be increased above 247 MVA without rebuilding the line. It is a matter of placing new conductors on the line. He stated that PSCo would be reluctant to limit the capacity. 2h. "The applicant shall provide the City with a construction schedule prior to commencement of construction, which shall indicate times of work on particular areas of the right-of-way." Diehl stated that there was a very small window of time to complete this project and asked for the ability to work with the City to adjust those conditions pending weather conditions in the spring. Diehl stated that PSCo had no objection to conditions 2i, 2j, and 21. 2k. "This SRU approval is personal to the applicant." Diehl asked for clarification and stated that if it means that it is specific to PSCo and not transferable to another entity, PSCo would like the ability to transfer in the case of mergers. He noted that the permit is for the facility. 2m. "The applicant shall install, and irrigate a minimum of three trees per pole placement located to most effectively screen the pole structure from the adjoining uses." 6