THE UNDERGROUND INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES 361 



Late last year a Utilities Appearance Committee was organized 

 by 24 utilities in five western States. This committee is coordinat- 

 ing the approaches and proposed solutions of all participating utili- 

 ties in an effort to arrive at standardization of designs which are 

 both aesthetically and economically sound. 



The problem of converting existing overhead districts to under- 

 ground is a more difficult one to solve. Circumstances vary widely. 

 In the older areas, absentee ownership and low income result in a 

 general lack of interest in the aesthetic aspect. Left alone, the con- 

 version would probably come about automatically due to change in 

 land use. This could take many years, and I'm not sure it's the best 

 answer. It seems to me the solution in these areas requires the co- 

 operative effort of the property owners, the community, and the 

 utility. It may well be that more flexible improvement district regu- 

 lations are also indicated. 



In other less depressed areas, the solution should be easier, but 

 even here, despite an active program on the part of the utility, very 

 little conversion has been made. Perhaps here, too, more flexibility 

 in the formation of improvement districts would help. 



I might make a comment on an article which appeared in the 

 May issue of Public Power, which told about an experience that 

 the Sacramento Municipal Utility has had on new subdivisions. 

 They offered the underground facilities, over an 18-month period, 

 at no extra cost to subdividers and their experience was so good that 

 they have extended this for another 1 2 months. 



The situation is different in different parts of the country, and this 

 is only one utility which has stepped forward and actually provided 

 the underground installations at no extra cost. The general prac- 

 tice is to have the subdivider pay for the difference in the cost of over- 

 head over the cost of underground, and this cost varies as to topogra- 

 phy and location of facilities. 



Mr. LISGHER. I think most electric utilities are becoming increas- 

 ingly aware of the need to have their facilities attractive as well as 

 low in cost. While considerable progress has been made in certain 

 areas, much remains to be done. The single, biggest problem is how 

 to do it economically so that it will not be an impediment for further 

 rate reductions for our customers. 



In the distribution systems to our homes, ten years ago the cost 

 ratio of going underground compared to overhead lines was 10 to 1 ; 

 today in some instances, it is 1 J/2 to 1 . Much has been accomplished 



