Get documents about "EMINENT DOMAIN
Document Sample
Relocate a Radio Station Tower
Requested by: Iowa
Survey Deadline: March 26, 2007
I would love to hear from any other states that have had to relocate a radio station tower.
In discussing with folks I know from IRWA Relocation Committee, the best and most
consistent advice was “DON’T”! However, I don’t have that option to avoid it. We
started working with them well ahead of our project, because we knew it would be
difficult, but I had no idea.
Some of the issues we’ve encountered and are having difficulty with are:
They must be on a similar site (a high spot) in order to main the height requirements for
operation
The station is a long time “tenant” at the current site and will probably have to buy land
for replacement so this is putting him in a significant financial bind
Everything at new site, when he finds one, must be up and running before he can shut
down the old one – this is apparently an FCC Rule that says they maintain near
continuous on air time otherwise their permits become void
I understand most of these things can’t be resolved to the station owner’s satisfaction,
but I would like to hear if anyone has moved one successfully and if there’s anything I
can gain from their experiences in doing so.
Thanks for your help. If there’s any further information you need from my end, please let
me know.
Nancy Halvorson, SR/WA, R/W-RAC
Iowa DOT Relocation Assistance Supervisor
800 Lincoln Way, North Annex
Ames, IA 50010-6993
Office Phone: (515) 239-1359
Toll Free: 1 (866) 282-5809
FAX: (515) 239-1247
nancy.halvorson@dot.iowa.gov
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
No, Arizona has not dealt with this issue. However, we would be very interested in
hearing about the outcome. If there are other radio towers or even larger cell towers in
the area, would it be possible for the radio stations equipment to share space while the
tower is relocated?
ARKANSAS
Following is information provided by the AHTD's Relocation Section on moving of towers.
If you would like more information or have questions, you may contact Danny Arendt,
Relocation Section Head, at 501-569-2308 or danny.arendt@arkansashighways.com.
In the relocation of a cell/radio tower we first determine through our appraisal section
whether the tower is realty or personalty. If it is personalty then it is considered a
business displacee, thus making them eligible for moving and reestablishment costs.
A new site must be chosen and then the tower displacee will go through the FCC
application and approval process. This may take a considerable amount of time. We
have contacted the FCC in the past in order to obtain a contact person to attempt to get
the application on the fast track. Once the site and application have been approved then
the moving process may begin.
We obtain two to three bids to have the tower dismantled and moved and reassembled
at a new location. We are sure to use qualified movers as this is a very specialized field.
The bids can include the dismantling and re-erecting of the structure, the construction of
the foundation which depending on the type of tower could be 4’ thick, 40’ square, 10’
deep in the ground, with 3 to 4 concrete piers, and a small temporary tower to prevent
interruption of service (if needed) during the move called a “cow”. Other things that can
be included in the bid are site prep, coax & connectors intallation, equipment installation,
grounding, electric power, access road, fencing and gates, permits and peformance
bonds, and generator installation. The low bidder is awarded the contract. Movers that
we have used in the past are as follows:
WesTower
Phillip Sarullo, Operations Manager
300 Walker Circle
Richland, MS 39218
601-932-4081
CMS Wireless
Stephen Acuff, Director of Construction
4700 South Bowman Rd., Suite 700
Little Rock, AR 72210
501-228-8188
Verticom
Jeff Lewis, President
1829 E. Levee St., Suite 100
Dallas, TX 75207
214-741-6898
About the only thing that reestablishment expenses were used for in our experience was
for increased rent at the replacement site
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
The Illinois Department of Transportation has a parcel that is needed for the purpose of a
highway project which is commonly called the New Mississippi River Bridge Crossing
between Illinois and Missouri in the St. Louis Metropolitan area. This project calls for a
new bridge(s) to be constructed over the Mississippi River, the improvement and/or re-
alignment of several highways such as FAI-55, FAI-70, FAI-64, IL Route 3 and numerous
abutting roadways. The project also impacts 12 different railroad lines in the metro area.
As part of this project, IDOT needs to acquire a piece of property from an operating radio
tower site owned by Nobel Broadcast of St. Louis (also known as Clear Channel). Due
to how much of this property we need, we are electing to do a whole take. Currently,
eight towers are used for an A.M. station out of St. Louis. Concerns on how to treat
various items located on the premises prompted the district office to contact the Central
Bureau of Land Acquisition on how to proceed with the appraisal, acquisition and
relocation of this parcel. Information found on the Internet by the appraiser provided
instructions to consider such items as the towers as personal property and hinted these
properties and businesses were sold in this manner. Yet, the local tax assessor in
Madison County considers the towers permanently affixed to and part of the real estate.
The district had been in discussions with the Clear Channel representatives on how to
proceed. The district wanted to clarify appraisal, acquisition and relocation issues prior
to making an appraisal assignment (back in 2004). Clear Channel only wanted to know
what IDOT would pay for their new site, new realty items and new equipment. One item
in particular, the tuning of the new towers, was of extreme importance to Clear Channel.
If the towers were to be considered realty as the county considered them, IDOT could
not pay to tune them. If they were to be personalty, the relocation assistance program
could reimburse Clear Channel for the tuning.
An on-site meeting was held in August 2004. The purpose of the meeting was to clarify
and put into writing exactly what items were to be considered realty and what items were
to be considered personalty. Those in attendance at the meeting Clear Channel
representatives, various District 8 Land Acquisition personnel involved in the project, the
appraiser and review appraiser assigned to the parcel, a relocation assistance consultant
who was to be hired to perform all relocation functions, and the State Relocation
Manager and State Appraisal Manager from the Central Bureau of Land Acquisition. We
walked the property and inspected the building and equipment boxes. Each item was
discussed and determinations were made on site as to whether an item was to be realty
or personalty. The district then prepared a memo to the files depicting the two lists of
items that everyone had agreed to. Below are the lists:
Realty Personalty
Towers 1- Harris Intertype MW-5 transmitter
Fencing 1-Broadcast Electrical AM64 transmitter
Underground radials 3-transmitter remote control panels
"Dog house 2-Monitors
Electrical equipment Misc. stored hardware
Transmission lines
ATUs
Electrical lines
Transmitter building
Heat/AC units (2)
Harris Intertype Corp. phasors
Onam Electrical Plant generator
Other topics of discussion included:
Clear Channel would provide technical assistance during relocation
Clear Channel would not provide estimates of services and fees already prepared to
comply with the FCC
Clear Channel would provide department with construction estimates for new station
Clear Channel would provide department with maintenance records (more
specifically annual inspection reports)*
Department would provide appraiser with a site plan of the existing property
District Property Manager will prepare retention values for realty items in case Clear
Channel might want to retain any of the items.
(*The department particularly wanted access to the information because we were
knowledgeable that the site was not in compliance with the FCC guidelines. We needed
to determine if the on-compliance was "project induced" or simply neglect of
maintenance on their part.)
A big concern to Clear Channel is how much it is going to cost them to acquire or lease a
new site and construct a new radio tower site with newly acquired realty and personalty
items. They are of the opinion that IDOT is responsible for paying for all of the realty and
personalty. While Clear Channel thinks the department should consider them eligible for
a total "functional replacement", they are not a government entity and, thus, do not meet
the provisions for "functional replacement" consideration.
Clear Channel, similar to the entity your state is dealing with, told the department that the
FCC requires their new site to be up and operational before they can go off the air at the
old site. This could take 12-18 months in their estimation. It is a sensitive and time
consuming process that must be monitored by the FCC.
The department had completed an original appraisal on the property in the fall of 2004
and updated the appraisal in early 2006. No offer has been made to the owners due to
the funding for the project being pushed back in the program. The separation of realty
and personalty remains the same and will continue to be treated accordingly unless new
information supports the shifts of items from one category to another. All parties will
meet again and will have to concur to any changes before a new appraisal is prepared
and the acquisition and relocation assistance eligibility commences.
Should you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Teresa S. "Teri" Pointer
Appraisal Unit Manager/Acting Relocation Unit Manager
Illinois Department of Transportation
2300 South Dirksen Parkway
Springfield, IL 62764
(217) 782-3982
(217) 782-3813 fax
Teresa.Pointer@illinois.gov
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
Nancy, as we just discussed, I'll bring our file on the radio station and tower we recently
acquired and relocated to our meeting in a couple of weeks. It went well because we had
a reasonable owner willing to make a sizable capital investment in an all new facility. If
you don't have that, your job will be much harder. At least we can show you what
worked for us.
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
This survey topic has been discussed with our Chief Appraisal Reviewer, John Dessena.
Mr. Dessena noted that if we were to acquire real property which included a radio station
tower, that the radio station tower would be valued as part of the site improvements and
included in the real property appraised value since the radio station tower would
contribute to the highest and best use of the property. As a part of the appraisal, the
cost to relocate the radio station tower would be analyzed to determine a salvage value
of the radio station tower. It is expected that the cost to relocate the radio station tower
would be quite expensive, so the salvage value of the radio station tower might be
minimal.
Since the radio station tower would be included in the appraised value, the radio station
tower would not be considered as personal property and therefore no relocation benefits
would be available to relocate the radio station tower. Any personal property within the
acquired area would qualify for relocation benefits.
We are not aware of any acquisitions of radio station towers by NYSDOT.
It would be interesting to see other state's perspectives on this topic. Please share the
survey results with us. Thank you.
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
Best of luck to you. Ohio has not actually bought or relocated any radio station towers,
but we made an advance acquisition offer on one late last year to try and get a jump on
an upcoming project. The owner refused our offer, so we had to back away from the
acquisition until we get our plans and environmental clearance (a few years away). I'd
very much like to hear how your transaction ultimately works out. Please send me a
copy of your research and keep me posted as you move through your issues
OKLAHOMA
Oklahoma doesn't have anything new to add on this type of issue, it sounds as if you're
on the right track based on your comments. Good luck with your project.
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
PUERTO RICO
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
Several years ago, SCDOT displaced a radio tower and had to be very creative in the
relocation of the tower. It was owned by a minority business and near the flight path of
the airport. We would be happy to discuss the case with you. You can contact either
Don Liester, Relocation Coordinator or me (RuckerOK@dot.state.sc.us) with your
specific questions. Oscar
SOUTH DAKOTA
Fortunately, South Dakota has not been involved with the entire removal of a radio
station tower. We did have one case where the guy wire anchor was moved and placed
on a guy pole. This did not affect the operation of the tower so it worked out for both
parties. It is too bad the project alignment cannot be adjusted to avoid the impact you
describe below
TENNESEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
We have not completed a move yet -- but we have a radio station tenant on an old pit
site that we would like to relocate. Several years ago the department allowed the lease
on our land, and we are learning that it is much more challenging process to remove
them than we had expected. We are finding all of the issues that you point out in your
message. When you are able to complete the relocation we would be interested in
knowing how you handled everything. Good luck.
Gerry Gallinger
Director, Real Estate Services
Washington State Department of Transportation
Voice - (360) 705-7305
Fax - (360) 705-6811
Mobile - (360) 951-9656
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
