Powerline Trails

[Oak]

HB22-1104 Powerline Trails: Upcoming hearing Feb. 2, 1:30 PM, House Transportation and Local Government Committee

Concerning public recreational trails in electric transmission corridors of the state, and, in connection therewith, encouraging transmission providers to enter into written agreements for the construction and maintenance of powerline trails and requiring transmission providers to provide informational resources and notify local governments regarding the potential for powerline trails when planning for the expansion or construction of transmission corridors.

The bill:

• Allows transmission providers to enter into contracts with public entities or private landowners to construct and maintain public recreational trails (powerline trails) covering a tract of land where transmission lines are or will be constructed (transmission corridor);
• Allows transmission providers to include certain contractual provisions in powerline trail contracts;
• Allows transmission providers to recover costs incurred in implementing and complying with the bill through an increase in rates;
• Requires transmission providers to develop and maintain informational resources to encourage the construction of new powerline trails;
• Requires a transmission provider, when siting or expanding a transmission line, to notify local governments of the potential for a powerline trail in the associated transmission corridor;
• Requires a transmission provider, when applying for a permit with a local government to develop in an area of state interest, to demonstrate compliance with the requirement to notify local governments of the potential for a powerline trail and to develop and maintain informational resources encouraging construction of new powerline trails;
• Requires the public utilities commission to amend its rules to also require electric public utilities in the state to consider plans for the construction of new powerline trails and with the requirement to develop and maintain informational resources on powerline trails;
• Requires the Colorado electric transmission authority (CETA) to arrange for the continuation of any existing powerline trail contracts before entering into a project or divesting a facility; and
• Requires the CETA to give priority for project solicitations to electric utilities and other entities that demonstrate an interest in continuing or creating a powerline trail.
  (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)
  

 

[marksjeep]

I'm a little conflicted on this, need to read more. I usually support the idea of making the most of what we have. By leveraging existing right of ways, this does that. And it might quell the drive for "new" trails. But otoh, many of these could very well be "new" trails and a lot of the transmission line ROWs go through some pretty remote areas with few other routes. Its hard enough getting away from a road or trail as it is.

Thanks for posting it up. I had not seen anything about it.

 

[TOGIE]

i share the concerns of "could this increase the pace at which I fear we will simply have too many trails?"

but, on the other side of the coin, could this help unlock access?

 

[schmalts]

A lot of loose terminology. "ENCOURAGE" is used a lot. I mean really, the installation of public trails should be between the land owner and utility company when the right of way is penned up. What am I missing? If I owned land and a utility company wanted to put a line through but said that it would also be public access it would be a turn off for me. I've dealt with this first hand and so has my brother with people thinking electric power lines is a legal ATV trail through private. My brother has gotten into physical altercations over it.

 

[RobertD]

Are we talking about crossing power lines in a perpendicular sense, or traveling along the length of power lines? Or both?

 

[MTGomer]

I don’t know much about Colorado utilities but this seems a little strange.
Until about a month ago I would’ve been the person at the company I work for (one of the largest utilities in the west) to review, work with engineering to accommodate, and then write up and execute an encroachment agreement for something like this.
I’m now on the siting side of things, which is still related, so I have a bit of experience with this stuff.
As far as I know we do not have any laws “encouraging” or mandating any of this, but generally, we will allow and even encourage this kind of development in our transmission ROWs as long as it meets our design guidelines, which we have a design guidelines document that is available to entities that want to construct within our rights of way, so that they can design accordingly.

The transmission ROW that runs through my neighborhood is nicely landscaped, has a pathway and also functions as storm water retention for the neighborhood. The concept works well.

At a glance this looks like a solution in search of a problem, but maybe things are much different in Colorado? Do the things that this bill would “allow“ actually need to be allowed? As in, are they currently forbidden?

 

[MTGomer]

Are we talking about crossing power lines in a perpendicular sense, or traveling along the length of power lines? Or both?

I believe this is regarding traveling along the corridor.