County Considers Wireless Proposal
Towers, Antennas Would Be Placed At Schools, Parks
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Sunday, June 3, 2007
In an effort to expand broadband service in Loudoun, county officials are considering a proposal to place wireless equipment for Internet and cellphone providers at schools and on county-owned property such as libraries, parks and administration buildings.
Several providers have inquired about leasing space from the county, an arrangement that could give the providers more options for locating towers and antennas while opening a new revenue stream for county government.
A recommendation to allow such leases was included in a report from a consultant hired by the county to study Loudoun's wireless infrastructure. The report was presented Tuesday to the Board of Supervisors' economic development committee.
Improving wireless service is a high priority in Loudoun, particularly in rural western areas where cable Internet lines have not been extended and cellular service remains spotty. In the east, the county is focusing on increasing competition among service providers.
Supervisor Lori L. Waters (R-Broad Run), chairman of the economic development committee, said she was open to hosting telecommunications equipment on county property and would ask school officials to consider the idea.
"Everything that I have seen thus far has shown it's a good deal that would not only bring in some additional income, it would add to the service network," Waters said.
Decisions about the placement of towers and other wireless equipment in Loudoun have been controversial. Many residents oppose the towers for aesthetic reasons. Some are concerned that radio waves from antennas can be harmful.
School officials said last week that they had not considered such a proposal before.
Waters said that a monitor-size broadband antenna could easily be attached to a football stadium light with little disruption.
Cellular equipment is typically much larger and more noticeable.
The county must consider practical issues before making deals with the telecom industry, said Scott W. Bashore, manager of broadband services for Loudoun County.
"I would love to say, 'Roof's open, ya'll come,' " he said. "But there are a lot of questions."
For example, Bashore said, he needed to find out whether the roofs of county and school buildings could sustain the weight of the equipment. Another issue is how companies could get access to the facilities if there were an equipment malfunction during off-hours.
Supervisors decided to look more comprehensively at the state of telecom infrastructure after receiving several tower applications -- which did not involve county or school property -- in recent months. Waters convened a roundtable discussion with county officials and industry representatives in April, and her committee requested an update to a telecom facilities survey conducted in 2002.
Loudoun has 43 standalone towers and additional equipment attached to water tanks, power-line towers and dozens of silos or private rooftops, Bashore said.
The consultant's report includes projections about how many towers might be needed. The number depends on the height and location of the towers. In one scenario, the county could have blanket cellular coverage with 16 additional 199-foot towers, each of which could support as many as five cellular antennas and several wireless antennas, the report said.
Broadband equipment can be attached to shorter towers, and the report includes a proposal to streamline the application process to a year or less for towers 80 feet or smaller .
Waters said her committee would discuss the options at its next meeting in June. She said the supervisors would probably not vote on any of the tower applications until the end of the year.


