Utility lines set to be buried - in 2067
Putting wires underground to take longer
By Ruth McKinnie Braun, Staff Writer
San Diego Union-Tribune [1] July 26, 2007
Many San Diegans will wait decades for utility lines on their streets to be buried underground, but none will wait longer than some Pacific Beach residents.
Power poles and sagging wires near Ingraham Street and Pacific Beach Drive are scheduled for removal in 2067. Lloyd and Jerry Harrison, who live in the area on Sequoia Street, aren't making plans to enjoy the unobstructed views.
"I won't be here," said Lloyd Harrison, 88, who has lived on the street for 18 years.
His son, Jerry, said: "I'm almost 65. I won't be here, either."
They expect to pay about $3.50 a month in line-burying surcharges to San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and AT&T until they draw their last breaths.
San Diegans began paying the SDG&E fees in 2003, and the AT&T surcharge started this month. They probably will pay them for at least 50 more years, though officials estimate it will take in excess of 60 years to finish burying more than 1,000 miles of utility lines. The average total cost to each household is more than $2,200.
In 2001, the City Council approved the ambitious plan to bury utility lines along San Diego's older residential streets, largely for aesthetic reasons. Other cities in the county and state are putting the lines underground on major commercial streets, but none has taken on residential streets like San Diego has.
The earliest estimates indicated it would take 20 to 25 years to complete and cost $1.2 billion. Now the estimates are 64 years and $2.3 billion, which has some questioning whether the program should be scrapped or overhauled.
"I think the city has to be intellectually honest and go back and talk about this," said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. "We are spending a ridiculous amount of money for God knows how long."
Almost all San Diego households with electricity and a telephone line pay surcharges to SDG&E, AT&T and companies that lease lines from AT&T, even those in Rancho Bernardo and other communities where utility lines were buried starting in the 1960s. Low-income customers are exempt.
The SDG&E surcharge that residential and business customers started paying in January 2003 amounts to 3.53 percent of their electric bills. The average cost to residential customers is $2.75 a month. Land-line telephone customers this month began paying 77 cents a month.
Combined, that's $3.52 a month, or $42.24 a year. Over 53 years, the total will be $2,238.72 for an average household.
SDG&E's fee will continue at least until 2020, when the utility's franchise agreement will be up for negotiation. AT&T's surcharge will adjust annually to cover its costs, estimated at $125 million. Cox Communications and Time Warner cover their own costs.
Increasing costs
Nathan Bruner, the city's Utilities Undergrounding Program manager, acknowledges that city officials didn't have the information needed to make solid cost estimates when the City Council acted in 2001.
At the time, then-Mayor Dick Murphy said the $2.75 a month residents would pay SDG&E wouldn't amount to much.
"My children lose that in their room daily," Murphy said.
Costs for the program have risen more rapidly than anticipated, just as construction costs in all industries have spiraled, said Bruner and Norm Kohls, who's managing the project for SDG&E. During a recent three-year period, costs for copper, PVC piping, concrete, fuel and labor were 50 percent higher than expected, Bruner said.
Because of the higher costs, the city delayed work on streets it had expected to start this year.
SDG&E sends the surcharge fees - about $44 million a year - to the city but manages the project and hires contractors to do most of the work. The utility submits a monthly invoice for its expenses. An audit of SDG&E's costs is in the works.
The city's goal "is ambitious and it's attainable. . . . It's just a long road," Bruner said.
In 2001, the Utility Consumers' Action Network and the San Diego County Taxpayers Association lobbied against the SDG&E surcharge.
Lani Lutar, president of the taxpayers group, said the surcharge was rushed through without proper evaluation. Her group also opposed the practice of having residents in areas with underground utilities subsidize those in older areas.
Now that the estimate to complete the work is much higher than originally anticipated, Councilman Kevin Faulconer said he and Council President Scott Peters have asked Bruner to look at possibly issuing bonds.
The city could pay off bonds with the income from the surcharges and possibly finish burying the utility lines in five to 10 years, Faulconer said. This assumes the city can re-enter the public bond market, which it has avoided recently because of its financial troubles.
"I want to get these lines underground before I go underground," said Faulconer, 40.
Frustration over the slow pace is magnified because AT&T hasn't buried its lines in the first residential areas, while SDG&E and cable companies have completed 30 miles since 2003. AT&T asserted that SDG&E's surcharge should have paid for everything.
With its surcharge now in place, AT&T will begin taking down its overhead wires early next year.
That won't be soon enough for resident Larry Garcia. Signs along his street in Ocean Beach said poles would come down in July 2005. But the date came and went.
He complained, but the only thing the city did was remove the signs. The wooden utility poles with their tops shorn off remain, a sign that SDG&E has completed its work.
"Once you have your expectations up and it doesn't happen, you get angry," Garcia said.
How other cities do it
Other cities from Oceanside to Imperial Beach bury utility lines along large, predominantly commercial streets under requirements the state Public Utilities Commission set in the 1970s. Few cities go beyond that.
In Del Mar, property owners in three residential areas have created assessment districts to bury utility lines, and others are considering the same, said Ernesto Aguilar, who works for the engineering firm that contracts with the city.
Property owners in one area agreed to assessments ranging from $6,000 to $60,000, with those having the best views paying more. About half the owners paid their share in full. Others will pay over 15 years, with the city issuing bonds.
The process takes three to four years, Aguilar said.
Some San Diego property owners will pay more than $12,000 each to bury utility lines near their homes rather than wait until 2030, when the work is scheduled for their neighborhood.
This week, the City Council created an underground utility district for 56 homes in La Jolla on portions of Candlelight Drive and surrounding streets after three-quarters of the property owners voted for an assessment.
Unlike Del Mar, most residents will pay a set $12,400, with a few paying slightly less. They also will pay about $3,500 to connect their homes to the underground system, and the city will contribute $380,000 from the surcharge fees.
Chula Vista's franchise agreement with SDG&E requires the utility to contribute $20 million over 10 years to bury lines beyond what the PUC requires. SDG&E is also helping pay to bury power lines that mar views of San Diego Bay, said Michael Meacham, the city's conservation director.
The cost of burying utility lines along larger commercial streets in San Diego - about $10 million a year - is covered by SDG&E, AT&T and cable companies. The work should be done by 2020.
In the past, the city used money from its general fund, which pays for police and fire protection and other services to repave streets and replace streetlights after the work is done. When the council approved the SDG&E fee, it set aside about 15 percent of the revenue for repaving and streetlights on larger roads.
But even those projects aren't without problems. Residents along Pacifica Drive in Pacific Beach have waited months for poles to come down.
AT&T hasn't started its work because it says it needs to dig beyond trenches used by other utilities into an area with archaeological significance and wants the city to pay the costs.
"We're 95 percent there," Pacifica Drive resident Marie McHenry said. "We see these telephone poles cut halfway down. It's just really ugly."
Bruner said he understands the frustration and would like to pull down utility poles more quickly. He expects that city officials will discuss next year whether to issue bonds to contain costs and get the work done sooner. Maybe even before folks like the Harrisons are long gone.