FAQ’s – Wind & Wireless Application Reviews & Consulting
Is a Proposed Site Essential for the Carrier?
First, Municipal Wireless determines whether the site is required for coverage, or capacity. In many municipalities, the carrier files an affidavit stating why the site is needed, and affirms that the construction is essential for their service. “Proof” for coverage requirement that we would require consists of a gain budget, supplied by the carrier, showing how much system gain is necessary at the cell boundary for the coverage quality desired – to support handheld phones in cars, for instance. From this budget, we obtain calculations and/or computerized propagation plotting using an appropriate prediction model to determine the coverage radius of the proposed cell. We check that against the coverage radii determined for the surrounding cells, which should show a deficit in the area.
A propagation plot prepared by the carrier, so long as it is accompanied by a clear legend and notes, can suffice for the above, as can drive test data. Municipal Wireless will deal directly with the carrier, saving time and administrative burdens on your staff. For capacity, traffic figures in erlangs are requested, and are evaluated in light of the access technology used and the manufacturer infrastructure employed by the carrier, eg., Lucent, Motorola, Ericsson, etc.
Can the Carrier Locate the Proposed Tower Outside of the Subject “Search Area?”
Municipal Wireless requires a list and map of surrounding cells, showing their locations, coordinates, tower heights and power output. Additionally, we request a copy of the “grid plan” and the search area, with the objective of determining that the search area is reasonable for the grid plan. If the carrier cannot provide a grid plan, we determine if the search area is reasonable from the standpoint of its relationship to the surrounding cells, in effect producing a grid plan. Generally accepted cellular engineering rules define a reasonable grid plan as a circle of radius R/4, where R is the desired coverage radius of the proposed cell. This work allows us to determine whether locations outside of the claimed “search area” would suffice for the carrier’s service. In order to insure that there are no other reasonable sites, we may suggest a Municipal Wireless site visit.
Who pays for the expert assistance?
The local regulations would require the applicant to place an escrow deposit with the community that is used to pay for the cost of the expert assistance needed to analyze the issues that should be addressed in an application. This should not be confused with an application fee (which is the community’s money). Any balance in the escrow account that remains after the grant of the issuance of the required permits, e.g. Special Use, Building and Certificate of completion of Occupancy, should be returned to the applicant.
How do you assure the tower is built safe?
Every community should require detailed structural design plans for any facility, including both for a new tower and for a co-location, regardless of what structure the facilities are being attached to. A structural analysis is highly recommended, since in addition to the obvious concern of public safety, there is the issue of potential derivative liability to the community by having effectively deemed the facility safe by granting the building permits. Local officials need to know that the facility is safe and will withstand the loads and demands place upon it, e.g. ice and wind loads. Communities should require that all information submitted related to the design of the facility be certified and stamped by an Architect, structural Engineer or Professional Engineer depending on state licensing requirements.
Where should towers be located?
New tower requests should be carefully reviewed and proven that there is no other alternative. In all but the most rural locales today, there is usually numerous co-location alternatives, ranging form existing towers to rooftops, billboards, utility poles, electric high tension towers, light standards and many other alternatives. If it can be proven that there is no alternatives to a new tower, the tower should not go where the community doesn’t want it, and it should be no taller than the lowest height at which at least a sizable portion of the gap in service for a given carrier can be filled. This is normally much lower and thus significantly less visually obtrusive than what was initially requested. The facility should be the least visually and physically intrusive means that is not commercially or technologically impracticable.
How does a community control the height of towers?
The key to assuring the minimum heights of towers is to require an applicant for a new tower or a new co-location facility to prove the lowest height at which the gap in coverage can be filled. Realizing that the law does not obligate the community to enable the service provider to cover the entire gap from a shingle site. Some may feel that two smaller towers are less intrusive that one large tower. The applicant should be required to provide propagation studies for the proposed site showing the results of attaching at lowest height that is functional and another propagation map showing the coverage situation 10 feet below the higher proposed elevation. The lower height should show that it leaves gaps in coverage.
Will the Proposed Tower Realistically Provide Collocation Opportunities?
First, Municipal Wireless performs an analysis of the height for the proposed radius to determine whether the height requested is reasonable for the coverage area desired, taking terrain factors into due consideration. Thus, the carrier is held “honest” to the height they request. Our analysis will insure that the height is reasonable for the coverage desired.
Collocation opportunities depend on whether the heights available below (or above) the first carrier fill the needs of carriers that come later. In some locations, carriers are collocating on a single monopole tower with antennas at only 10’ vertical separation, with no problems.
In the instant proposal, we would contact other wireless licensees in the area in order to ascertain their expansion plans, and recommend a solution that will provide minimum impact in your community. Municipal Wireless is uniquely experienced in the industry to suggest creative collocation options. Our projects in the broadcast industry have involved collocation of multiple FM and TV stations at single sites. Our wireless experience entails collocation of up to eight carriers, including cellular, PCS and ESMR, at a single site.
Would a Camouflaged Tower Address Aesthetic Incompatibility?
This depends on the area. Camouflaged solutions that aren’t designed sympathetically to blend in with the area sometime look more peculiar than a simple monopole tower. These monopoles can be designed for minimum impact. Current antenna technology allows singular, “dual-polarization” flat-panel antennas that mount flat against the pole face, eliminating the need for large triangular antenna platforms. Experience shows this is far preferable aesthetically. Poles and antenna are then painted sky blue or brown or green in order to blend in with the surrounding area.
Municipal Wireless can recommend solutions that the carrier might otherwise not due to cost or concern of their overloaded engineering staffs. We have the engineering background to ease carrier reluctance to utilize less-intrusive products, and lead them to solutions more palatable to your community.
Would Collocation Continue to be Applicable with a Camouflaged Tower?
In a word, “yes.” Multiple antennas can be accommodated on “stealth” towers and structures, and dual-polarization technology lends itself well to multi-carrier placement.
Municipal Wireless has extensive background and knowledge in engineering, construction and management, specifically RF and wireless applications.
What’s Coming and When?
The wireless industry has acknowledged the need for at least 20,000 new sites each year for the next several years.
Why?
There are primarily two (2) reasons for the need for new sites. First, more and more existing sites are becoming overloaded with traffic, resulting in calls being blocked and thus frustrated subscribers and a loss in revenue. Secondly, the advent of wireless internet access requires that they eliminate any “fringe” or “marginal” areas on the perimeter of the existing service areas, since internet access requires that the service be effectively 100% reliable, i.e. with no loss of transmitted data or major problems can develop. For example, BIG problems can result if a single digit is dropped from an Electronic Funds Transfer (depending on which side of the decimal point it is located).
What are the effects?
In most communities this will mean between two and four times the number of sites currently existing . . . in the next 2 to 3 years.
What are the technologies involved in Wireless Services?
There are 3 primary technologies employed in the provision of what is generically known as “cellular” service. These are SMRS (Specialized Mobile Radio Service), Cellular and PCS (Personal Communication Service). Each of these operates within different frequency ranges.
What makes the services/technologies different?
SMRS and Cellular operate in the 700 to 950 MHz. range of the frequency band and PCS operates in the 1800 to 1900 MHz range. The nature of frequency propagation is such that the further up (higher) on the frequency band at which a service operates, the less distance the signal will travel and still be usable. In other words, the higher the frequency the shorter the range or the lower the frequency the greater the range. The net effect is that SMRS and Cellular service should be usable at twice the distance of PCS, because they are only ½ the frequency.
The same principle governs why some sounds are heard for miles and other for only a hundred yards. The higher the frequency, the less distance. Whales can be heard for thousands of miles, because they communicate in ultra-low frequencies, while birds can only be heard for a limited distance because they communicate at significantly higher frequencies. Also, for the same reason, the sound of a bass drum or tuba travels much farther than the sound of a clarinet. PCS service providers (in a reasonably flat topographic situation) often require 2 to 4 times the number of wireless sites than does SMRS or Cellular when viewed from an omni-directional perspective. Conversely, SMRS and Cellular normally need 25% to 50% fewer sites than does PCS.
Propagation Studies and Signal Strength: Propagation studies are color-coded computer-generated graphical representations of the situation, including whether or not service exists in a given area or at a given location, as well as what signal strength is present at a given point in the service area. The quality of service is primarily a factor of the signal strength at a given location from which a call is being made or received. The signal strength is shown in a color-coded format, with different signal strengths being denoted by different colors. Signal strength is the bottom line test or determiner of the presence of useable service. Signal strength is the primary determiner of both voice quality and reliability. For all intents and purposes, the need for a minimum level of signal strength drives everything else from a technological perspective.
Why hire Municipal Wireless?
Many third party entities such as Municipal Wireless have stepped into help facilitate the cellular revolution. Municipal planners and officials often need technical education, legal advise, and negotiating tips while cellular carriers often need help scouting and acquiring sites for their transmission devices. Some communities, in conjunction with the carriers who have approached them, have hired consultants to fulfill these needs. Municipal Wireless brings a wealth of cellular technology experience and land-use expertise to the table.
Wireless Consulting for Government Agencies | Midwest, USA
Municipal Wireless Solutions Inc. has locations in Illinois & Michigan. Our services are available throughout the United States, including, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio & Wisconsin.