Qwest is building a wall on my lot. Help.

**Tippster** · 10-16-2007, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by PaSucks

I don't think a 10" fence is going to cut it.

**grskier** · 10-16-2007, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

Well, y........re before or after your house is irrelevant. It's the easement that matters...in the end. Be cool, and let us know. I work with these people day in/day out, trust me.

'tis sage advice.. also see my email..

If anyone gets powertrippy on you, let me know what "knowledge" they are trying to drop.

As with Blurred, as some know I deal with this on a daily basis as well being one of those "guys" that ends up in the decision making process regarding this shit. Utilities in a utility easement are what they are, usually eyesores, but sometimes a necessity for how we live.

**Tippster** · 10-16-2007, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by nutcase

you say its an easement - which means that you own the land and they have a pre-negotiated right to use it for certain purposes...

Huh. 'round here it's the exact opposite - the city owns 1/2 of your front yard in case they need to widen the streets. You are responsible, however, for the upkeep of this land, including shoveling the sidewalk. You can get fined for not doing that, or letting the weeds grow.

**grskier** · 10-16-2007, 09:48 PM

That is not exactly how it works, but there are definite prescriptive easements to be headed. Just because your deed plotted shows you own half the road...

Eminent domain is an interesting topic that we discuss a lot. You need to help maintain publics right of ways in the aspect of sidewalks, yes, your lawn does need to be kept of weeds, it's a protection to your neighborhood (I'm not going to flame about that one though, I'll let our land manager battle that fight). This is a little different, as this is in the public ROW if the description I read is accurate.

**Tippster** · 10-16-2007, 09:51 PM

Our utility poles are in our treeboxes. Yep, we're responsible for maintenance of those as well, yet have no right to have them removed.

**nutcase** · 10-16-2007, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by Tippster

Huh. 'round here it's the exact opposite - the city owns 1/2 of your front yard in case they need to widen the streets. You are responsible, however, for the upkeep of this land, including shoveling the sidewalk. You can get fined for not doing that, or letting the weeds grow.

If the city owns it it is not called an easement. It would be a right of way or something similar. An easement is an ability to use someone elses land. You might not be able to do anything with the land becaus eof the easement restrictions- but you would generally be the fee owner.

**DrGonzo** · 10-16-2007, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

Well, you seem like a reasonable guy, so I'll play.

Whether the cabinet was there before or after your house is irrelevant. It's the easement that matters. (and I'd just about guarantee telco was there before your house) Look up the definition of easement. It's a right of usage, which screws you. I'll also mention that utility companies have an infinite supply of wealth and knowledge on the subject that has been building since the beginning of time.

Your best bet is to call up the Qwest engineer, and schedule a meeting with him on the property. If you're reasonable with him and rationally voice your concerns, he'll probably give you some good suggestions and work with you. If you try and pull some sort of power trip, he'll just write you off as a dick and go ahead with his plan, and you'll find out I'm right in the end. Be cool, and let us know. I work with these people day in/day out, trust me.

Thanks. I'm just trying to protect what is, for me, a huge investment.

Originally Posted by nutcase

If the city owns it it is not called an easement. It would be a right of way or something similar. An easement is an ability to use someone elses land. You might not be able to do anything with the land becaus eof the easement restrictions- but you would generally be the fee owner.

You are right on. I own the land, but the city can and does approve conditional use for utilities etc. My contact at the planning division seems to think this will be denied, but we'll see. Qwest will appeal if it is, and vice versa for me for me if it's approved.

**Arty50** · 10-17-2007, 12:26 AM

Do a google search for U-verse.

That's what AT&T is calling their next gen "fiber-optic" network. Except it's merely fiber optic to the node, which happens to be a huge box sitting outside someone's house. I've read about numerous complaints from people about these boxes and some have managed to get them blocked.

I used quotes around fiber-optic because U-Verse still relies on copper to your house. Verizon is the only company that has ponied up and is laying fiber directly into homes for their Fios service. And of course, Qwest doesn't have plans to do anything even remotely approaching either of these yet.

**Nobody Famous** · 10-17-2007, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

What "mini refrigerators" are you referring to? Pedistals? Transformers?

Please elaborate.

These:

**Jer** · 10-17-2007, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by DrGonzo

... it is possible to make things faster, as well as less obtrusive--it just costs the provider more money. They have cited Murray's fiber optic system as a prime example.

Yeah. See also: Provo, UTOPIA. Qwest & Comcast did their best to kill UTOPIA - competition is bad for business, y'know. Their lobbying is a big part of the reason that SLC didn't sign on, so Sugarhouse won't be getting fiber for quite a while.
Not that I really need a 10-100x faster connection for half the price that Qwest & Comcast fixed.

Doc - if you wanna fight this and win, you gotta talk to all the players and get some support from your neighbors - some letters to the right places, and some warm bodies at the right meetings. Lotta legwork - don't expect the city/county/utility to have their records & regs in order and accessible. If it's really that big a deal to you, consider getting some research assistance - someone who can find the right info, construct the right arguments, present them to the right people. Might mean getting an attorney - the research will be done by legal assistants anyway. Time is money, so it'll cost ya, one way or the other.

**Art Shirk** · 10-17-2007, 12:37 PM

I don't think that I am adding much more than has already been said but...reference the easement language first. Not sure about Utah, but easements are public record available online with the Auditor in the county where the property is located. Utility easements granted to the city fall into this category, and although they give the city a general carte blanche at times, many incorporate reasonable exercises of utility creation. I have drafted a few of these things, and when my client is the developer (and the city is demanding that we produce the easement for recording), I usually place some restrictions that I hope are adopted.

I think the most that you can hope for is either (a) the easement language in some way contradicts Qwest's plan and AND this argument actually garners some leverage for them to find a less intrusive alternative rather than continue the fight, or (b) public involvement, clear and consistent dissent. You won't hit a homerun, but you may get a better option or some landscaping.

**irul&ublo** · 10-17-2007, 12:53 PM

Check and see if the easement is actually there and what it provides. Qwest ended up paying me 25 large a few years ago when they ran a line and placed underground vaults on my property because they were told there was PUE easement. Turned out there wasn't.

**Jer** · 10-17-2007, 12:56 PM

^^ Q.E.D.
If you assume that They know what They are doing - you're probably wrong.

**Adolf Allerbush** · 10-17-2007, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by grskier

Voice, Voice, and voice again, the more you have, the more reaction you will get (trust me on this).

Find out what type and where exactly the easement is. If it's on your lot or on the public right of way. Call the local administering GIS and Transportation department to get this information. If they don't have it then they are dumb. Write a letter both to staff and the Commission addressing the issue. You can also possibly request a delay (not likely) to the hearing. A lot of times people don't know exactly where their property boundaries are.. the municipality may own more ROW than you think (some of it is fuzzy because of prescriptive easements and whatnot), or there may be some confusion. Depending on where you are, you can get a lot of information from the clerk and recorders office regarding deeds and whatnot. If you need more help PM me and I'll be more than happy to look through your local departments and give you the people you'll probably need to talk to. Also, get a copy of the munic. asset management plan and land use codes..... It'll all be empowering.

If you can afford a few hours of lawyer time, they can review all above documents better than most (if they know their ish)

You should be able to find all the information you need online to know weather or not you have any sort of case. Check out the county/city online mapping. They have this, I do work for the DOT in the area. Check the zoning code. It sucks but I'm sure that the utility has done this and picked your property because they can build it easily on your property legally. I think a lawyer is a waste of money and time. You call them up and complain to get your name out there and on record. Unfortunately Tippster is right, there is little recourse, it's an easement.

Which makes me wonder what type of easement? Do you have an easement to be in the public ROW? Is the utility in the public ROW? Is the utility on your property using an easement? Did you buy the house knowing the utility was on your property? etc.

do you have an example of what one of these looks like exactly?

This???

I feel your pain but man if that picture above is all it is I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Originally Posted by grskier

That is not exactly how it works, but there are definite prescriptive easements to be headed. Just because your deed plotted shows you own half the road...

Eminent domain is an interesting topic that we discuss a lot. You need to help maintain publics right of ways in the aspect of sidewalks, yes, your lawn does need to be kept of weeds, it's a protection to your neighborhood (I'm not going to flame about that one though, I'll let our land manager battle that fight). This is a little different, as this is in the public ROW if the description I read is accurate.

This isn't always the case. Much of the time the sidewalk is owned by the state/county/city that owns the road.

**irul&ublo** · 10-17-2007, 03:23 PM

Check the title insurance you got when you bought the house. It should list all easements and encumberances of record as exceptions.

**Clone** · 10-17-2007, 04:18 PM

Qwest generally is pretty helpful if:

1) You can actually talk to someone involved with the project.

2) You do it before they pull and splice cable. Peds are easier to move than fusion spliced fibre.

But my experience is in rural Colorado so YMMV etc...

**DrGonzo** · 10-17-2007, 05:56 PM

I spoke to the project manager at Qwest yesterday just to ask some questions--he claims that this is the the most convenient site, and smallest cabinets available. He wasn't really interested in accomodating me, and I can't really blame the guy.

The cabinets are similar in shape to the smaller one in the photo that AA posted--they are all about 5' tall and 3' wide, and painted green (actually about 4 shades of green from spraying over graffiti on a regular basis.

I pulled the title report and plat map and sent it to some people much smarter than I am. I can't see anything wrong with it, but I've been wrong before. This being short notice and only having been in the neighborhood a short time, I haven't been able to build any consensus from my neighbors. I did meet with the head of the Sugarhouse Community Council, who acts as an advisory Board, with no legal weight, to the City Council. She will read my letter on record tomorrow at the hearing, as well as speak on behalf of her council who represents my community at large, whether they know it or not.

While I may not have a leg to stand on legally, we will attempt to reinforce the adverse findings of the Planning Divisions staff report--the circumstances and location do, in fact, present a pedestrian hazard as well as visually disturb a community that some are trying very hard to preserve. I, personally, just don't want to get hurt financially. I can dream, right?

**altagirl** · 10-17-2007, 06:17 PM

Sounds like you're doing what you can.

If the easement was on your title when you bought the place, legally, they have every right to do it. Whether or not zoning approves it is a different matter completely.

And I have to agree that if they don't put it there, it has to go somewhere... it's not going to make someone happy no matter where it goes. It's admittedly not a plus for your home value to have it there, but not having good telecom service in your neighborhood isn't exactly a selling point either. And I don't know how to put an exact price tag on the devaluation - it's going to vary buyer to buyer how much they care about it.

As far as reading your title report goes, you can also call the title company and you can ask them for some assistance. That should only take them a few minutes. Their contact info should be on the title page of the report.

**Adolf Allerbush** · 10-17-2007, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by DrGonzo

While I may not have a leg to stand on legally, we will attempt to reinforce the adverse findings of the Planning Divisions staff report--the circumstances and location do, in fact, present a pedestrian hazard as well as visually disturb a community that some are trying very hard to preserve. I, personally, just don't want to get hurt financially. I can dream, right?

Is this your zoning?

Code Description Parcel # R-1-7000 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

Assuming this wall is going in your front yard:

1. Front Yard: The minimum depth of the front yard for all principal buildings shall be equal to the average of the front yards of existing buildings within the block face. Where there are no existing buildings within the block face, the minimum depth shall be twenty feet (20'). Where the minimum front yard is specified in the recorded subdivision plat, the requirement specified on the plat shall prevail.

But if you're on a corner: 6' the corner side of the lot.

So, does this qualify as a City Utility(I assume it does)? aka

"Municipal service uses, including city utility uses and police and fire stations"

Do you have a copy of the conditional use permit application from Qwest? Is that what you're calling the "Plainning Divisions staff report"? Because if you're trying to find a loop hole to get them to not build it on your property or near it I'd start there and try to pick that beeyotch apart. Any discrepancies you find will at least delay the work as they will have to give an answer as to why it's innacurate or revise their application.

You said your house has been around for a while, I think you wrote 1944 or before? This little tidbit might be a good place to start:

the locations and proposed treatment of any historic structure, element or feature affected by the development

If you can get your SHPO (state historic preservation office) dewds to buy off on your house being a significant historic site you might be able to get the Qwest dudes to stay away just purely from wanting to avoid the hassle of hiring a consultant to say that the wall they plan on putting in will have no impact. And then maybe it does have an impact??? Visual etc. Is there anything structurally significant about your pad (some crazy architect design it)? Anything crazy happen there? Like did some significant historic figure take a dump there or something?

Also I would think that this part of the application needs to be dead on accurate from Qwest:

the location and purpose of any existing or proposed dedication, easement or deed restriction

I think buy putting up a fight and just bing in general a pain in the ass they might look elsewhere to put the wall.

So, that's my 2 cents for what its worth...which is probably not much.

**DrGonzo** · 10-17-2007, 07:03 PM

The Staff Report is the Planning Division's diligence in approving a conditional use permit. A few tidbits--I'd copy/paste the whole thing but it's long...

You are correct with the zoning, R - 1 - 7000:
"A. The proposed development is one of the conditional uses specifically listed in this title;
Analysis: Public/private utility buildings and structures are specifically listed in section 21A.24.190 Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts.
Finding: Staff finds the proposed development is one of the conditional uses specifically listed in this title."

And in their words:
"L. The proposed development complies with all other applicable codes and ordinances.
Analysis: Approval of application remains contingent on compliance with all applicable City departmental requirements. The proposed development shall comply with all other applicable codes and ordinances.
Finding: Staff finds the proposed development complies with all other applicable codes and ordinances"

But...
"K. The proposed conditional use or, in the case of a planned development, the permitted and conditional uses contained therein, are compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the proposed development and will not have a material net cumulative adverse impact on the neighborhood or the city as a whole;
Analysis: The proposed development is listed in21A.24.190 Table of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Residential Districts. The immediate benefits of the installation are realized by those who wish to invest in technology has become a basic infrastructure need in many homes today. That said, it comes at a cost in our residential districts. The location and scale of this project makes mitigation difficult. First, public safety is a major factor with Dilworth Elementary in such close proximity. Second, the cabinets provide ample opportunity for obscuring the nighttime view of the sidewalk and streetscape potentially posing a safety hazard for residents. Third, you cannot simply disguise or mask three 48” to 58” tall telecommunication cabinet with vegetation and maintain accessibility for Qwest or any other telecommunication company. Finally, the issue of graffiti is ever-present and frankly will remain no mater how diligent Qwest and the residents continue to be.
Finding: Stafffinds the proposed conditional use are not compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the proposed development and will have a material net cumulative adverse impact on the neighborhood or the city as a whole; The location and scale of the cabinets coupled with the final proposed outcome remains unmitigated."

**bean** · 10-17-2007, 09:46 PM

Suggest they bury the fucker.

**Adolf Allerbush** · 10-18-2007, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by DrGonzo

[FONT='Times New Roman']
But...
"K. The proposed conditional use or, in the case of a planned development, the permitted and conditional uses contained therein, are compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the proposed development and will not have a material net cumulative adverse impact on the neighborhood or the city as a whole;
Analysis: The proposed development is listed in21A.24.190 Table of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Residential Districts. The immediate benefits of the installation are realized by those who wish to invest in technology has become a basic infrastructure need in many homes today. That said, it comes at a cost in our residential districts. The location and scale of this project makes mitigation difficult. First, public safety is a major factor with Dilworth Elementary in such close proximity. Second, the cabinets provide ample opportunity for obscuring the nighttime view of the sidewalk and streetscape potentially posing a safety hazard for residents. Third, you cannot simply disguise or mask three 48” to 58” tall telecommunication cabinet with vegetation and maintain accessibility for Qwest or any other telecommunication company. Finally, the issue of graffiti is ever-present and frankly will remain no mater how diligent Qwest and the residents continue to be.
Finding: Stafffinds the proposed conditional use are not compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the proposed development and will have a material net cumulative adverse impact on the neighborhood or the city as a whole; The location and scale of the cabinets coupled with the final proposed outcome remains unmitigated."

I think you have a decent case. It's a safety issue for pedestrians and an eye sore. There must be a different place they can put it. Are there any commercial parcels nearby?

**DrGonzo** · 10-24-2007, 06:14 PM

From the Salt Lake planning division...

"We just finished up with the hearing and the petition was outright denied. Qwest does have the ability to appeal. If anything changes I will let you know as soon as I find out."

Thanks to everyone who contributed. Now I just need to pray for more snow since I left just when everything was getting good...