wireless (small cell) challenges for california cities & counties
TRANSCRIPT
Upcoming Local, State & Federal Challenges• Small Cells and Not-So-Small Cells• How Proposed Wireline abandonment affects Wireless• Next Steps for California Cities & Counties
• Omar Masry, AICP
While some neighbors may not “be in favor” of a single “macro” wireless tower hidden in the roof of a church in a residential neighborhood.... (see next page)
Antennas hidden inside church steeple (made of a type of fiberglass that allows radio waves to go through but can be painted and textured to mimic wood/steel/concrete).
……Wireless carriers are currently pushing at the Federal level and State level for laws that would allow them to be treated as any other “utility” and put up new cell towers, rent-free, along City streets or sidewalks.
Referred to as “Small Cells” or “Outdoor Distributed Antenna Systems (oDAS)”
A previously proposed “Not-So-Small-Small-Cell” with multiple cabinets along a nicely landscaped street in South Orange County
A fairly well-designed, low-power and quiet (no noisy cooling fans) conceptual Small Cell design
(assuming State/Federal laws don’t override the ability of the City/County to request a better design…)
A bulky not-So-Small-Cell on a wooden utility pole in Oakland
Some systems have noisy cooling fans
So instead of wireless carrier paying a lease 2k to 5K, a month, to put a single macro cell site on a church, the carrier may pay nothing, or a few
hundred a year for Small Cells in front of your home/bedroom window
1 of these …or..4 to 12 of these
Macro Site Not-So-Small-Cell
Cost is not always an overriding factor
In urban areas Small Cells will augment existing rooftop macro cell sites for more data capacity at street level.
In suburban areas Small Cells may be used where there aren’t many options for macro sites (limited # of non-residential properties)
It appears one wireless carrier (“Mobilitie” on behalf of Sprint) is aggressively pushing a two-prong strategy that may result in more poles/equipment/antennas right in front of your home or driveway
1. In some cities/counties Mobilitie has been proposing 120 foot tall steel poles along streets and sidewalks (some in residential neighborhoods).
New nationwide proposal for really tall Not-So-Small Cells
It appears one wireless carrier (“Mobilitie” on behalf of Sprint) is aggressively pushing a two-prong strategy that may result in more poles/equipment/antennas right in front of your home or driveway
1. In some cities/counties Mobilitie has been proposing 120 foot tall steel poles along streets and sidewalks (some in residential neighborhoods).
2. In addition, Mobilitie has been proposing brand new 20-40 foot tall wooden poles for Small Cells, even on streets where all the utilities, like electric wires/poles, are underground; and without proposing “attaching” antennas and equipment to existing streetlights nearby
Backhaul for Small Cells | Traditional Fiber-Optic
Cell phone signal reaches antenna
Signal travels to computers (”RRUs”) on pole
Fiber-optic cables run from computers on pole under City streets through (PG&E) conduit and back to data center
Extenet Systems for Verizon Wireless Small Cell
Cell phone signal reaches antenna
Signal travels to computers (”RRUs”) on pole
Fiber-optic cables run from computers on pole along utility poles back to data center
Crown Castle Not-So-Small Cell on existing utility pole (+ ground cabinets) in Palos Verdes (LA)
Backhaul for Small Cells | Traditional Fiber-Optic
Mobilitie’s push for widespread microwave backhaul for Sprint Small Cells
Cell phone signal reaches antenna
Signal travels to computer on pole
Signal is ”backhauled” from coffee can sized “UE relay” (microwave) to nearby 120 foot tall microwave backhaul.
Carrier advantage: This eliminates substantial costs of running fiber-optic cables to each Small Cell (whether on existing wooden utility poles or under streets)
Larger Policy Concerns with Mobilitie’s attempt at widespread microwave backhaul for Sprint Small Cells
• Considered an optional and very intrusive network deployment model
• Mobilitie’s 120 foot poles would not LIKELY be collocatable for other carriers meaning others may pursue additional poles nearby
• Would undermine years of largely successful efforts to combine cell towers with multiple sets of antennas for competing carriers on few number of towers in a given community.
(four or more cell sites “screened” in one cell tower in New Mexico)
Larger Policy Concerns with Mobilitie’s attempt at widespread microwave backhaul for Sprint Small Cells
• Would undermine smart land use siting that encourages use of large cell sites on rooftops (hidden from view)
Current Federal Lobbying
Mobilitie is currently asking in a recent proceeding for the FCC to override local control regarding access to the public right-of-way.
This could hypothetically mean FCC decisions (whether this proceeding or subsequent):
Forcing cities/counties to allow carriers to put up brand new wood/steel poles along City sidewalks without any limits on the number of new poles in a residential or historic neighborhood.
Forcing cities/counties to rent out space on City-owned light poles at rates far below what many cities/counties charge or feel is appropriate to recoup costs and best represent taxpayers (e.g. $35 a month instead of $150 to $350 a month)
Current Federal Lobbying
Mobilitie is currently asking in a recent proceeding for the FCC to override local control regarding access to the public right-of-way.
This could hypothetically mean FCC decisions (whether this proceeding or subsequent):
Forcing cities/counties outside California to give up franchise fees (e.g. percentage of revenues). Cities/counties in California cannot charge these fees due to State law (”7901” of Public Utilities Code). Though cities/counties can charge rent to attach antennas/equipment to municipal assets (poles, bus shelters, advertising kiosks)
Forcing cities/counties to allow designs with no regard of best available technologies or common sense rules
Example: Requiring carrier to turn off unnecessary equipment indicator lights on equipment cabinets installed on a pole located a few feet from a bedroom window.
Forcing cities/counties to allow carriers to put bulky cabinets (computers or backup batteries or generators) on the ground with little to no regard for how it may block busy sidewalks (including proper handicapped access) or views of historic / iconic buildings or small business storefronts
Current Federal Lobbying
These types of rules could also have the effect of forcing cities/counties to undo nearly 20 years of smart wireless siting that sought to balance robust and competitive networks while working collaboratively with carriers to pursue the least intrusive means of providing those services
Least intrusive could mean hiding antennas in fake vent pipes on office buildings instead of building brand new steel towers.
In rural areas pushing wireless carriers to share space on a single tower, instead of each new carrier coming and building a brand new tower down the road (“collocation”).
Or, disguising a tower as a water tank or windmill on private property instead.
Least intrusive could also mean a balanced approach for an urban area with rooftop cell sites for core coverage and WELL-DESIGNED (small equipment and antennas with no noisy cooling fans) Small Cells attached to existing light poles for robust data coverage at sidewalk user level.
Current Federal Lobbying
Mobilitie request of the FCC to override local control regarding access to the public right-of-way could also mean:
Forcing cities/counties to allow a wireless carrier to rip up a decorative or well-maintained concrete sidewalks (for new trenching) and replace any broken sidewalks areas with (often bump) patches of asphalt.
Allowing carriers to pursue poles of any height, even if it means the placement requires new aircraft warning lights. With no recourse for a City/County to suggest something like moving the pole a few hundred yards away from an aircraft landing zone (to negate the need for the flashing lights).
The Senate may consider a revised version of the MobileNow Act which would gut local review of wireless siting as well.
For example, the first version (withdrawn last year) would have said a City/County can’t require any review for a diesel backup generator as long as it is for a wireless site. So even if the generator was proposed on the roof next to a bedroom window, the City/County could not apply any noise or exhaust rules or even request the generator be moved to the other side of the roof.
California (State) LobbyingAT&T appears gearing up to continue pushing for a shutdown of the existing copper telephone (wired landline) AT&T network. Also known as
They’ve begun proposing (in some rural areas) replacing the network with new cell towers accompanied by new antennas on each home (to talk to the nearby cell tower in lieu of copper wires).
California (State) Lobbying The bill that died last year (AB 2395 – Evan Low) will likely be revived in 2017.
The California Public Utilities Commission recommended denial over concerns raised regarding reliability, consumer protection, compatibility of hearing aids and home alarms and so on.
The bill was withdrawn in the face of opposition by many counties, especially rural ones, as well as many labor unions (wireline crews are unionized – while the wireless industry has a comparatively anti-union bent, and an issue of poor safety issues related to poles falling over causing fires in Malibu, and tower climber deaths).
Blog Link: http://www.tellusventure.com/blog/att-plan-to-scrap-copper-networks-will-widen-digital-divide-say-rural-reps/ - Author, Steve Blum, has worked to put together a roadmap for more responsible copper retirement rules
California (State) LobbyingVerizon appears gearing up to revise a bill that failed (withdrawn) last year (AB 2788 by Mike Gatto) to override local control and allow “Small Cells” along public streets/sidewalks with little to no control over siting/design/noise by a City/County.
California Supreme Court SF versus T-Mobile/Crown Castle/Extenet Systems• T-Mobile and two neutral host carriers (CC & Extenet) sued City of SF
over wireless ordinance specific to public right-of-way
• Lawsuit is NOT over micro/macro wireless sites on private property (rooftops)
• Carriers lost twice, California Supreme Court will now take up review
• Issues hinge on whether carriers have automatic right to install antennas/equipment/poles without discretion by California cities/counties (aesthetics/design, noise, undergrounding rules)
What can cities/counties do
Planners & Public Works will have to work together more closely, because…
Small Cells & Not-So-Small Cells represent a shift of review from mostly private property (Planning review) to the
Public Right-of-Way (Streets & Sidewalks), which generally falls under Public Works Review
What can cities/counties do
Figure out if your current wireless rules also cover the public right-of-way?
If not adopt an ordinance soon (e.g. Palos Verdes, SD, or SF)
Avoid using outdated rules that may force worse designs/locations (such as min. separation distances that push the next Small Cell in front of homes)
Encourage well-designed Small Cells on Arterials/Collector Streets (instead of local)
Create noise, height, lighting (aircraft warning) limits
Create clear application forms
Talk to other agencies that may own assets (bus shelters, advertising kiosks, water districts, Port districts and so on) about lease rates and collaborative review and permitting. Those assets may provide more options for less intrusive wireless siting
What can cities/counties do
Keep close track of State and Federal Shot Clocks
New Sites - 150 Days
Collocations – 90 Days
”6409” eligible changes to existing & legal sites - 60 days
What can cities/counties do
Work with the local electric utility to avoid the need for electrical meters on the sidewalk, or on the pole.
PG&E has begun allowing wireless smart metering (antenna the size of a grapefruit, instead of a large meter) in some trials.
This also reduces “6409” *challenges associated with carriers demanding ability to add more ground-mounted equipment as soon as they install a facility that includes cabinets (or meter pedestals) already.
*FCC’s 2014 Broadband Order overriding local government discretion of certain changes to existing (and legally installed) wireless facilities
What can cities/counties do
Consider allowing microtrenching
Small cut in pavement or gutter to run fiber-optic cables
Can help with both “cellular” and in-building broadband deployment
Allowed in many cities ranging from Calimesa to NYC
What can cities/counties do
Work with City Real Estate on Rate Schedules
Encourage rates that vary based on footprint such as one rate
•For Macro Plus Sites (7-12 antennas & shipping container sized equipment area)
•Lower rate for Smaller Sites (3-6 antennas and equipment area the size of an office cubicle)
What can cities/counties do
Work with City Real Estate on Rate Schedules
•Even lower rates for small microwave dishes used by Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPS)
• Can be used as an economic/social development tool to bring high speed in-building broadband to a City funded non-profit office, or an older business park that is not adequately served by phone/cable company
”Fixed” Wireless Signal serving another site with internet access (wires from antenna into the building) a few miles away
What can cities/counties do
Wireless carriers CAN develop well-designed Small Cells, but it requires:
A focus by the City/County (along with JPAs & Independent Districts) to articulate smarter siting, design, and noise policies early on:
A concerted effort by wireless carriers to use already available technologies & options such as:
•Integrated poles (antennas/equipment in vault or inside pole)•Passive cooling systems (no noise)•Oversight on actual contractors to follow through on conditions of approval (build safely & correctly)•Radome antennas instead of hanging panel antennas with loose bundles of cabling•More conscientious siting•Equipment cabinets that are slender instead of bulky (e.g. TSI Power battery backup cabinets instead of Alpha)•Forgoing unnecessary decals, logos, lighting and excessive visible wiring
Small Cell
Thanks!
Article & Tips on Small Cells for California Citieswww.tinyurl.com/10wirelesschallenges