[mythtv-users] Underground vs. Overhead Utilities

Brian Wood beww at beww.org
Wed Jan 28 20:14:51 UTC 2009


On Wednesday 28 January 2009 12:50:25 ryan patterson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Russ Dill <russ.dill at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've lived in phoenix for around 30 years, both in areas with above
> > ground lines and below ground lines. The areas with below ground lines
> > are not just more visually appealing (higher property values) but also
> > have much more reliable power. During the summer, when you need power
> > the most, storms tend to snap overhead lines like twigs.
>
> Utility delivery is more important in the winter then in the summer.
> Yes you can die from heat stroke.  But it is a LOT easier to freeze to
> death.  Especially after an ice/snow storm that closes the roads.  In
> the summer at least you can leave the house.
>
> > I don't know if the total repair and downtime costs ever make up for
> > the extra build costs, but the increased uptime and visual appeal is
> > definitely worth it to me.
>
> I agree 100%.  Below ground installation is worth it just for the
> visual appeal.  The added stability is just gravy.  I can't imagine
> any intelligent person arguing that they prefer above ground
> instillation just so they can save 1-2% on the purchase price of a
> house.

As far as an individual you are correct.

But in a lot of cases the utility installation costs are passed to the 
developer, and if he is building 600 homes, he is likely to opt for the 
overhead option.

-- 
beww
beww at beww.org


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list