The City of Surrey has lost an appeal court fight – with $41 million at stake – against the British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority and British Columbia Utilities Commission related to relocating power lines to accommodate the 72 Avenue extension, after a judge decided the city’s proposed appeal “does not pass muster.”
“I conclude that none of Surrey’s grounds of appeal are arguable,” Justice Paul Riley found. “The transmission line relocation project will clearly involve significant cost, and is necessary to facilitate Surrey’s proposed highway extension. Thus, I accept that the outcome of the appeal is a matter of significance to Surrey, and also to B.C. Hydro.”
However, he concluded, “the appeal stands no chance of success on the merits.”
Riley presided over a Court of Appeal for British Columbia case in Vancouver wherein Surrey unsuccessfully applied for leave to appeal a commission panel’s decision ordering it to pay the full cost of a $41 million reconfiguration of high-voltage powerlines in accordance with its plan to expand 72 Avenue.
Surrey argued the commission hadn’t the jurisdiction to do so and applied under the Utilities Commission Act (UCA) for relief.
“Surrey is in the process of planning a highway extension, which is expected to run along the 72nd Avenue property. B.C. Hydro has high voltage transmission lines suspended by towers running across the property. To accommodate the proposed highway extension, the height of these transmission lines must be raised, and the towers must be relocated to allow adequate overhead clearance for traffic,” Riley explained in his January 23 reasons for decision.
“In preliminary discussions, B.C. Hydro informed Surrey that the necessary modifications to the transmission line infrastructure would cost between $18 million and $39 million.”
But after discussions broke down, Riley noted, the City of Surrey filed a lawsuit against B.C. Hydro alleging trespass, arguing it never had the proper authority to run its lines across the property.
The judge explained in his reasons that Hydro then filed its application with the commission seeking an order that set out the “manner and terms on which B.C. Hydro’s high voltage transmission facilities would continue to run across the subject property.”
Surrey objected and filed its notice in September, seeking leave to appeal with an “overarching argument” the commission panel erred in law in holding that Hydro had a right to enter municipal property as per the UCA.
“In my view, the argument that the panel erred in reaching this conclusion has no merit,” Riley decided.
“Surrey has therefore not identified any basis on which a division of this court could revisit the panel’s conclusion that this was an appropriate case for the exercise of the commission’s statutory jurisdiction to resolve a dispute between a utility and a municipality regarding public utility infrastructure on municipal property,” the judge concluded.
“While Surrey may disagree with the panel’s conclusion, it has not identified any grounds on which it could successfully challenge the panel’s multifactorial assessment of the terms for modifying the existing B.C. Hydro infrastructure to accommodate Surrey’s planned highway extension.”
Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke could not be immediately reached for comment.