The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-07-31 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION A special meeting of the Fayetteville Historic District Commission was held on July 31, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ACTION TAKEN Consideration of a submission of a formal letter to the Public Service Commission regarding the petition of Southwestern Electric Power Company for a declaratory judgment Approved Historic District Commission July 31, 2006 Page 2 MEMBERS PRESENT Ethel Goodstein-Murphee Cindy Kalke Rob Merry -Ship Rob Sharp Tony Wappel STAFF PRESENT Karen Minkel, Long Range Planning CITY ATTORNEY Kit Williams, City Attorney MEMBERS ABSENT Tim Cooper Leslie Belden STAFF ABSENT Historic District Commission July 31, 2006 Page 3 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair Goodstein-Murphree at 5:32 p.m. 1) CONSIDERATION OF A SUBMISSION OF A FORMAL LETTER TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGARDING THE PETITION OF SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY FOR A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT NO CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY IS REQUIRED TO REBUILD AND CONVERT THE VOLTAGE OF CERTAIN TRANSMISSION FACILITIES IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS, DOCKET NO. 06-091-U. A. Staff Report a. Karen Minkel provided a summary of the petitions submitted to the Public Service Commission, beginning with SWEPCO's petition for a declaratory judgment, which was followed by a staff recommendation to approve the request, a petition from the City of Fayetteville to intervene and formal public comment. Minkel stated that since the proposed rebuild by SWEPCO would significantly impact property owners along the proposed route and the view of Old Main, the most prominent historic structure in Fayetteville, the Historic District Commission should consider the submission of a formal letter to the Public Service Commission. b. Kit Williams then provided a brief summary of the legalities involved with SWEPCO's petition. The City had submitted a petition for a Leave to Intervene so that the City could present arguments that contested SWEPCO's request. Williams said that he did not know what sorts of powers the Historic Commission had legislatively, but they did have a voice. The Commission was formulated to protect historic areas and therefore, this discussion was relevant. B. Public Comment a. Tommy DeWeese, a representative from SWEPCO, began by sharing a brief history of the electric power lines in question, stating that there are 15 conductors on the current line and that SWEPCO has looked at alternatives to the above ground poles currently proposed. DeWeese stated that SWEPCO has never buried a 160kV line before in its 17 - state jurisdiction and emphasized that the difference in cost between burying the lines versus installing the proposed poles would be a cost to the citizens of Fayetteville. A rough cost estimate of $3 million for approximately two blocks of buried lines was the preliminary number. Commissioner Sharp questioned whether there would be a cost savings in decreased service after ice storms and tree trimming for overhead lines, but DeWeese felt these savings were mostly offset with the cost of service to a buried line, which is more difficult to access. As a Historic District Commission July 31, 2006 Page 4 public utility, SWEPCO could not charge citizens of DeQueen or Texarkana for an aesthetic improvement in Fayetteville. DeWeese also stressed the need for an upgrade; the current lines are at capacity. The current wooden poles are approximately 65 feet, and the proposed rebuild would install 85 -foot poles. DeWeese said that SWEPCO would like to work with the City and residents to create a solution that satisfies everyone. When questioned by the Commissioner Sharp about the petition for a declaratory judgment, DeWeese said that SWEPCO was looking for guidance in terms of protocol and encouraged public input. b. Irene Pritchard emphasized the need for a voice in the process. She shared pictures of existing replacement poles, stating that the 85 -foot poles would rise above the tree line. She shared pictures of her home, the Gregg House, which has been on the National Register of Historical Places since 1974 and would be obscured by the new poles. Pritchard stated that inventive solutions were needed; the views in this area were important to the Fayetteville and its economy. This was also a chance for the City to come together as one community. c. Don Marr, Ward 2 Aldeman, reminded the Commission that the area in question was what the community viewed as the historic part of Fayetteville. Marr suggested that different planning was perhaps needed, particularly in light of the City's recent request for grant funds to bury the power lines along College Avenue and the City Plan 2025, which envisions an positive aesthetic experience. Marr emphasized that the citizens have a right to have a say and present additional information and encouraged the Commission to take a stance against SWEPCO's petition. d. Rick McKinney also said that citizens should have input with the Public Service Commission. McKinney said that SWEPCO could make a request for a public hearing, so this petition seemed to imply that they did not want public input. McKinney shared how the type of poles proposed currently can be viewed from his office window on School Avenue and suggested that installing a larger, more stable pole invited more service on the line. He felt it would be improper for these poles to be installed. MOTION: Tony Wappell SECOND: Rob Merry -Ship VOTE: The vote was unanimous to submit a formal document to the Public Service Commission encouraging a public hearing, 5-0-0. C. Commission Discussion Historic District Commission July 31, 2006 Page 5 a. Commissioner Kalke: Kalke suggested that there was not enough information on the funding difference between burying the lines versus installing the proposed 85 -foot poles and allowing a public hearing would give everyone more time to complete that analysis. b. Commissioner Sharp: Sharp said that the current situation is not great; the current poles are somewhat of a patchwork approach but we've all gotten used to viewing them. SWEPCO's action was an opportunity to take advantage of a situation and turn this into a positive by finding a better solution than the current situation or SWEPCO's proposal. The cost was also relatively small when spread out among the City's population and the number of visitors who come to the downtown area. c. Commissioner Goodstein-Murphree: Goodstein-Murphree stated that the Commission's comments should address the impacted view corridor, the sense of place and space in the unique meeting of the university, Dickson Street and residential neighborhoods, and the respect for growth. Murphree stated that it was difficult to imagine an area that has so many stakeholders; it brings together the commercial, residential and educational facets of the City. Further, the area highlights a concentration of architectural resources and is seminal to the City's sense of place. d. Commissioner Merry -Ship: Merry -Ship commended SWEPCO for maximizing the service of a line that has been in service since the 1920s and acknowledged that something will have to happen to ensure that the community continues to receive quality service. Allowing a public hearing would enable the community to explore the funding options for a project that would satisfy the electrical and aesthetic needs. Merry -Ship added if we are burying lines elsewhere, why not on Dickson. e. Commissioner Sharp: Sharp added that though this situation may seem like a small matter to SWEPCO and Little Rock, for our community, it was equivalent to putting lines in front of the Statue of Liberty or the U.S. Congress or Supreme Court and that the current proposal was not an acceptable solution to the Historic District Commission. Sharp said that though they were a young commission, this may be the most important action they take. f. Commissioner Goodstein-Murphree: Goodstein-Murphree said in closing that she could not imagine another area that would justifiably raise concern from so many sectors. It was too important not to seek a voice from all those who have a stake. Historic District Commission July 31, 2006 Page 6 D. Staff Comments a. Kit Williams suggested that the Commission file a Petition for Leave to Intervene, which the City Attorney's office would draft and submit within the next two days. MEETING ADJOURNED: 6:31 P.M.