You are on page 1of 8

.

Montgomery County
Wireless Facilities
Coordination Process
Robert Hunnicutt
Tower Coordinator
January 2012

1/9/2012

Local Regulatory Authority


Preserved under 1996 Law

Montgomery County's Cellular


Tower Coordination Process

Section 332(C)(47 U.S.C. 332 (c))

1995 - County Task Force formed to plan and


implement new process
Participation by industry and planners throughout

o
o
o
o
o

Speedy and reliable process


Created master database of towers and facilities
Since 1996 processed more than 1,700
applications - 123 of which were new towers or
monopoles

<CoCTC'2011

Protects local zoning processes


Must treat providers equitably, fairly
Prohibits "barriers to entry"
Requires record for decisions
Preempts denial based on radio frequency (RF) health
hazards

OCTC 2011

Transmission Facilities
Coordinating Group (TFCG)

TFCG (cont.)

The County's "tower committee"


Includes representatives ofland-owning/land-use
agencies, and County departments involved in
communications issues:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

TFCG chair:
o Conducts monthly public meetings
o Acts as County's liaison to community, industry, elected
officials, and participating agencies
o Directs the work of the Tower Coordinator

Department of Transportation and PublicWorks


MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools
Maryland-NationalCapitalParks and PlanningCommission
WashingtonSuburban Sanitary Commission
Department of Permitting Services
Department of TechnologyServices
Office of CableCommunicationsAdministration
Office of Managementand Budget

.oc1c2011

TFCG members:
o
o
o
o

Review each application


Attend monthly meetings
Participate in the review process
Vote on applications (approval, denial, approval with
conditions)

OClC 2011

1/9/2012

Application Review:
New Tower/Monopole

Overview of Application
Process
Wireless carrier or a representative files an
application for a "wireless facility"
Tower Coordinator reviews application

Engineering review: Can an existing structure be


used to support the antennas, does the tower need
to be as tall as proposed to enable desired signal
levels?

o Verifiesneed for new antennas


o Assures the support structure is minimal required to meet needs

o ReviewRF contour maps


o Analyzeresults of"drive tests"
o Conductsite visit to see topology and location

Tower Coordinator makes recommendation based on:


o
o
o
o

Engineering
Zoningcompliance
Appropriateness of siting to meet carrier's stated goals
Impact on community

Evaluationof visual impact: What can be done to minimize


the communityimpact of the new tower?
o Stealth designs?
o Screeningof equipment?
o Lower height?

TFCG votes to "Recommend,""Not Recommend," or


"Recommend with Conditions" each application

..,it,CTC2011

Application Review:
"Co-Location"

Benefits of Process
Monthly TFCG meetings provide a public forum:

Adding new antennas to an existing structure


(tower, monopole, building, water tower, etc.)

o discussingsitingissues
o reviewingand commenting on telecommunications transmission
facilitypolicies of various agencies
o facilitatingcommunications between member agencies and
between government officialsand the industry

Zoning review: Is antenna placement permitted?


Plan review: Are other antennas planned there?
Radio frequency review: Any conflict with
frequency?
Structural review: Can the structure physically
support the new antennas?

. e crc 2011

,7

CCTC 2011

Wireless industry is ensured a speedy, consistent, and


reliable process
County residents are ensured better wireless coverage
and more competition
County earns revenue from leasing public property
8

ttCICTC

2011

1/9/2012

TFCG Track Record


Reviewed more than 1,700 antenna siting
applications since 1996
Recommended approval of 1,550 applications
o 1,008 co-locations on existing structures
o 123 new monopoles/towers
o 419 minor modifications

e ctc 2011

Additional Information

10

Seek Creative Solutions

,ccrc2011

,11

Seek Creative Solutions (cont.)

Co-locate on utility poles, water towers,


buildings, or other existing tall structures

J1,J,.,......._~.

wOCTC 2011

12

OCTC 201 l

13

1/9/2012

Camouflage with Design, Paint,


Landscaping ( cont./

Camouflage with Design, Paint,


Landscaping
~~
~

.,.,

0CTC2011

."

Camouflage with Design, Paint,


Landscaping (cont.)

0CTC2011

15

Distributed Antenna Systems


(DAS)
Owned by carrier or third-party company, such as
Crown Castle and NextG
Several "micro cell" antennas connected by fiber
Antennas attached to existing infrastructure, such
as utility poles
Multiple carriers with different frequencies can
utilize a single DAS
Potentially fewer applications for new towers if
DAS replaces traditional antennas

"\CICTC2011

16

CCTC2011

17

1/9/2012

DAS Design

DAS Example

COMMUHICIT10,..S:!IHELTl'R

:1'11'1<'"'1,

NextGantennas atop
a utility pole at
Brickyard Road and
MacArthur Blvd. in

Potomac
REPLACES

!lm
L1~T-

,a

CfC'20tl

.~ere

Antenna (Site) Coverage


Considerations

Sl.il,:fiogMcLJrtl:

19

Site Selection Basis


Need for coverage or capacity improvements
based on customer use data or business plan for
network expansion
Availablesupport structures for antennas or land
for new tower
Priority of site relative to budget
Challenges of competition

Signal frequency
Signal strength (power to antenna)
"Downtilt" and "orientation" (direction) of
antennas
Obstructions to signals
Terrain around the site

.ccrc2011

Mcnop.?11

2011

20

t-OC1C 2011

21

1/9/2012

Process Scrutinizes "Need"

Tools to Predict Coverage


Computer Models
o Antenna characteristics
Type, orientation, tilt

o
o
o
o

Power levels
Terrain
Existing sites
Demographics

Drive tests
o Measures actual signal around site
o Process data to compute likely actual coverage for active
site
.oc,c

2011

22

OCTC2011

23

Process Scrutinizes "Need"


(cont.)

Process Scrutinizes "Need"


(cont.)
Proposed
site fills
in
coverage
gap

CTC:::.011

Tower
Coordinator Engineering
Consultant
verifies "need"
based on RF
propagation
contour maps
(proposed site in
red)

Different
colors
represent
different signal
strengths
(signals
diminish with
distance from
antenna)
24

,ccrc 2011

;:,10f. ,\

r,S

r.-51

.-,,,

1AN

25

1/9/2012

Process Scrutinizes
(cont.)

Process Scrutinizes "Need"


(cont.)

"Need"

Engineering Consultant activates "test" signals

>i

1.5

~les

<.+

/
J

,'
I
CTC 2011

26

CTC 2011

-.,

,,.~
'

27

For Further Information


TFCG website:
httJJ_;.LLwwJN..!J1Jl1ltgo_n1ffY.QJ..lli1t)ml_d,W.1LLmcgtmpl.asp_Lur:.l=Jcgnten
t/sableOffice/index.asp
FCC website:
http:/Ltransition.fcs;,gov /oet/rfsafety,L
Robert Hunnicutt
Tower Coordinator
Columbia Telecommunications Corporation
10613 Concord St, Kensington, MD 20895
301.933.1488
0CTC201\

28

You might also like