School Cell Towers: Why RFP’s Don’t Work
April 10th, 2009 by admin Posted in cell towers, municipality, school cell tower | No Comments »
- The District and the tower company’s goals are typically aligned in that the tower company needs tenants if it intends to be profitable.
- The District gets to offload the negotiation of lease agreements to a third party vendor thereby decreasing staff time on the projects. (As anyone who regular negotiates leases on school district property knows- these are time consuming leases).
- The District gets a sizable amount of income- especially in more urban areas or in areas where
- 50% of the revenue can be substantially less than the District would have received had it just negotiated the lease directly with the wireless carrier.
- In some cases, it is unlikely that more than one wireless carrier will use a particular location. As the tower company only gets 50% that may not be enough to justify building the tower. As such, the District forgoes whatever revenue it could have negotiated directly for the lease.
- The District can give up some of its control over the placement of towers on its own property.
- Some districts have experienced significant public opposition to cell towers on school property on the basis of the sometimes irrational concerns about radio frequency radiation.
- Despite some common goals, the tower company and the District will inevitably have different goals because the tower company exists solely to make money off the operation of the towers.
The biggest issue we had with this particular District is that they assumed that an RFP would effectively bring in bidders. However, what they don’t know is that the way they intend to craft the RFP will limit the number of bidders. The large tower companies don’t do 50% revenue sharing. There are some tower companies that would be interested in building cell towers at schools, but they aren’t likely to see the RFP. The wireless carriers won’t bid because they would simply prefer to let a tower company deal with the burden and cost. The District is unlikely to know how to find small tower companies who aren’t likely to read or follow school district RFPs. So the District constituents get the short end of the stick because the RFP ends up being bid on by one or two companies. To make matters worse, these bidders almost always know that RFP’s for school sites will only be bid on by one or two companies and therefore aren’t forced to bid competitively.
Our suggestion is that school districts retain outside experts to assist them in determining the most profitable way of leasing space for school cell towers. We can review the District’s goals and help guide you on the method that will maximize your revenue while minimizing the headache to the district. It might be that one vendor is suitable or perhaps multiple vendors. Alternatively, perhaps the District could consider building and owning the towers themselves. Please contact us if you are school district looking to increase its revenue while minimizing the administrative burden from dealing with the wireless providers. We can provide non-biased advice on how best to accomplish BOTH of these goals. Please also see our webpage on municipalities building their own towers.
Cell Tower and Cell Site Location Data: A Primer
November 24th, 2007 by admin Posted in Rooftop cell sites, cell sites, cell tower locations, cell towers, tower maps | No Comments »CELL SITE VS CELL TOWER
Many people make the mistake of comparing “cell sites” and “cell towers”. I regularly receive inquiries from people who say they have a “cell tower” on their roof. What they actually mean to say with rare exception is that they have a “cell site” or cellular antenna site on their rooftop. A “cell site” is simply the antenna installation. A “cell tower” is the support structure upon which a single or multiple “cell sites” are installed. “Cell sites” can also be installed on rooftops, water towers, billboards, signs, hillsides, ect. (In rare cases, there are cell towers installed on top of rooftops.)
1. Rawland: A proposed site for a new tower which will accommodate multiple “cell sites” or “collocations”.
3. Tenant Improvements: The improvement of an existing structure other than a tower. This can be a water tower, a building rooftop installation, or any other non-tower structure.
It is difficult to estimate the number of cell sites in existence. In a few previous posts, we have indicated the number of cell towers owned by the top 20 towers companies (as ranked by RCR who does a yearly informal and somewhat inaccurate poll), our article on estimates of the total number of cell sites owned by each carrier, and estimates of the number of towers owned by each wireless carrier.
COMPLETENESS OF TOWER DATA
To start with, there are no comprehensive tower databases that I am aware of, including Steel in the Air’s. We are contacted on a weekly basis by individuals looking to procure “cell tower” data. However, most of these people are actually looking for “cell site” data. They don’t need to know where towers are but instead want to know where each carrier has their sites. There are multiple reasons why they want to know:
1. Location Based Services (LBS): The wireless carriers are required by the FCC to be able to Enhanced 911 (e911) services for wireless devices which enables emergency providers to locate cellular handsets with a moderate degree of accuracy. Many entrepreneurs desire to use “cell site” locations and coordinates to establish locations for their wireless service. From the location of an individual cellular provider’s cell towers and cell sites, these entrepreneurs intend to triangulate their service’s user’s locations. Unfortunately, we are not aware of any commercially available service whereby this data can be purchased or is otherwise available except through from each individual carrier.
PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATA
Many of the available online sources of tower data simply regurgitate the records available from the FCC. Please note that there is no requirement by the FCC or any other government agency to register individual “cell sites”. Cellular service is licensed by the region, meaning that the FCC grants the wireless carriers a general license for a county or other geographic region. As long as they conform to the frequency and power limitations of these licenses, they can build anywhere (with local zoning approval).
There are numerous types of data available from the FCC for antenna sites. However, these online sources do not distinguish between what the datasets provide. This appears to create a good deal of confusion between users. Below are some of the datasets provided by the FCC.
1. Antenna Structure Registrations. (ASR) Many of the free online sites for tower data use this as the base data. (Antenna Search.com, Cell Reception.com) Antenna Structure Registration is required by the FCC for those tower sites that pose a threat to air safety. In short, this means towers that are over 200’ tall or those towers that are within 5 miles of an airport. Accordingly, if a tower is under 200’ and is not within 5 miles of an airport, it does not have to be registered with the FCC. (For a indication of how many towers exceed 200′ tall- see our previous post on cell tower heights.) It is important to note that ASRs are only necessary for towers- not cell sites. Oftentimes, the owner of the antenna structure or “cell tower” is not the wireless carrier, it is a tower company who built the tower or a tower aggregator like American Tower or Crown Castle who purchased the tower sites from the wireless carriers. To complicate matters, many of the FCC ASRs are not actually used for cellular communications. They can be two way radio towers or broadcast towers or other wireless internet service towers. There are approximately 110,000 antenna structure registrations.
In essence, if you use the free services that regurgitate the FCC data, recognize that you are getting what you paid for. I personally would not waste my money on any service that offers to sell you the FCC data. (It is available for free from other online sites and can be downloaded from the FCC website for free, although the translation of the database is not simple.)
We have assembled a comprehensive database of tower and cell site locations from numerous sources, including the public FCC data, FAA data, and tower companies that provide their data online. We also have represented over 1000 clients with cell site leases for a few thousand cell sites. For many of those clients, they helped fill in missing data in their area by driving around. In addition, we have independently gathered specific cell site from various sources including paying people to literally drive areas of interest and visually identify towers. Some of our data includes lease rate data, most of it doesn’t. We use our data to assist our clients with determining where cell sites are. In a number of cases, we don’t have complete cell site data for an area. However, we know how to “fill in the holes” and how to assess areas for existing cell sites. In short, we make it our business to collect cell tower and cell site data and create tower location maps. We don’t simply regurgitate free government data.
Cell Tower Heights Across the US
September 28th, 2007 by admin Posted in cell towers | No Comments »Think there are too many cell towers in the US?
July 17th, 2007 by admin Posted in American Tower, SBA, cell tower ground lease, cell towers, india | No Comments »To put this in perspective, the US is 3.5 million square miles- while India is only 1.25 million square miles. Yet the population of India is 1.1 billion people- in the US, 330 million. (from wikipedia) 3 times the people, 1/3 of the land mass.
No wonder SBA, Crown Castle, American Tower are all interested in India.
AT&T Mobility Acquires Dobson Communications
July 5th, 2007 by admin Posted in ATT Mobility, Dobson, cell towers | No Comments »AT&T Mobility announced the acquisition of Dobson Communications this past Monday for $2.8 billion. We believe this is an excellent deal- and would not be surprised to see further acquisitions by AT&T or TMobile as they attempt to buyout their roaming partners and expand their coverage through acquisition not through new site development. Dobson primarily uses GSM technology which is what AT&T uses as well. Dobson’s coverage is primarily in rural and suburban smaller markets nationwide. Allegedly, there isn’t much overlap in coverage. See Dobson’s Coverage Map here. Dobson markets under the name of Cellular One.
As Dobson’s towers were acquired by Global Tower Partners in 2005, we suspect that the Dobson landowners won’t be contacted by Blackdot Wireless or Md7 to renegotiate their lease agreements downwards because of “duplication”. That doesn’t mean that landowners with AT&T cell phone tower leases won’t be contacted with a new pitch.
Cell Tower Health – American Cancer Society Summary of Research
July 4th, 2007 by admin Posted in Rooftop cell sites, cell towers, health risks, radiofrequency emissions | No Comments »
At Steel in the Air, Inc., we are constantly bombarded with questions about the issue of the safety of cell towers and the radio frequency emissions from them. Our answer is that we are not qualified to answer the question of whether cell towers are a health risk. We do point out that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 prohibits local communities from evaluating health risks as part of a decision on whether to approve or deny a cell tower in a zoning hearing. In fact, if it becomes apparent that a cell tower was denied on the basis of health risks, the decision can be overturned on appeal.


