Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Poles Ada topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charlottesville staff describe slow progress removing utility poles, cite franchise limits and ADA changes
Summary
City staff told the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee that removing or relocating utility poles across Charlottesville is slow because of fragmented utility ownership, an old franchise agreement with Dominion, engineering limits for pole lines and new ADA guidance that removes some prior exceptions.
City staff and committee members discussed persistent sidewalk and accessibility problems caused by utility poles during a Charlottesville Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting.
Brandon, a city staff member, told the committee the city has been working with utilities “in earnest” since last year and that “we have around 15, independent utility companies” involved in attachments to poles, but that only two — Dominion and BrightSpeed — own poles, complicating removals. He said the city has removed “somewhere between 30 and 50 poles in the last year” but that many poles remain because moving one pole can force larger rearrangements on a line of poles.
The discussion centered on three constraints: the city’s limited leverage under an older Dominion franchise agreement, the technical difficulty and cost of relocating or undergrounding lines, and changes to accessibility rules. Brandon said the franchise is effectively perpetual, written around 1921, and that it limits renegotiation; he also said newer ADA guidance passed late last year removed an earlier exception for poles and hydrants, which increases the number of locations where the city must provide an accessible route.
Committee members pressed the city on enforcement and quality control. Brandon described steps the city has taken: asking utilities to pull permits for new work, hiring a records-retention and finance staffer to manage franchise paperwork, and relying on a traffic inspector who drives the city daily to spot unpermitted work. He also encouraged the public to report problem locations through the city’s service app (MySegal) and, for persistent problems, to contact utilities directly.
On costs and alternatives, Brandon said burying lines is expensive and technically constrained by narrow rights of way, existing underground utilities and the need for protected duct banks. He gave an example: an East High Street streetscape project that undergrounds lines between Market and Locust cost about $3.5 million.
Questions from committee members and residents flagged specific hazards: wires hanging across streets, large repair holes left in sidewalks, and poles placed in the middle of sidewalks near schools. Brandon said the city will try to route some ADA fixes by building new sidewalk around poles when moving poles is impractical, and that many fixes will be part of the city’s ADA transition plan spread over several years.
No formal motions or votes occurred. Committee members suggested the city consider a dedicated staff person to coordinate pole work, maintain monthly updates from utilities, and press for clearer permitting and quality standards. Brandon said the city already seeks monthly updates from utilities and is working to get more consistent reporting.
The discussion closed with staff asking for continued reports from the public and committee support identifying priority poles and locations to escalate with the utilities.
