🚀 go-pugleaf

lrobbins@dale.ksc.nasa.gov (Lloyd Robbins) writes:

> As a previous reader noted, yes, there was an easment there. And no,
> three months ago when we signed the contract there were "no plans for
> utilities in that area".  But now they have to condem another 8 feet
> of my neighbor's yard for a total of 15 feet of easment to fit these
> blasted poles in.  I wouldn't be so torqed off about the whole thing
> except:

I may be misunderstanding what you're saying, but it sounds to me like
you're talking about _widening_ the easement. If that is the case it
seems to me that FPL will either:

a. have to get your neighbor and the other property owners effected to
   agree to the changes in the easement, or

b. get the local government to change the easement, even if the
   effected property owners don't agree.

That ought to be a whole different ball game from what is involved in
just using the original easement. I would suggest exploring the
alternative routes available to FPL and figure out how much FPL is
saving by using this route. This might give you an idea of how hard
they'll try before they give up.

I think the whole EMF is overblown, but based on the discussion in
misc.consumers.house a few months ago there can more practical reasons
for not wanting to be next to high-tension lines. There was some
mention of problems that can happen if the lines aren't balanced or
the insulators aren't properly maintained.


Joel Upchurch @ Upchurch Computer Consulting uunet!aaahq01!upchrch!joel 
718 Galsworthy Ave. Orlando, FL 32809-6429  phone (407) 859-0982