Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action 29 Glen Court – James Sparkman, Property Owner

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Glen Court – Looking Down Hill Glen Court –Looking Up Hill

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Synopsis: June, 2012 – UG committee approved a variance request to James Sparkman of 29 Glen Ct. The approval waived the requirements of SMC Section 18.08 which requires utility and communication services to be placed underground when a electrical panel is replaced or relocated. July, 2012 – Robert and Brenda Forsythe Appeal UG Committee Decision.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action 17 Glen Ct 27 Glen Ct

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action James Sparkman of 29 Glen Ct. performed a major remodel of this property. Remodel work required an Administrative Design Review permit which was granted on January 4, 2011 by the Zoning Administrator.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Condition 50 and Advisory Note 11 notified the property owner of the need to underground utilities if the electrical panel was replaced or relocated. The remodel Work replaced and relocated the electrical panel.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action 29 Glen Court does not front on a Public Right of Way. Underground laterals should be routed to a power pole in the Public Right-of-Way. Access to Glen Court is achieved by means of an private access easement over 27 Glen Court and a public access easement over 25 and 21 Glen Court.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Mr. Sparkman retained an attorney to determine if the easement(s) included permission to install utilities. The Attorney advised that an explicit easement for electrical and communication services should be prepared and executed.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action 17 Glen Ct 27 Glen Ct

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Mr. Sparkman contacted PG&E to develop plans for the service lateral to 29 Glen. Mr. Sparkman contacted property owners of 27 Glen Court and 25 Glen Court. To get easement to a power pole. 37 Glen Court was contacted to determine interest in participating in UG work City staff unsure if another property owner (17 Glen Court) was contacted. Tentative Agreement reached on PG&E suggested design.

Appeal of Utility Underground Committee Action

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Mr. Sparkman authorized preparation of a four party Easement Agreement involving 25, 27, 29 and 37 Glen Court. A three party agreement had been also prepared for 27, 29, and 37 Glen Court.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Four party easement agreement were presented to owners of 25, 27, 29 and 37 Glen Court. Action was required by May of 2012. Easement Agreements were not returned in that time period.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Mr. Sparkman submitted an application for a Utility Underground Committee Variance request on May 24, 2012. The Utility Undergrounding Committee was convened on June 11, 2012. Meeting Agenda was posted June 7, 2012 on City Bulletin Boards outside and inside at 420 Litho Street.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action 18.08.040 SMC allows for Ordinance Exceptions (a.k.a. Variances or Waivers) due to Hardship Hardship Findings Standards: UG costs exceed 1% of Market value UG costs exceed 10% of Remodel Costs Findings: Financial Hardship existed, Utility undergrounding cost estimates were $41,297.67. Market value of home $958,080(purchase price). Remodel costs were $547,993. Market Value post project completion – Unknown. Equivalent - Costs incurred=$1,506,073. 1% = $15,060.73. Hardship due to lack of easement rights also existed. Underground Committee approved the Variance (a.k.a. Waiver) on June 11, 2012.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action July 27, 2012 Robert (Harry) and Brenda Forsythe submitted an appeal of the Underground Committee action. Rationale: Two party easement not explored Costs to underground to pole on 27 Glen Court would be lower than costs to underground to Pole on 25 Glen Court but next to 17 Glen Court

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Submitted documents suggest Four Party Agreement with three party easement rights granted Three Party Agreement with two party easement right granted Were considered.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Staff Recommendations: Solicit comments from Forsythe’s, Sparkman, UG Committee Member’s, Public. Provide Direction to staff regarding resolution preparation Upholding or Denying Appeal.

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Action Alternatives Make Finding to uphold the appeal Make Findings to deny the appeal Return the item back to UG Committee for further review Continue Item directing staff/involved parties to provide additional information

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action Additional Consideration Consider whether or not to authorize refund Appeal Fee of $2,587 to Forsythe’s

Appeal of Utility Undergrounding Committee Action End