Which Stealth Cell Tower is more Stealthy?
Reading an
article in the Press Democrat for Santa Rosa, CA where they show two separate stealth cell towers. The article is not particularly innovative- just commentary on the battle between aesthetics and wireless expansion. However, the reason that I found it interesting is that they contrast two stealth towers. (Photos from Press Democrat)
The first is a water tower at a farm:
The second is a stealth pine tree in the middle of an orchard:
Clearly, one of these accomplishes the objective of being fairly stealthy- in that it is not readily apparent without a second look where the cell tower is. The water tower is well done- fits the environment. The pine tree on the other hand is ridiculous.
The question that remains is whether the second tower is really that much better than a typical monopole in terms of visibility? This is similar to a 100' pine tree tower near downtown Tampa that rises out of a commercial area. It is completely out of place. Seems to me that stealth towers should actually be stealthy in the area that they are located. This burden falls on the local land use planners to actually understand what they are approving.
Labels: camouflaged towers, stealth cell towers
Crossroads Wireless- Bankruptcy!
Many people contacted Steel in the Air, Inc about the possibility of getting assistance with negotiating land leases with Crossroads Wireless. After one or two consultations, we chose not to take on any of these clients because our experience in dealing with Crossroads agents proved that they would not make changes to their lease. At the $300/mo to $400/mo that Crossroads was offering, we suggested to potential clients that they should really consider the liability that they were incurring by working with Crossroads. Furthermore, we suggested people did not need to retain us unless their property was special or unique because they were not likely to get anything more on their lease.
None of our clients chose to go forwards with Crossroads. In hindsight, that may have been a wise decision. In February of 2009, a group of Crossroads creditors chose to file for involuntary bankruptcy for Crossroads. The Bankruptcy Court granted an order to convert the bankruptcy to a Chapter 11
reorganisation.
As it pertains to land leases, Crossroads was successful in signing up 2000 or so landowners. They now want to get out 197 of those leases. Whether these leases are ones where they actually started construction is unknown. Perhaps the leases that they want to retain are ones where they haven't started construction or they have finished construction.
For more on this situation, please read an
excellent article on the subject at Wireless Estimator.
Labels: Crossroads Wireless
T-Mobile Cell Tower Construction On Hold.
This afternoon, one of our clients who had negotiated an agreement with T-Mobile for lease of their land received the following response from T-Mobile as to why their lease was not signed:
"As I mentioned during our conversation, due to the Economic Situation, T-Mobile is not moving forward at this time, with any leases, since no towers are going to be built. We would like to keep this site as a possibility for future reference, since it is a future interest for T-Mobile."
Our client was understandably angry because this particular lease reimbursed him for legal fees that he had already expended. So T-Mobile's failure to sign the lease meant that he wasn't going to be reimbursed even though he had done everything they had asked of him and had signed the lease.
It appears from this message that T-Mobile tower construction nationwide is on hold. We have heard a rumor that capital expenditures from T-Mobile in some markets have
been dropped 90%. We suspect that they are still continuing with construction on some towers but that a budget hold has been placed in effect and a good number of towers are not being constructed at this time. In our experience, these setbacks are typically an indicator of one of the following:
1. Poor financial performance: T-Mobile has not been having a banner year.
2. Possible merger: Carriers typically stop construction prior to announcing a merger.
3. Need to reallocate budget for 3G.
I believe this is probably indicative of the 1st scenario. If you are in a similar situation, there isn't much you can do other than wait. Whatever you do, there is no cause to get angry towards T-Mobile.
Labels: T-Mobile, tower construction
Top 10 Pieces of Advice for Landowners
1. Do know that their first offer is almost never their final offer.
2. Don't ever assume that your neighbors/friends/family knew what they were doing when they negotiated their own leases.
3. Don't ever sign a lease that doesn't include the full construction drawings as an exhibit.
4. Don't assume that every lease must have sublease revenue sharing.
5. Don't believe everything you read on the web. The average for cell site leases is NOT $1500/mo.
6. Do have your attorney review your tower lease.
7. Don't trust a verbal promise by the wirelss carriers or the tower companies.
8. Do be prompt in negotiating and responding to inquiries for a cell tower lease.
9. Do consider that the tower may alienate neighbors and nearby residents before agreeing to a lease.
10. Do your own homework on whether towers are safe or not.
Labels: cell phone tower lease
