OT: Utility Easements and the law

[Louis]

Does anybody out there know if an electric utility can force a new easement on a property owner?

I live at the end of dead end street A. A large property owner on dead end street B on the north side of my property wants to start a new development. The existing power lines on B street do not have sufficient capacity to handle the new demand. The power lines on my street are to be upgraded anyway. To serve the new development the utility wants me to grant them a 15' easement along my N-S property line so then can run underground wires from my street to the new area. Can they force me to do this? (I believe this will have a number of negative effects on my property.)

TIA

Louis

[SoCalSteve]

I would contact a local Real Estate attorney as they will have the best information regarding your situation.

3 outcomes, right?

1.) They can do it.

2.) They can do it, but you can get $$$ from them.

3.) You tell them no.

Good luck!

Steve

[Lifelover]

They can not force it upon you without compensation or going to the city for eminent domain. If that path is clearly the only viable, path they are likely to win the right in court but still owe you compensation.


If you truly don’t want it and you think there is another "reasonable" way for them to get there, just say no. Otherwise, make you case as to how you think it impacts your property value and tell them that is how much you want. Again, it becomes a question of "reasonable".

Also, remember that along the path from the point the power is generated to your house, the transmission and distribution lines most likely pass through easements on hundreds if not thousands of other peoples property. If all of them had choose to fight the power company you maybe paying much more for you power of not have a house there at all.

Be reasonable but firm.

[pbjbike]

I would contact a local Real Estate attorney as they will have the best information regarding your situation.

3 outcomes, right?

1.) They can do it.

2.) They can do it, but you can get $$$ from them.

3.) You tell them no.

Good luck!

Steve

+1

If the development plans have been approved, they will get the power through your property one way or the other. Definitely get an attorney and you will see some financial recompense. Another factor to consider in the negotiation is any landscaping and/or trees that may be removed.

Cheers

[zap]

Louis, any public hearings about the proposed development?

[Louis]

Louis, any public hearings about the proposed development?

None that I'm aware of.

I thing the baseline plan was to get the power from the other street, but they are now looking for ways to save money.

[rugbysecondrow]

If the lot already has a designated easement (look at your initial development plan or plat) yes, they can do this. Most lots have easements of varying depths around the perimeter, so it is possible they can do this. If they are looking for an additional easement outside of that already granted under the plat or current development plans, then I would consult the planning commision (or local governing body) as there will likely be a public hearing based on submitted development plans submitted by the power company.

[Ken Robb]

Underground utilities have almost zero impact on most properties. Overhead lines are a PITA.

[vqdriver]

15' is a lot. even if it's underground, do you have to keep it clear for them to access it/dig it up for repairs and maintenance? or can you use it like normal after they're done?

i have a power pole in my backyard and i have to keep something like 7' clear all around. it's bigger than you think.

luckily if it's underground, you'll probably forget it's even there until it's time to sell the home.

[rugbysecondrow]

15' is a lot. even if it's underground, do you have to keep it clear for them to access it/dig it up for repairs and maintenance? or can you use it like normal after they're done?

i have a power pole in my backyard and i have to keep something like 7' clear all around. it's bigger than you think.

luckily if it's underground, you'll probably forget it's even there until it's time to sell the home.

15' is a lot, but not unusual. When I was a community planner and would review and recommend approval and denial of development plans, there would often be one or two lots that had these easments for access purposes similar to what Louis is talking about.

[Louis]

This is definitely a new easement.

I'm 100% certain that I would have to keep it clear for them in case emergency access is required. That means they would have to chop down a bunch of existing trees. One of the reasons I live out there is that I like being surrounded by trees. This reduces my privacy and I don't feel like they should be able to force me to do it. If it were just enough room to get a trencher through there then let things grow in I could live with it, but this is a big, permanent change.

[vqdriver]

If you truly don’t want it and you think there is another "reasonable" way for them to get there, just say no.

i think this is the key.
that's a tough spot you're in but part of being a property owner i guess.

if you're correct in the initial plan being to bring it thru the other property owner's lot, then you should push to do it that way. one thing that may work in your favor is time. i don't know how long those hearings take, but the property owner may not be able to/want to wait that long. once started, those projects bleed money on a daily basis.

also, other than saving some money, wouldn't the utility have show some compelling reason for the easement when the 'other' side is under development anyway? i could see eminent domain being in play if there was something unique about coming thru your land, but it sounds like there are other viable options.

[vqdriver]

oh wait, tell the USFWS that there's some endangered rodent on the land. then the whole thing will be turned into a preserve.. fun.

[Dekonick]

oh wait, tell the USFWS that there's some endangered rodent on the land. then the whole thing will be turned into a preserve.. fun.

Our dreaded squirrel does NOT count.

[rustychain]

Tell them about the old Native American graveyard on the property :beer:

[Louis]

The developer sent me a preliminary copy of what the utility was proposing (it's just their generic text). Even before having read it I had decided I was going to fight it as much as possible. Reading what you see below makes me even more determined to do so.

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,

That ___________, their heirs, successors and assigns whether one or more and whether an individual, individuals, a corporation, or other legal entity (hereinafter "Grantor"), for and in consideration of the sum of One and No/100ths Dollars ($1.00) the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does grant unto UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY, d/b/a AmerenUE, a Missouri corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter "Grantee"), the perpetual right and easement to construct, reconstruct, use, operate, maintain, add to the number of and patrol an electric, telecommunication line or lines consisting of wires, cables, conduits, transformers and other appurtenances thereto, upon, across, and under the following described land, to-wit:

INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION

This easement is for underground lines and related ground-level and above-ground appurtenances such as manholes, services boxes, or transformers on transformer pads. along with all rights incidental to the exercise and enjoyment of said easement rights, including without limitation the right of ingress and egress to and over the above described easement area and premises of Grantor adjoining the same, for all purposes herein stated; together with the right at any time and from time to time, to trim and cut down any and all brush, saplings, trees and overhanging branches and remove same and/or any rocks or other obstructions upon, over, and under said easement area and the premises of Grantor adjoining the same, which, in Grantee's judgment, interfere with the exercise and enjoyment of Grantee's rights hereunder, or endanger the safety of said line or lines; and the right to license, permit or otherwise agree to the use or occupancy of said easement or any portion thereof or of said line or lines by any other person, association or corporation for the purposes hereinabove set out; and with the further right at any time and from time to time, to remove any or all of the said line or lines, and appurtenances thereto located upon, across and under said land by virtue hereof.

Grantor, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, does hereby warrant and covenant unto Grantee (1) that Grantor is the owner of the above described land and has full right and authority validly to grant this easement, (2) that Grantee may quietly enjoy the premises for the purposes herein stated, and (3) that Grantor will not create or permit any obstruction of any kind or character that will interfere with the exercise and enjoyment of the easement rights hereinabove conveyed.

[vqdriver]

Dude. Really?

I know most of that is a form letter but it sure does read like a big F you.

[Louis]

Dude. Really?

I know most of that is a form letter but it sure does read like a big F you.

They are still asking nicely.

The big "F you" will be when the county sends me a letter saying that the utility wants to do this "for the greater good" (or whatever the legal term is for that concept) and they will be holding a hearing at such and such place at such and such date, with Utility Co. lawyers present, see you then.

[Lifelover]

The developer sent me a preliminary copy of what the utility was proposing (it's just their generic text). Even before having read it I had decided I was going to fight it as much as possible. Reading what you see below makes me even more determined to do so.

What is it specifically about the form letter that seems so bad. It is what it is.

I understand if you don't want to grant it, but I don't see where there is anything in that letter out of the norm.

[rugbysecondrow]

What is it specifically about the form letter that seems so bad. It is what it is.

I understand if you don't want to grant it, but I don't see where there is anything in that letter out of the norm.

Typically when you ask somebody for something, you say please.

I would fight it. If they are changing the use of the property and your enjoyment of the property, then I would certainly fight it. I think even compensation wouldn't make the situation better, I would want the full use of the land (trees and all) rather than a few grand. You might lose that much on resale if aesthetics are ruined by remove trees etc.

I would call the city council (your rep) the planning commision, anybody who would listen about this. They should not approve (nor should they have approved) the development plan without secured easements. So force them to seek an alternative.

[sc53]

Wow, consideration of $1 will be paid to you for their right to erect transformers, transformer pads, MANHOLES (??), other crap, and prune/mow/trim/cut down anything that gets too near their transformers and pads. You will have a mini-power station on your property! What happens when a transformer blows during a t-storm? BOOM and a nice fire on your property. I know in my neighborhood, if even one sickly tree is to be cut, a big hullaballoo starts up and city council is inundated with letters and phone calls and meetings are called where lots of people talk about the tree and what it means to them and before you know it the route is changed to impact some other community. Definitely fight this, you don't need a lawyer at least at first. If served with some sort of eminent domain notice, THEN lawyer up!

[MattTuck]

You should modify the contract. change One and No/100ths Dollars ($1.00) to One Million and No/100ths Dollars ($1,000,000.00), and ask them to come over for the signing ceremony.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . and paying you $1 for it. This is called and "easement" but you will never be able to use this strip land for anything again. You can't build anything on it because if they think it obstructs their access they can tear it down without notice. They can also come in to do just about anything they feel is necessary at any time and without any notice to you. At least, that's what I'm understanding from what you've posted. Plus if this strip happens to go through the middle of your parcel then I don't see how you could ever take full advantage of the rest of the parcel because you would be severely restricted in possible future uses.

It's a first step in seeking to get it from you for the least cost. It's a typical trial balloon to see if you're receptive enough (translate" dumb enough") to go for it. They're trying to see if they can get it without the cost of negotiating a deal with you or suing you for eminent domain.

If you don't go for this I would predict they will attempt eminent domain. But at least with eminent domain they would be forced to pay you some sort of market value. They want to put the line through your land because it's cheapest for them. They don't give a sh*t about you.

BBD

[vqdriver]

Wow, consideration of $1 will be paid to you for their right to erect transformers, transformer pads, MANHOLES (??), other crap, and prune/mow/trim/cut down anything that gets too near their transformers and pads. You will have a mini-power station on your property!

this is what sounds so bad about the form letter.
if they're going to force this on the op, he'd be better off selling it to them.

[Louis]

. . . and paying you $1 for it. This is called and "easement" but you will never be able to use this strip land for anything again

Agreed.

If the developer really wanted to have this property to run power lines through it, he should have purchased it six years ago before I bought it. But why do that, when the utility can strong-arm you and get it for free?

[vqdriver]

I'm missing something. Why, exactly, can they not go thru the developer's land?

[Louis]

I'm missing something. Why, exactly, can they not go thru the developer's land?

They can, but it would cost more because the power lines on the street that has access to his land are not sufficient for the added demand the new homes will put on the system. The utility is going to be upgrading the lines on my street (using the money from all the bills we have been paying and will be paying in the future) so they figured they'd tap into the new lines on my street then cut through my property to his land instead of spending more on the other side.

It all comes down to taking something away from me so they can make more profit.

[johnnymossville]

It looks like you're going to be a sacrificial lamb for the good of the community.

[dave thompson]

It looks like you're going to be a sacrificial lamb for the good of the community.
A little mint jelly and Louis would be quite tasty. ;)

[Lifelover]

The OP is free to accept or deny the initial request, but it is not a conspiracy by "THE MAN" to screw him out of anything. Every one of us benefits from hundreds of easement agreements right now. Every property owner that is serviced by public or private utilities signed the same easement at the closing.

Before we send out a forum sponsored Lynch Mob, there are a few things to consider.

The OP made it clear that this is the standard wording the Utility company uses but this letter was provided by the developer, not the utility. The $1 offer may not be the figure that is proposed. Most times new easements are granted by a property owner to enhance their own utility service. The utility company is still REQUIRED to obtain a legal easement and a dollar amount ($1) is included as legal ease to ensure the property owner can not claim that he did not know that compensation was an option.

Prior to getting the easement, the utility company will provide a engineered drawing showing exactly what is going to be installed and what existing growth or structures will be impacted. The easement, as written, does NOT allow the utility company to come in and change the use of the easement. They can NOT run a single underground feed for 100 homes now and upgrade it to multiple over head lines to feed 1000 homes in the future. They can maintain or remove the utility that they install, but they are not free to do whatever they want in the future.

The OP made it clear that the easement is on the border of his property and thus, there is most likely already code restrictions (set back) that prevent him from building anything there. A fence maybe the sole exception and I would bet that a fence could still be allowed for with the easement.

[Louis]

They can NOT run a single underground feed for 100 homes now and upgrade it to multiple over head lines to feed 1000 homes in the future.


From the text above:

"the perpetual right and easement to construct, reconstruct, use, operate, maintain, add to the number of and patrol an electric, telecommunication line or lines consisting of wires, cables, conduits, transformers and other appurtenances thereto, upon, across, and under the following described land"

LL, I'm not sure how you read the above, but I think that gives them wide latitude.

Also, the text is straight from the utility and the $1 is a standard value in documents of this sort.

[johnnymossville]

The OP is free to accept or deny the initial request, but it is not a conspiracy by "THE MAN" to screw him out of anything. Every one of us benefits from hundreds of easement agreements right now. Every property owner that is serviced by public or private utilities signed the same easement at the closing.....

You are right of course, especially when it's the other guy that is getting pummeled by the easement agreement. :p

[Lifelover]

From the text above:

"the perpetual right and easement to construct, reconstruct, use, operate, maintain, add to the number of and patrol an electric, telecommunication line or lines consisting of wires, cables, conduits, transformers and other appurtenances thereto, upon, across, and under the following described land"

LL, I'm not sure how you read the above, but I think that gives them wide latitude.

Also, the text is straight from the utility and the $1 is a standard value in documents of this sort.

I'm not and I don't think you are a Lawyer, so in the end it really does not matter how "we" read it.

You clearly are not comfortable with it and should not grant it unitl you are. If it does look like they are going to force it, you will need a Lawyer to tell you what it really means.

Getting the opinion from the forum is like BP getting our opinion on how to stop the leak. We are all working with very, very limited knowledge.

Regardless of how it turns out, I hope you are able to accept it and it does not taint your fellings about your own home.

[Louis]

Getting the opinion from the forum is like BP getting out opinion on how to stop the leak.

The implication that I am like BP is terrible, terrible insult :p

[kestrel]

Louis,

I work for a public body that condemns land occasionally. Before we even consider condemnation, we send a letter and a personal visit to the land owner. We have never used such a figure of 1 dollar as total payment for the land. We get an appraisal company to do a fair market value assessment, and begin at that point. We negotiate the price taking into consideration the cost of condemnation and lawyers fees from any subsequent lawsuit the property owner may choose to file against us. (Some property owners have made a case that the intrusion of our lines and limited or no use of the property over our lines constitutes a devaluation of their property and have won retribution payments.) We have offered higher than appraised value for a piece of property if it was potentially going to cost us more in legal fees than paying the higher price. We also negotiate landscaping measures the property owner would like in order to maintain their privacy.

We have done this with hundreds of acres and also with strips as small as 15 X 25 feet.

[1centaur]

Yeah, that legal agreement is a bit over the top. I've worked with corporate counsel on drafting a lot of agreements and one gets used to finding the character of a lawyer in the words and concepts chosen. There are some word choices there that are a bit too clever and self satisfied.

I particularly noticed the grantee's right to license use of an appurtenance on the easement to anyone they want. Look up that word. It's wide open to interpretation, including "improvement" with a word origin that includes "outbuilding." They could put up a building that houses lines under that wording, or license that right to someone else, despite limiting their "such as" examples to manhole covers, etc. Further, the grantee's "judgment" of whether anything you'd do might interfere with the easement is not subject even to a reasonability standard that a judge could use against them.

Money for the utility, money for the developer, a dollar for Louis. Great deal. Even under eminent domain, I hope you can more tightly define what they'd put there and how nicely they'll hide it. They can afford it.

[Ken Robb]

FYI, the "$1" or "$1 and other valuable considerations" are commonly used in some areas to reflect that a "consideration" was paid to validate a contract or sale but it conceals the actual amount paid from people reading the documents at the Recorder's Office.

I wouldn't read too much into the $1 amount in the example above.

[Louis]

I wouldn't read too much into the $1 amount in the example above.

Ken, I agree and I don't, but even if it were $10,000 I wouldn't be interested. (And you can be sure any numbers they are thinking of are more like $1000 and hope I just go away.)