O-1991-1764 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

e e KNOX W. ASKINS .JOHN O. ARMSTRONG ASKINS & ARMSTRONG, P. C. AlTORNEYS AT LAW 702 W, FAIRMONT PARKWAY P. O. BOX 1218 LA PORTE. TEXAS 77572-1218 TELEPHONE 713 471-1 eee TELECOPIER 713 471-2047 June 12, 1991 Mr. Robert T. Herrera City Manager City of La Porte City Hall La Porte, Texas Dear Bob: At your request, I have examined proposed easement from the City of La Porte to Houston Lighting & Power Company, for a 138KV electrical transmission line, being a 50 foot wide electrical transmission right-of-way along the south edge of Blocks 475 and 474, Town of La Porte, Harris County, Texas, for Houston Lighting & Power Company to serve Tenneco. The terms of the easement are set out in letters dated April 4, 1991 and April 5, 1991, from Houston Lighting & Power Company to the City of La Porte. I have spoken with Mr. Clayton L. Williamson, Land Agent for Houston Lighting & Power Company, about the proposed easement. Although there have been extensive discussions between the City of La Porte, Houston Lighting & Power Company, and Southern Pacific, concerning the alignment of the Houston Lighting & Power Company easement, and Southern Pacific spurs across the easement area, the Houston Lighting & Power Company proposed easement is in standard form, and does not show, on the map attached thereto, the positioning of the Houston Lighting & Power Company poles and equipment, nor does the easement language confine Houston Lighting & Power Company in any way as to pole location. The easement does provide that the City reserves the right to "extend railroad spur tracks, roads or streets and f.nces across, but not along the easement...conveyed." City or railroad facilities cannot be closer than 12 feet to any of Houston Lighting & Power Company's "then existing structures." Further, the easement document provides that the City would have to first seek Houston Lighting & Power Company approval of plans and specifications for proposed crossing and the location thereof. There is easement language to the effect that the spurs must cross the easement, and not parallel the easement. In conversation with Mr. Williamson to obtain clarification of this language, he said this language was intended to prevent streets or railroad tracks to parallel the easement, within the 50 foot easement strip. I see no objection to this requirement. In other words, the proposed railroad spur which would go west on "H" Street, could be constructed in the remaining former right-of-way of "H" Street, without impeding the easement.