03-12-97 Councl Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COIINCIL MARC:H 12,1997 that the bond or letter of credit requirement was an ongoing burden the City did not need to impose. The City Administrator reviewed his memo dated March 7, 1997 wherein he is recommending the performance bond or letter of credit be required for proper[ies having a mlrginal value. For properties with sufficient property value, as determined by the City Council, the applicant may substitute an agreement in recordable form which would address the assessment of the property for tower removal costs iF such removal by the City becomes necessary. Fahey was concerned about the administrative burden in carryin~ a performance bond or letter of credit over the life of a tower. Morelan asked the carryin~ costs of such a document. The City Attorney estimated the carrying costs at I%, and it was suggested for a firm with the financial strength of Sprint, for example, it is possible sucl~ a documenC could be issued at no cost to them. Scalze pointed out the proposal is the performance bond or letter of credit would only be required on a small, limited value piece of property. The Administrator pointed out the concern is should it be necessary to assess the cost of tower removal against a property, the amount of the assessment may be larger than the value of a marginal piece of land, and the property owner might then let the property go tax forfeit. The proposal is that the City would not require a bond or letter of credit for parcels which have sufficient value. Fahey asked if this is consistent witli what other cities are doing. The City Administrator reported that some cities use the hazardous building statutes to require removal of lbandoned towers and other cities require an assessment provision be included in lease agreements. The Administrator felt the proposed requirement was a means of addressing the issue without exposing the City or putting an unreasonable burden on the tenant or landowner. Les Jobes, PCS, reported that Sprint typically pllces towers on properties which have a substantial property value. Jobes also agreed with the Mayor's comments that there is a substantial administrative burden in trackin~ a performance bond or letter of credit. Fahey indicated he w1s concerned about the administrative burden, but pointed out the Administrator's recommeudation would be to only require the bond or letter of credit for pro~erties with mar~inal value. 2