9/12/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

OLD BUSINESS Cell Tower in the Park The City has been approached to locate a flagpole type cell tower in the Park. They would be interested in building it directly behind the Senior Center/Community Cabin area where there is already building. It was talked about in Council, which was split in its decision. Three Council members thought it was of enough interest to discuss; two Council members said no, and a third member was adamantly opposed to it who was not present, and the seventh member has yet to be appointed because Mr. McKay has resigned. The City basically splits cell tower revenues. This would basically be five-year leases with renewals. Basically $1,200 a month would be split with economic development. The first extension would bring it up to $1,380 a month; the second extension would bring it up to $1,583; the third five-year extension would be $1,825; and the fourth extension would be $2,098 a month. Council was very interested that it would go elsewhere such as the new fire station property or even around city hall property, but they are very reluctant about wanting to put it in the Park. A couple of things: my prior experience with cell towers is when you go to put one in, you’ll find people not wanting it for health reasons. We have experience at Clague Park with a cell tower; it was a very controversial thing when we did it, and now that it’s up there have been virtually no complaints. A few people have informed us over the years that if we ever put the cell tower in the park that would be it, not realizing that it’s already standing there. So, it would be very controversial if we put one in the Park. Once there, it would be 150 feet tall, a flagpole design, less obtrusive than a single column type that goes up. It would be in the midst of the trees, which are about 90 feet tall. Probably the best place to see it from would be from Lorain Road, a good distance away. Mr. Limpert wants the thoughts of the Rec Commission to forward to Council members and whether negotiations should start to sweeten these numbers. Mr. Kelley said that the only thing he questions is that the Commission discussed this with Mr. Jesse preliminarily and gave the O.K., but in the back of the Park, not up towards the Senior Center. Using Little Clague as an example, the back right hand corner of the Park should be used (among trees). Mr. Kelley just went to the High School football game at Padua High School where there are cell towers 200 feet in the air, right behind the stands. Ms. Steele said she was there and it was horrifying. This was on parochial school property, earning $2,500 a month. This is where Nextel or who wants the business? Mr. Limpert said it was Cingular. Again, he was not trying to sell anyone on the idea; he wanted input. Ms. Jones asked where the money went from Clague Park. Mr. Limpert said it was split between the Recreation Department and Economic Development. Mr. Lasko asked how many people would co-locate. Mr. Limpert responded it could be up to three. Mr. Kelley said that each would mean more income. Mr. Baxter asked how much room it would take: 20x20, 30x30, what? He understands how tall it would be. How much of the Park would the community be losing. Mr. Limpert said that too much should not be lost, but there would have to be an access building, perhaps building new park restrooms and taking over the old park restrooms for the access building. Mr. Baxter asked if the Tower would be near the restrooms. Mr. Limpert said yes, in that area. Again, this is being placed before the Commission to find out if the Tower can be suggested for placement in the Park. Mr. Baxter said that one of the things he did not like would be the flashing strobe Page 15