Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecom Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sports authority raises concerns about a Verizon cell tower discovered during River City demolition
Summary
Members reported that River City’s demolition work encountered a previously unacknowledged cell tower and that the Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance to move the tower; participants said relocation likely will not occur until mid‑July and flagged uncertainty about who received Verizon’s payments.
Maria, who opened the public meeting, told attendees the group had been asked to write to the cell-tower company on behalf of River City after demolition crews found a tower and billboard on sports-authority property.
The most immediate worry, Maria said, was that demolition could disrupt active equipment and knock out cell service downtown. She said she had written a letter on the board’s behalf and had received a reply from a tower attorney identified in discussion as Hal North.
Members reported the matter had been before the Board of Zoning Appeals, which granted a variance to allow the tower to be moved to an alternate location. Maria said the earliest relocation window discussed by zoning officials was roughly the middle of July, a timetable that could slow River City’s demolition work and generate delay claims and bills from the demolition contractor.
Questions also remain about whether Verizon’s monthly payments related to the tower were routed to the sports authority or to another party. According to remarks at the meeting, Verizon asked for a copy of the notice of sale because it believed the property had been sold to River City; meeting participants said the property had only a temporary easement to River City and that no sale documentation had been provided to the sports authority.
Maria said the sports authority has not found any signed agreement that authorizes the tower on the authority’s parcel; she described seeing a draft agreement dated 2007 and a more recent draft circulating through counsel. Participants named Vogue Towers as the tower company and said River City’s counsel (identified in discussion as Philip Meyer) and the tower attorney were negotiating while local counsel for the sports authority reviewed documents.
No formal action was taken at the meeting on the cell-tower dispute; Maria said she would collect the zoning‑appeals paperwork and include it in the packet for the next meeting so the authority could see the relocation site and better assess whether demolition would interfere with active equipment. The meeting record indicates the parties expect the Board of Zoning Appeals’ relocation schedule to determine how quickly River City can resume demolition.
Next steps noted at the meeting included providing the tower’s revised location to the sports authority, clarifying the status of Verizon payments, and continuing legal exchanges between the parties. The meeting did not include a vote or directive to file suit or to halt demolition beyond the parties’ current correspondence and the zoning appeals process.
