Yankton Press and Dakotans, Yankton, Oct. 19
Does AT&T have Plan B on cell tower issue?
There was an odd feeling in the air last week after the Yankton County Planning Commission rejected a request for a conditional-use permit tied to the construction of a cell tower just north of Lewis & Clark Lake.
Even though the permit needed to build the 199-foot tower was denied, it was clear that many of the people on either side of the issue still wanted the applicant, AT&T, to be part of life in the lake area.
As such, AT&T is probably exploring its next options, which can range from filing a lawsuit against the county to secure the permit for its preferred site or selecting another site to build the tower, which would provide much better wireless service to the lake area. Thus, the commission’s rejection probably isn’t the end of the story.
It feels odd because this county has become accustomed to emotional battles over concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFOs), an issue that usually stirs very strong, polarizing feelings whenever it takes the spotlight.
For the cell tower, the main point of contention is the site, for which the permit was rejected primarily over road access issues. Some opponents also objected to having such a tower in their vicinity, which is a common complaint with similar structures everywhere.
No one, however, denied what such a tower can do for the lake area, for it would provide much better wireless service.
Proponents of the cell tower’s proposed location declared their support in messages submitted to the commission because of what it could mean for lake-area residents and for the nearly 2 million people who visit the park annually.
“There is a need for improved cell phone connectivity throughout the campground, especially west of the Gavins section of the park,” District Park Supervisor Shane Bertsch wrote in one submission. “The improved coverage will enhance our park visitors’ experience, allow (people) to work remotely and will allow them to call first responders in case of an emergency.”
Added Kasi Haberman of the Yankton Convention and Visitors Bureau: “It is imperative that our visitors’ first experience in Yankton does not showcase its lack of quality cell phone connectivity, indicating that Yankton is not keeping up with today’s technology. Rather, the connectivity in the lake area should surpass today’s expectations, proving that Yankton is on the cutting edge of technology and that we truly care about our visitor’s experiences and safety.”
Even opponents of building a tower at its proposed location see the importance of AT&T’s service.
“I am definitely in favor of AT&T building a new tower and getting better cell coverage in the lake area,” said local resident Todd Huber. “But AT&T did not perform the necessary due diligence in selection of a cell tower site.”
Ultimately, Yankton Planning Commissioner/County Commissioner Dan Klimisch echoed the sentiment: “AT&T, we want you in our community. We want internet, but it has to be in the appropriate spot.”
So, this story figures to be far from over. If AT&T didn’t have a Plan B, it needs to find one. While the permit failed, this effort can still turn out well for everyone.
___
Madison Daily Leader, Madison, Oct. 20
County roads plan moving in right direction
There appears to be a consensus that Lake County roads need improvement. That isn’t new. But the approach is changing, and we think it’s for the better.
Maintaining county roads and bridges is complicated and expensive. Our climate is particularly hard on roads, and heavier vehicles are running on roads that weren’t designed for that weight.
Some of Lake County’s roads date back more than a century and were constructed with little engineering in mind. County roads connect to, and are mixed in with, state highways, city streets, township roads and private drives.
Traffic patterns change, also, with development and changing agriculture uses. Roads that were rarely used can now be heavily trafficked.
So amidst all these changes, Lake County commissioners file a five-year plan each year with the South Dakota Department of Transportation, listing maintenance and repair activities, bridge replacement, estimated costs and funding sources. It’s a challenge to prioritize when there are many needs and a budget to stay within.
But we think current activity and the upcoming plan show the possibility of making progress in coming years. Most controversial is the “depaving” of eight miles of county roads, converting them to gravel. County staff determined that they are essentially unrepairable and need to start over.
The traditional goal of overlaying five miles a year is also being reconsidered. Only one mile is scheduled for 2021, with money shifted to replacing culverts that are failing. We think this is a sound decision. Five miles was an arbitrary number, and we need to be more calculating in how to spend tax money on roads.
County Highway Superintendent Nels Nelson worked at the state Department of Transportation, which went through its own reprioritizing during the Daugaard administration. That experience should help here.
Lake County residents will need a lot of patience in coming years as roads are slowly repaired, maintained and rebuilt. But we do think progress is on the horizon.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.