Reducing Roadblocks For More Towers

Filed under: mobile network operators, politics - 27 Sep 2008 13:54

While I am known not to agree with the CTIA on a great many things, I do like to point out when I think they’re going in the right direction. A recent post talks about a problem that all consumers face on some level–poor coverage.

In many cases, poor coverage can be tracked to one thing and one thing only: a lack of towers. Mobile network operators spend years trying to get approval from local authorities–even in cases where no new towers are being built! There’s no reason for approvals to take that long.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 actually addresses this problem already, but there are loopholes in the laws that are being exploited by some municipalities to restrict the building of towers. The CTIA wants four changes:

  • Specific timeframes a state or locality must act on wireless facility siting requests: 45 days for colocation requests, 75 days for other types of siting requests.
  • If the relevant party fails to act on these applications within the appropriate timeframe, the applications are to be deemed granted by default, unless the delay can be jsutified by the state or local zoning authority.
  • Ensure that zoning decisions don’t have an effect that prohibits additional entrants from providing service in a given area.
  • Preempt local ordinances and state laws that subject wireless siting applications to unique, burdensome requirements, such as those treating all wireless siting requests as requiring a variance.

You can read the text of the request here (warning: PDF file). It’s generally god stuff there.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Bookmark with: del.icio.us Digg it Furl iFeedReaders ma.gnolia Maple.nu RawSugar reddit Simpy StumbleUpon
Tags: , , , Fnord

3 Comments

  1. Comment by spg

    its a very complicated issue actually. there is alway the questions of whether a high rise towers is needed or if micro/pico cells placed within the area could do the job; but at a different cost. there are also many methods of using smart antennas that can cover large areas/subscriber numbers with fewer towers. we probably need all of these together with more towers and spectrum.

    of course there is also the debate about carriers sharing towers. it lowers capitol cost that could potentially lower calling rates; but at the same time could result in a less competitive atmosphere that could have the opposite affect on rates.

  2. Pingback by Skype Blog auf Deutsch

    <!–%kramer-ref-pre%–>[...] Reducing Roadblocks For More Towers [...]<!–%kramer-ref-post%–>

  3. Comment by PhoneBoy

    I think it makes sense to share towers where it is feasible, but it is only one part of the solution, you are right.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Switch to our mobile site