|
Hi Kurt,
<br />
<br />I can address your questions and add some additional comments.
<br />
<br />The distance from the pole to the building does create somewhat of a
<br />concern. As the cable distance increases so does the signals resistant
<br />so the cable and pole would likely get larger. It's just a matter of
<br />how much.
<br />
<br />The city of Bloomington requires an underground vault in certain areas
<br />for the cell companies. You might want to contact them. A couple of
<br />things to keep in mind however are the water table and the underground
<br />area would still be restricted. This does become much more costly.
<br />
<br />Here are a couple of additional issues.
<br />1. The building will probably be fitted with an air conditioner and
<br />possibly a back-up generator. This might be a sound issue.
<br />2. If the building is close to the pole sometimes they will run the wire
<br />to the pole aerially. The city should require underground.
<br />3. If the height of the pole is limited. Co-location may be less
<br />desirable. If co-location is required additional pole strength and
<br />possibly height will be needed regardless of T-mobiles needs.
<br />4. The Lakeville reference in the previous email had a taller pole so it
<br />was a higher cost. With a shorter pole the cost would be less thus the
<br />abatement time should be shorter.
<br />5. T-mobile should provide us with their requirements for co-location
<br />6. Finally if the City does take ownership of the pole after an
<br />abatement period the base rent required by the City should be the same
<br />as if another company wanted to co-locate some where in the $1200-1500
<br />range.
<br />
<br />Additional Questions?
<br />
<br />Dale Aukee
<br />Field Representative
<br />Great River Energy
<br />Office 763-241-2229
<br />Cell 612-840-4019
<br />Fax 763-241-6003
<br />
<br />
<br />-----Original Message-----
<br />From: Kurt Ulrich [mailto:kurt.ulrich@ci.mounds-view.mn.us]
<br />Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 4:49 PM
<br />To: Aukee, Dale GRE/ER
<br />Cc: Greg Lee; Jim Ericson
<br />Subject: RE: T-Mobile proposed communication pole and antenna at
<br />Groveland Park
<br />
<br /> Thanks Dale. Excellent comments and they answer many of my questions.
<br />I still wonder about the relationship of pole size to the distance of
<br />the equipment shelter. T-Mobile indicated that as the distance
<br />increased the pole would have to get larger due to the increased size of
<br />the cable required. Also, would it be feasible for the equipment
<br />shelter to be located below ground as an option? Thanks.
<br />-Kurt
<br />
<br />-----Original Message-----
<br />From: Aukee, Dale GRE/ER [mailto:DAukee@GREnergy.com]
<br />Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 10:06 AM
<br />To: Kurt Ulrich
<br />Subject: FW: T-Mobile proposed communication pole and antenna at
<br />Groveland Park
<br />Importance: High
<br />
<br />Hi Kurt,
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A I mentioned to you this morning, here is the email I sent to council.
<br />Once you have had a chance to review please let me know if there are
<br />additional questions that you think of.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Dale Aukee
<br />
<br />Field Representative
<br />
<br />Great River Energy
<br />
<br />Office 763-241-2229
<br />
<br />Cell 612-840-4019
<br />
<br />Fax 763-241-6003
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />-----Original Message-----
<br />From: Aukee, Dale GRE/ER
<br />Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:25 AM
<br />To: 'Greg Lee'; Cindy Palm; Dan Weldon; Dave Long (E-mail); Gerald Arel
<br />(E-mail); Jerome Kunz (E-mail); John Kroeger (E-mail); John Kroeger
<br />-work; Marta McIntyre; Shari Kunza; Steve Dazenski
<br />Cc: 'rob.marty@ci.mounds-view.mn.us';
<br />'roger.stigney@ci.mounds-view.mn.us';
<br />'sherry.gunn@ci.mounds-view.mn.us';
<br />'barbara.thomas@ci.mounds-view.mn.us';
<br />'joe.flaherty@ci.mounds-view.mn.us'
<br />Subject: RE: T-Mobile proposed communication pole and antenna at
<br />Groveland Park
<br />Importance: High
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Hello Commissioners and Council members,
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Below are some facts and points of negotiation that can and should be
<br />addressed if the City is to move forward on the tower. I would like to
<br />re-iterate my position that due to our limited park space I don't
<br />believe this is a reasonable project for the city to undertake.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />However,
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* The City should require a monopole, which by itself, won't take
<br />up much space. Although the equipment shelter for T-Mobile may only
<br />take an area 10' x 12', if other carriers want to co-locate on the pole
<br />in the future, additional ground space would be required for them to
<br />either place their own shelter or, add on to the T-Mobile shelter so it
<br />looks like one building. Many of the carriers use a pre-fab shelter
<br />approximately 12' x 24' but, they are used to altering them or
<br />constructing buildings that match existing architecture. While it is
<br />cheaper and more convenient to have the shelter placed adjacent to the
<br />monopole, it can be located farther away if the ground is clear to bury
<br />the cables between the tower and the shelter.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* Carriers generally pay around $450 - $800/month for what they
<br />call raw-land sites (built by them from the ground up) for the first
<br />year of the contract. The rent then increases by a certain percentage
<br />each year thereafter. 3% - 4% is usually accepted without question.
<br />The city can also require the carrier to share any rent from additional
<br />carriers that want to co-locate on the tower. Or, the city can require
<br />the carrier to convey ownership of the tower to the City, in which case,
<br />the City often abates the rent for a number of years (As an example the
<br />City of Lakeville abated the rent for 7 years. The carrier will then
<br />begin paying rent taking into account the 3% escalation over the course
<br />of those 7 years).
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* Regarding the term of the lease, T-Mobile essentially wants a 30
<br />year lease (5 year initial period + 5 more 5-year periods). This is
<br />longer than most standard leases they are usually 20 - 25 years. The
<br />City should shorten this to 15 or 20 years, which will force T-Mobile to
<br />re-negotiate - and allow the City to re-evaluate the rent & terms to see
<br />if they are still reasonable in 15 or 20 years. Another option might be
<br />to offer T-mobile an initial term of 10 years and then one or two
<br />additional 5-year periods.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* Pole height may also vary. T-mobile may be asking for there
<br />preferred height or as much height they believe they can get. The 100
<br />foot pole may not be required for their purposes and a shorter pole may
<br />be feasible for T-mobile's purposes however this may limit co-location.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* A requirement of the lease should state that if T-Mobile
<br />abandons the site, ownership of both the building and pole is
<br />transferred to the City. If not previously addressed in the agreement.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />* With respect to additional carriers or co-locating, there are
<br />three ways the City may want to consider leasing:
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />1) Lease to T-Mobile only that space they need for their 10' x 12'
<br />shelter and then lease additional ground space to other carriers if, and
<br />when, they go on the tower. Other, co-locating carriers will have to
<br />pay T-Mobile approximately $1,000/month just for use of the monopole so,
<br />they will balk at paying more than around $500/month for ground space.
<br />You can still require T-Mobile to pay a portion of the rent in addition
<br />to whatever ground rent you get from co-locators;
<br />
<br />2) Lease more space to T-Mobile than they currently require and
<br />allow them to sublease some of that space to other carriers. Then, take
<br />a percentage (50% seems to be common) of the rent from T-Mobile.
<br />Currently, rents for co-location are around $1,200 - $2,100/month.
<br />NOTE: Carriers usually don't agree to split co-location rent but, they
<br />will often do it with local governments. Additionally, they build
<br />monopoles on city property knowing that they may never be able to recoup
<br />any of their costs through co-location fees; or,
<br />
<br />3) Allow T-Mobile to build the tower, convey it to the City and
<br />abate their rent for an agreed upon number of years. Then, charge any
<br />additional carriers rent for tower and ground space.
<br />
<br />Any combinations of the above may be an option.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Some things carriers won't negotiate on are:
<br />
<br />A) Access to the site - they usually need 24 hr/7 days a week access in
<br />the event the site goes down. This will be a large burden if future
<br />park uses change.
<br />
<br />B) Sharing a percentage of their revenue - other than co-location rent.
<br />This becomes difficult calculation.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Again if the City is to move forward these are possibilities to get the
<br />City the best deal.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Dale Aukee
<br />
<br />Field Representative
<br />
<br />Great River Energy
<br />
<br />Office 763-241-2229
<br />
<br />Cell 612-840-4019
<br />
<br />Fax 763-241-6003
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />-----Original Message-----
<br />From: Greg Lee [mailto:greg.lee@ci.mounds-view.mn.us]
<br />Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:18 AM
<br />To: Cindy Palm; Aukee, Dale GRE/ER; Dan Weldon; Dave Long (E-mail);
<br />Gerald Arel (E-mail); Jerome Kunz (E-mail); John Kroeger (E-mail); John
<br />Kroeger -work; Marta McIntyre; Shari Kunza; Steve Dazenski
<br />Cc: Kari Brown
<br />Subject: T-Mobile proposed communication pole and antenna at Groveland
<br />Park - draft report
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Hi Commissioners and Kari,
<br />
<br />Attached is the draft report pertaining to the proposed communication
<br />pole and antenna at Groveland Park. This item has been placed on the
<br />November 6th Work Session Agenda.
<br />
<br />At this meeting a representative of T-Mobile will be available to
<br />present the proposal and answer any questions the City Council may have.
<br />
<br />
<br />Is there any additional information or points that you wish to be
<br />included in this report?
<br />Please let me know as soon as possible.
<br />Greg
<br />
<br /><<T-Mobile Pole and Antenna Installation Proposal at Groveland Park
<br />11-6-2006.doc>>
<br />
<br />
|