20040907Reading Rebuttal.pdf

i:ECEIVEO L~:r-.;
!L,
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
znoi: SEP - 7 Prl 3: 20
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
COMPLAINT ANT VS. CITY OF EAGLE
IDAHO, RESPONDENT
: c.' e;
: '
- ,Li L. iCrlf I"-
"'--- ,..",.-,," "
C'C't"
"'!j
U j ! L lit t:) L U I"!! .) 0 t Uh
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
Rebuttal and Supplemental Testimony of
Don C. Reading, Ph.
Ben Johnson Associates, Inc.
on behalf of
The City of Eagle
September 2004
Rebuttal and Supplemental Testimony of Don Reading, Ph.
On Behalf of the City of Eagle, Idaho, Case No. IPC-O4-Page 1
Would you please state your name and address?
Don Reading, Ben Johnson Associates, Boise, Idaho. The address is 6070 Hill Road
Boise, Idaho.
Are you the same Don Reading who filed direct testimony and exhibits in this
docket?
Yes.
What is the scope of your rebuttal testimony?
I have reviewed the direct testimony of Staff Witness Randy Lobb and I have three
observations in relation to his positions. First, Mr. Lobb makes no distinction between
the potential loss between higher and lower valued properties from the installation high
voltage transmission lines. He goes on to say the utility should be able to put in its
transmission lines where it "deems appropriated". This approach leaves no incentive for
the power company to look at its impact on property values and to weigh only its own
benefits. Second, by quoting the Idaho Land Use Planning Act, he states that it is
appropriate to place transmission lines in existing utility easements. What he does not
recognize is that utilities have easements along virtually all roads in cities like Eagle.
Third, he agrees with Mayor Merrill and recommends city comprehensive plans include
designated transmission corridors. I agree, and cities need to be informed about a utilities
long-run transmission plans. Unless there is better coordination between city and utility
planning the Commission can expect more cases like this one.
Could you please discuss your first point dealing with the economic impact of high
voltage transmission lines on high valued property?
On page 3 of his direct testimony Mr. Lobb states:
While I do not necessary dispute the potential economic impact such overhead lines may
have on adjacent property, I believe it is inappropriate to require the general body of
Idaho Power customers to pay significantly higher rates to provide underground facilities
Rebuttal and Supplemental Testimony of Don Reading, Ph.
On Behalf of the City of Eagle, Idaho, Case No. IPC-O4-Page 2
for the aesthetic benefit of local communities and landowners." (Direct Testimony of
Randy Lobb, p. 3, lines 8-13.
He also states:
I believe it likely that large overhead power lines can negatively affect local property
values wherever they are located." (Direct Testimony of Randy Lobb, p.10, lines13-15.
As I stated in my direct testimony there are no high voltage transmission lines along
important corridors such as Warm Springs, Harrison Boulevard, and Capitol Boulevard in
Boise. Property values in areas such as this are too valuable to be spoiled by
transmission lines. A blanket policy that does not recognize this will only lead to more
confrontations between cities and utilities and to more hearing like this one.
Does the power company have any incentive to recognize this difference between
higher and lower valued properties?
No. According to Mr. Lobb Idaho Power should be able to:
In my opinion, the Company should be allowed in situations like these to reasonably extend and
upgrade its transmission/distribution facilities, as it deems appropriate. (Direct Testimony of
Randy Lobb
, p.
, lines 4-
The problem is the Company s only incentive to meet its obligations as a service provider
is what it "deems appropriate . This does not include the value of adjacent property or a
cities existing comprehensive plan. Mr. Lobb also states:
However, I believe overhead transmission facilities are the standard of construction for
Idaho Power Company." (Direct Testimony of Randy Lobb, p. 12, lines 2-
With this "standard of construction" the Company has only the benefit to its system
without considering the costs it is imposing on property owners or the development
Rebuttal and Supplemental Testimony of Don Reading, Ph.
On Behalfofthe City of Eagle, Idaho, Case No. IPC-O4-Page 3
opportunities of cities. Mr. Lobb appears to find this appropriate without taking into
account the degree of potential harm done to the city and its property owners. What is
missing is any attempt at a rational cost/benefit analysis. The power company is looking
only at the most inexpensive way to meet its needs without regard to any level of costs
imposed on the city and property owners.
Lets turn to your second point. What does Mr. Lobb say about the Company
planned route along highway 44 or bypass routes and the Idaho Land Use Planning
Act?
On page 10 of his Direct Testimony Mr. Lobb states that both State Street and the bypass
routes are along public roadways and thus are consistent with the Idaho Land Use
Planning Act. What he fails to recognize is that the Company has a utility right of way
along almost all roads within the City. This is to be expected and is true with other cities
as well. This approach does not deal with the essence of the dispute in this Docket. What
is important is that growing cities understand that they need to understand utilities
transmission plans and establish utility corridors to route high voltage power lines around
their visual entry corridors and high value downtown areas.
That leads us to your third point. Do you agree with Mr. Lobb that cities need to
include utility corridors in their comprehensive plans?
Yes. As Mayor Merrill stated in her role as President of the Association of Idaho Cities:
I plan to educate growing cities like Eagle about the dangers of how public utilities can
Rebuttal Testimony of Don Reading, Ph.
On Behalf of the City of Eagle, Idaho, Case No. IPC-O4-04. Page 4
affect property values, result in adverse health perceptions, has impacts on years of
careful planning and zoning, and stunt future development. Clearly, utility corridors need
to be planned well in advance. Since the cities are given little or no help in this area I
would like to see the AIC take a more active role in helping to address this problem. I am
also the legislative chair for the AIC and will encourage a review of relevant statutes
addressing large utility poles in the territorial limits of Idaho Cities. "(Direct Testimony
of Nancy Merrill, p. 7, lines 17-23.
I recommend the Commission support this effort by instructing the Staff and ordering the
Company to participate in this effort. I believe without a serious effort by all parties that
the contested issues in this case will continue to occur with cities throughout the state.
The Company and Staff are concern about any extra costs from transmission construction
be passed on to all ratepayers. It should be remembered that all ratepayers share in the
cost of hearings like this and any litigation that may follow. Resolving these issues in a
less contentions manner will be essential for the cost effective expansion of transmission
facilities.
Does this end your testimony as of September 1, 2004?
Yes.