Loading...
none, SFR interior remodel, porch an, Correspondence9 October 29, 2003 To: Dederer (2 Ringbit Road West) Tsou (4 & 6 Ringbit Road West) Cicciarelli (5 Ringbit Road West) Hummel (3 Ringbit Road West) Klerman (7 Southfield Drive) From: Shumaker (1 Ringbit Road West) RE: Private Undergrounding of Utilities Dear Neighbors: By OCT 3 0 2003 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS As many of you know, the City of Rolling Hills is not currently actively seeking to underground utilities through a bond measure, but is actively encouraging groups of homeowners to privately undertake certain undergrounding projects. Last February, Joe Hummel arranged for Scott Gobble of Southern California Edison to come to our cul de sac and address us on these issues. Since then, I've had some telephone conversations with Mr. Gobble discussing details with him. I also spoke with Craig Nealis, City Manager for Rolling Hills, regarding the flyer from the City stating that the City encourages private undergrounding. What follows is a discussion of what I have been able to learn. General What is being proposed for our neighborhood is that we underground the utility poles in the Ringbit West cul de sac. The line would run from the large utility pole on the Shumaker's property (this pole would remain standing), and the remaining poles in the cul de sac would be taken down. Necessary Commitment From Tsou Family In February, Mr. Gobble stated that Kelly Tsou had agreed that she would allow SCE to place a large "box" on her property that would in essence be the transformer. The continued agreement from the Tsou family to this requirement is necessary for this project to continue. Further, it appears that as the construction of the Tsou's house continues, a larger transformer on a larger pole will replace the pole near the Tsou's property, in order to properly provide power to the new house. If an undergrounding project is undertaken, the Tsou's power needs will be met without need for the larger pole and transformer. Easements Mr. Gobble informed me that SCE currently has overhead easements over our properties. SCE will require that all affected properties sign the necessary documents for underground easements. He anticipates that the underground easements will run in the current easements and down the center of the road. I'm not sure how the e property lines run, but I would guess that most of the homeowners addressed in this letter would have to sign off on the underground easements. Initial Study One of the most frustrating things about this whole process is that SCE will not give us a firm bid unless we pay them $2000 to do a study and plan. In essence, SCE is insisting that we put money down before we decide whether we want to pay for this, and we can't decide if we want to pay because they won't tell us how much it will cost until we give them $2000. Further, once the study is down and SCE gives us a bid, the bid is only good for 90 days, meaning that we would have to sign all contracts and agreements and pay all monies within 90 days, or else we would have to pay another $2000 for another study to keep the ball rolling. Upon my inquiry, Craig Nealis told me that we could -possibly ask the City to reimburse us the $2000, after the project starts. There is no assurance that the City would do this, and the City has -no obligation to reimburse the money to us. However, the City is interested in private undergrounding, and to date no group of homeowners has successfully completed (or even started) such a project. If the City reimburses us the cost of the study, it would be solely as an accommodation to encourage the process. We shouldn't count on getting this money back. Homeowners' Aareement If we all decided to proceed after the initial study, we would all need to sign a contract agreeing to how the cost is to be split. We may be able to save some money here, since Charlie's law firm could produce the agreement. If anyone else would prefer to draft the agreement or have their attorney do so, that would be fine. Service Connections Mr. Gobble told me that usually homeowners agree how to split the costs, and further that each homeowner is responsible for his/her own "service connection." Basically, everyone is responsible for the lines from their homes to the undergrounded connection. Mr. Gobble did specifically mention that the Cicciarellis would need to have a trench dug from their house to the undergrounded connection, at the cost of about $3000 (Mr. Gobble's figure, not mine). I don't know if anyone else, including my family, has this issue, and we would not know until the initial study is done. Telephone Company Mr. Gobble also mentioned that we would have to contact the telephone company for the phone company to do its own simultaneous study and underground its lines at the same time as the project continues. He thought the cost relating to the phone company could be about $ 5000. Cable Company I'm very hazy on the particulars, but I believe the cable company must underground their lines, but at no cost to us. I may be wrong on this. Estimated Costs Mr. Gobble estimated off the top of his head (without the $2000 study) that the entire SCE (not including phone company) project could be done for $24,000 - $30,000. None of the figures mentioned in this letter are firm, since SCE will not yet give us a firm bid. However, if we use these figures on the high end and add some for overage, we may be able to do the job for $40,000 - $50,000. If we were to divide this among 7 homes, the cost per house is $6000 - $7000 (not counting everyone's individual service connection). I know that everyone may not agree with that split, but I start with that to start somewhere. Further Underaroundinq I want to be as inclusive as possible with the information I have learned. Mr. Gobble told me that our cul de sac is fairly easy to underground. However, a street like Southfield Drive would be much more expensive to do, in part because of the nature of the poles and the way the lines run down the street. If a group ever forms in the future to underground Southfield, I don't know if all of us would be approached, but certainly, Klerman, Shumaker and Dederer would be asked to participate financially in that project. r Benefit How would this project benefit each one of us? For some of us, our views would be cleared of the poles. For all of us, we would have a more attractive cul de sac. I'm not a real estate broker, nor do I have a crystal ball. I don't know if this would translate into higher property values. I don't know if this would protect us from power outages. I do believe that the cost of such a project would just increase as time goes by, and now is as good a time as any to do this. I asked Mr. Gobble if it would be possible to take down single individual poles. He replied no, that SCE would need to undertake the entire cul de sac project. I've been very inclusive in this letter. I've included every homeowner who I think may have any interest. Some of you may feel that this does not concern you, but I erred on the side of giving the most information to the greatest number of people. I've also tried to include everything I've learned. If I sound disjointed at times, it's because the information is disjointed. I'm sure that there is a lot of additional information that I just don't know. What I've learned in this process is that the information is there if you know what question to ask. Many times, I've just kept asking questions until I found something out. I also want to add that the information in this letter is as of my understanding. However, at times things get changed in translation, and I may not have correctly understood some of the information given to me. Please let me know if you are interested in pursuing this further. If I get enough interest, I'll proceed by setting up a meeting with all interested homeowners, Scott Gobble (SCE), the City and the Community Association. I'm also interested in any thoughts any of you may have as to anything I've stated in this letter. Also, please let me know additional areas of information that you feel should be explored. You can reach me at 544-1532 or email your thoughts to me at cshumaker@aol.com. I would prefer to be contacted by email. If you all send me your email addresses, I will forward on to everyone any emails I get from anyone else, so we will all be having the same dialogue. a_ Clarisse Shumaker cc: Craig Nealis (RH City Manager) Scott Gobble (SCE)