• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

This Speakout has not been edited

By Jan Marie Belle, Denver

On Monday, July 9th at 5:30 PM the Denver City Council will "decide" (one would hope they have not already "decided") whether or not to allow Xcel Energy to violate the law by further invadeing Ruby Hill park and piercing the Ruby Hill View Plane with extremely ugly large rust- colored power transmission towers that are 7 to 26 feet higher than the already nonconforming existing towers and which will double the power transmission from 115 kilovolts to 230 kilovolts.(Xcel has promised to paint these towers in all OTHER neighorhoods (excepting Ruby Hill) so as to blend in with the skyline).

The Denver Planning Board, all Denver citizens serving in volunteer unpaid capacity on behalf of all citizens of Denver, ruled in May 2007 that Xcel cannot violate the law by erecting these towers in violation of the Ruby Hill View plane.The solution is to underground these power transmission lines.

However: After the Planning Board vote, City Council introduced an "emergency measure" to CHANGE THE LAW for Xcel, allow these towers (and only Xcel's towers) to pierce the Ruby Hill view plane (and only the Ruby Hill View plane). I note that Kathleen MacKenzie the councilperson representing the area in which Ruby Hill Park is located, to her everlansting and eternal credit, OPPOSES changing the law for Xcel. But enough of her collegues decided THEY know what's best for HER district and pushed this forward with the speed of power through an upgraded transmission line.

Surely this requires more information and thoughtful debate. We begged at Blueprint Denver Committee for a "courtesy" public hearing which was set on July 9th, despite our requests that the public hearing be held after the new city council takes office on July 14th, just one week later. Our "courtesy" public hearing willl be shared with four, or maybe it's five, other public hearing, and restricted to one hour. One hour for us, or one hour for all four or maybe it's five public hearings? I don't know yet. I guess we will find out for sure on Monday July 9th.

What's really going on here? Can someone please help me connect the dots? I am seeing my neighborhood of low moderate income hard-working people and seniors on fixed incomes AGAIN being the site of "objectionable uses". Remember how so called "adult uses" were "restricted" to so called "light industrial areas"? Well, that's us too -- Witness the "Adult" usage at the foot of Ruby Hill on the southwest corner of West Mississippi and the South Platte River.

People of Denver, wake up! What's next? A highrise development being able to block historic views that are our unique Denver heritage because lower costs/higher profits can be realized going vertical into the view plane?

What are the REAL "Power Transmission Lines". Please attend the City Council meeting at 5:30 PM on Monday July 9th to see your government in action and connect the dots.

Jan Marie Belle is a native of Denver and president of the Ruby Hill Neighborhood Association.

READER COMMENTS

I was raised and currently live 1/2 mile from ruby hill park. In the 38 years I've been in this neighborhood, many things have changed. One or two have been good changes. These new towers are a bad idea, but not because of the view plane. (I live to the north so I would not be affected) If you take a walk along the train tracks to the north you will see the new towers that have already been erected. These towers are already covered with graffiti. Now imagine these towers in a more accessable location, backed up against those homes on quivas street. Easy access to trouble makers and gang banger wannabes. These towers with somewhat flat surfaces will be an eyesore in no time. The city keeps talking about battling the problem of tagging. This will add to the problem and I have heard no discussion of it. Bury the lines, or use a different style tower. But either way do not give taggers a new canvas to paint!

As I recall from other articles on this subject, land for this park was donated by Public Service Co (now Xcel) in the first place, and the existing lines were already there. The figures I have seen indicate that the proposed plan would cost about $600,000, while burying the lines would cost $5,000,000.

I assume these lines serve the Xcel Arapahoe Station (built in 1950) generating plant that's less than 1 mile south of the park. Electrical infrastructure has been in this part of town for a long time. Xcel shut down two of its older units at this station back in 2003, reducing pollution. Maybe these lines are needed to bring in replacement power from other stations?

Apparently the city could take on the additional cost. But I haven't heard that Denver is swimming in extra tax money these days. Given that the pollution from the Arapahoe plant has decreased in the last few years, I think the impact on the view from the power lines might be worth it.

Also, they did postpone the council meeting, so this authors wish seems to have been granted.

I'm sure the city council has all kinds of creative ways to fund projects when they see fit. The towers are in direct violation of the view plane laws and the intersect a city park - if it were Wash park, City park, Cheeseman park would this even be up for debate?

I'm sure the city council has all kinds of creative ways to fund projects when they see fit. The towers are in direct violation of the view plane laws and the intersect a city park - if it were Wash park, City park, Cheeseman park would this even be up for debate?

So, am I to assume that IF whatever needs to happen to force Xcel to bury the lines happens, I am supposed to (once again) quietly accept the "minor" increase to my utility costs? Just so someone else can maintain their preferred view?

As far as I am concerned, leave the current power lines just like they are. And, when the power 'needs' of whatever areas would be served by the new lines exceed the ability of the current lines to support, those who pitched a fit should be the first on the list for brown outs.
You make your bed, YOU lie in it. And quit demanding that everyone else suffer the consequences of YOUR personal interest.

I don't think the lines should be buried at the increased cost to the users of the power - you and i.

The reason given for new poles is to increase power and prevent blackouts. That is the central issue here, not whether or not a single pole obstructs the view. In fact the trees at the park do a better job of that. Maybe the residents will call for the trees to be cut down?

Councilperson Linkhardt made the comment about the new poles..."you can't see through the new poles, at least you can see through the existing towers". What? I thought this was about insuring we had enough power, not a viewing contest for power line poles..

Referendum if Council goes along with Excel? Bring it on....and voters will defeat it as well.

Something smells fishy about this one. I'm thinking that there's some political backscratching going on here. I live in Denver (not near Ruby Hill), but I support the move for undergrounding the utility lines.

POST A COMMENT

• Sunspot activity driving global warming
• Fed's market rescue a slippery slope
• Time might be ripe for the idea of a rotating regional primary
• CSAP fails to convey worth to students
• Qwest’s cable-franchise complaints
• Single payer cost-effective, viable
• Rocky not helpful in furthering health-care discussion
• Green to a fault