New AT&T LTE Markets

[ilvla2]

Goodness, 100 and 150 footers are in the cities here, but 300 ft. is the standard in rural areas, usually placing the tower on top of one of those rolling hills for the best range. There aren't any regulations on height either in rural areas. Pick your tower manufacturer, select a height, file the FAA notification paperwork and build it once you settle on rent for the landowner. That can be the hardest part, but not always. Farmers & ranchers consider towers to be money trees. Different world.

Not in our rural areas, the highest towers here in Mendocino County are 175 feet, but then we have hills and mountains that reach close to 8000 feet, and Redwoods that tower to 375 feet. There are also restrictions on what can be built, here all sites (new, colocation and panel/dish additions/removals) have to pass through approval by the Mendocino County Planning Commission, they can't just put up sites at random. We only have 4 incorporated towns in the county, Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg and Point Arena, so most of the land is unincorporated county, state park, blm, private or national forest. Within those few city limits, sites also need to be approved by the city council's in addition to the Planning Commission. More and more sites here are also being built as MonoPine's, and several MonoPole's are painted brown and/or put in stands of trees on hill or ridge tops. We do have the regular, metallic towers too of course, but like I said they max out at 175 feet, and are often located to minimize visual impact.

Now, I can understand there, there isn't as much scenery to protect (or the $$$ it brings), compared to areas like ours anyway, so people probably aren't as picky. If you go over to the Sacramento Valley (Sacramento to Redding, part of the Central Valley) people generally aren't too picky on sites either, and the land is mostly flat farmland, aside from the Sutter Buttes (the smallest, independent mountain range in the world, they are what's left of a ancient volcano).

[i0wnj00]

There aren't any regulations on height either in rural areas. Pick your tower manufacturer, select a height, file the FAA notification paperwork and build it once you settle on rent for the landowner. That can be the hardest part, but not always. Farmers & ranchers consider towers to be money trees. Different world. .

Maybe OK (or where ever you're from is) is lenient with cell site placement. Not so in VT. Not only does the FAA have to approve it, but sites must pass muster with local governments, Act 250 regulations and/or VT Public Service Board. Then there are the locals who throw their arms when they feel their view and or way of life is threatened by any form of development.

Not sure about your rural place, but you can't really build anything in VT. A good chunk of the state is basically a long chain of mountains inhabited by people who generally don't like any form of development.

[ggore]

Maybe OK (or where ever you're from is) is lenient with cell site placement. Not so in VT. Not only does the FAA have to approve it, but sites must pass muster with local governments, Act 250 regulations and/or VT Public Service Board. Then there are the locals who throw their arms when they feel their view and or way of life is threatened by any form of development.

Not sure about your rural place, but you can't really build anything in VT. A good chunk of the state is basically a long chain of mountains inhabited by people who generally don't like any form of development.

Different states have different regulatory and environmental realities to deal with, I understand. It's a "free-er" regulatory environment here (OK) than in some other states. There are the same NIMBY problems in the cities here as elsewhere, but there is an emphasis on economic growth and the benefits to consumers of having such things as cellphone service available to everyone, including those in rural areas, as agriculture and energy are the two largest economic providers in the state.

Some people actually think that a cellphone tower standing out in the middle of nowhere, or a wind tower slowly turning, are signs that progress and growth are taking place, and it's a good thing.

[ilvla2]

Some people actually think that a cellphone tower standing out in the middle of nowhere, or a wind tower slowly turning, are signs that progress and growth are taking place, and it's a good thing.

Well, when you have relatively flat, fairly featureless land like where you live, or over in the Sacramento Valley in NorCal, sure, but when you have scenery like iownjoo has in Vermont, and I have in Northwestern California, well, people are a bit more restrictive on how things look. Now, sometimes people can go overboard in their review of cell sites, equipment, etc., but in areas like mine tourism dollars are a main part of the economy, and any impact on that is going to draw scrutiny. Thankfully, we have a lot of mountains and heavy forest cover, so that helps a lot in disguising sites, but the tallest things (aside from the mountains of course) in our county are not man made, they are Redwood Trees, the tallest (known) Redwood, the Mendocino Tree is 375 feet tall, and just a few miles from me

[ggore]

Different regulatory environments in different places, not a thing wrong with that, just like I said in my post.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using HowardForums

[zephxiii]

I've been down in Indianapolis today and yesterday and noticed the AT&T cell sites are easy to spot with LTE.

You will see a set of panels, all of them will have boxes right behind the antenna (or close by). The HSPA TX/RX antennas will have the standard TMA boxes but the LTE panels may be slightly larger and will have a larger box bolted to the back that is the remote radio head.

Sent from my MB865 Atrix 2.

[GSMinCT]

Goodness, 100 and 150 footers are in the cities here, but 300 ft. is the standard in rural areas, usually placing the tower on top of one of those rolling hills for the best range. There aren't any regulations on height either in rural areas. Pick your tower manufacturer, select a height, file the FAA notification paperwork and build it once you settle on rent for the landowner. That can be the hardest part, but not always. Farmers & ranchers consider towers to be money trees. Different world.

We have a state siting council, and they do a halfway decent job of balancing aesthetics with their goal of 100% road coverage by AT&T and Verizon. They took the power for siting away from the towns, as if they still had the power, we'd have very few towers anywhere, and massive dead spots unless the carriers did massive DAS or small-site systems, and even then a lot of places aren't easily covered by those.