Mast rejection - Oxford
2005/07/20 Wed
Once again our wonderful councillors rejected a mast application. T-Mobile and Vodaphone are moving in on our area of Oxford for their 3G coverage and last night the councillors rejected a mast proposal for a second time on the basis of lack of evidence of consideration of mast sharing and also that the applicant, T-Mobile, had changed their advised cell size for mast coverage from 4 km to 1 km diameter.
Re this, diameters measure circles, are their cells circular? What about overlap? It must mean that they want a mast every 300m therefore?
There has been a decision to report the council officers to the ombudsman for not pursueing this question of mast sharing. Don't know if that will be a good move.
There was quite a bit of discussion at the meeting re health concerns and a number of the councillors agreed that health should be taken into account but felt that they were not allowed to do so.
Now about to write, again, to my disinterested MP.
Cheers Ann
--------
Good for them!
And this is quite right: 3G ranges are small. The latest industry comment in the press is that in excess of 130,000 additional masts will be required to provide the 5 operators with complete infrastructures.
The cells need to overlap, but not too much. It's going to be a planning mightmare for them.
As for mast sharing, they can't always, and with the limited range, someone else's site won't be so useful for filling their gaps!
Two solutions: every mast has all 5 operators on it, then they all get equal coverage, with 20% of the structures. Then all they need is to cope with their respective demand levels.
OR: one set of masts AND only one set of high capacity antennae to cope with everyone's traffic. (technically more complex) (the gas and water utility model)
Consequence? Whichever option, with the spread of frequencies that 3G brings, total power of emissions into the environment is set for a massive increase.
And before you ask, no, I would not want a single mast with 5 x 3G on it anywhere near me!
Andy
Once again our wonderful councillors rejected a mast application. T-Mobile and Vodaphone are moving in on our area of Oxford for their 3G coverage and last night the councillors rejected a mast proposal for a second time on the basis of lack of evidence of consideration of mast sharing and also that the applicant, T-Mobile, had changed their advised cell size for mast coverage from 4 km to 1 km diameter.
Re this, diameters measure circles, are their cells circular? What about overlap? It must mean that they want a mast every 300m therefore?
There has been a decision to report the council officers to the ombudsman for not pursueing this question of mast sharing. Don't know if that will be a good move.
There was quite a bit of discussion at the meeting re health concerns and a number of the councillors agreed that health should be taken into account but felt that they were not allowed to do so.
Now about to write, again, to my disinterested MP.
Cheers Ann
--------
Good for them!
And this is quite right: 3G ranges are small. The latest industry comment in the press is that in excess of 130,000 additional masts will be required to provide the 5 operators with complete infrastructures.
The cells need to overlap, but not too much. It's going to be a planning mightmare for them.
As for mast sharing, they can't always, and with the limited range, someone else's site won't be so useful for filling their gaps!
Two solutions: every mast has all 5 operators on it, then they all get equal coverage, with 20% of the structures. Then all they need is to cope with their respective demand levels.
OR: one set of masts AND only one set of high capacity antennae to cope with everyone's traffic. (technically more complex) (the gas and water utility model)
Consequence? Whichever option, with the spread of frequencies that 3G brings, total power of emissions into the environment is set for a massive increase.
And before you ask, no, I would not want a single mast with 5 x 3G on it anywhere near me!
Andy
Starmail - 20. Jul, 14:08
