Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ed Smith, 882 West Mulberry Street, Louisville, CO 80027. Mr. Smith asked if the statistical <br />data for downed power lines in a hazard of 115 (kV) broken lines, especially near a school, <br />including the operations and maintenance cost for both versus below ground. 2) Can the cost <br />variance for above versus below ground be narrowed if the work was competitive bid and <br />performed under utility supervision. <br /> <br />Chairman Lipton suggested submitting questions to Staff and Staff will establish the question in <br />the public record and on the website. <br /> <br />Michael Gheleta, 761 Pear Court, Louisville, CO 80027. Mr. Gheleta responded to several <br />points in the letter sent by PSCO. Mr. Gheleta stated that the EMF almost disappears when the <br />line is buried on the edge of the right-of-way. On the issue of property values, the Public Service <br />letter sites a study showing no impact to property values from increasing the voltage of power <br />lines. Simply increasing the voltage of power lines would not necessarily have a visual impact that <br />people would know that there was some change going on. The letter also indicates that voltage is <br />not being increased in this project. That suggests to Mr. Gheleta that the study is inapplicable <br />here. The study also does not seem to address the issue of increasing the size of power poles or <br />locating poles next to residences which previously did not have one. That would have an impact <br />on property owners’ investment back expectations. He would also like to see a cost estimate for <br />under grounding that portion of the corridor that is in direct proximity to residential areas as <br />opposed to open space areas. He thinks that the cost could be brought down by looking at that <br />information. With respect to the PUC decision that is sited, it was unclear to him what it provides <br />for. Does it simply require those requesting underground construction to pay the differential or <br />simply require Public Service to underground when parties pay. He would like to see the <br />underground alternative be given equal consideration along with the other alternatives. If there <br />are any poles at all, they should be located in the same place. People moved into their houses <br />with the expectation that that would stay the same. Under grounding makes more sense. <br /> <br />Michael J. Smith, 788 West Tamarisk Street, Louisville, CO 80027. This is a significant impact to <br />the community. This is not a minor upgrade to a facility that has been there for a long period of <br />time. Mr. Smith moved in next to a 65-foot pole and it may become a 85 to 95-foot pole based <br />on PSCO proposal. He has been examining power poles and the ornamental steel poles that are <br />proposed do not appear to be buried. They appear to be founded on a concrete structure. He <br />questions the 10% plus 2 feet would come off of that based on their proposed design. Under <br />grounding is the way to go. <br /> <br />Carrie DeGraw, 741 Orchard Drive, Louisville, CO 80027. Ms. DeGraw would like for the rest <br />of Louisville to know about the power line proposal. She suggested putting a flyer in with the <br />water bills to inform the whole city. She would also like to know why the power has gone out <br />three times. <br /> <br />Lynn Willis, 763 Orchard Drive, Louisville, CO 80027. Ms. Willis feels that this is just as <br />important as all of the issues that the Planning Commission generally looks at. She does have <br /> <br /> 4 <br /> <br />