Morris Township Committee to vote on ‘small cell’ wireless, June 20

Example of a 5G light pole, courtesy of Morris Township Engineer James Slate.
Example of a 5G light pole, courtesy of Morris Township Engineer James Slate.
1

 

New 5G gear is attached to this existing utility pool, 2017, courtesy of James Slate.
New 5G gear is attached to this existing utility pool, 2017, courtesy of James Slate.

Across America, telecom firms are pushing to attach “small cell” transmission gear to streetlights and utility poles, and on new poles, for the next wave of wireless service, known as 5G.

On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, the Morris Township Committee is scheduled to vote on a pair of ordinances spelling out how and where this equipment may be installed in the municipality.

Some critics of the technology have raised concerns about safety risks, aesthetics and diminished property values. Industry advocates say 5G will enable advanced wireless performance and features.

Here are recommendations from Township Engineer James Slate:

 

Jim Slate report small cell towersThe meeting starts at 7 pm in the municipal building on Woodland Avenue.

1 COMMENT

  1. Everyone should take note that “5G” is a VERY nebulous term and the township’s engineer and whoever is requesting these permits (another unknown) are either being intentionally vague or simply unaware of what’s being installed. Is this “millimeter wave” 5G? Is this just an extension of current LTE with wider spectrum or a different modulation scheme? The answers matter as they dictate a few things about this deployment:

    – Density – if this is millimeter wave, then there will be lots of units deployed because these frequencies are basically “line of sight”
    – Equipment size/eyesore – if this is something closer to standard LTE, then it’s going to basically be large and bulky with all sorts of external cabinetry – this equipment will cover a larger area at a lower frequency, necessitating more power and bulk. Millimeter wave 5G is lower power and due to the frequency and the lower power, the antennas are smaller as is the supporting equipment.
    – Health concerns – There’s no good science supporting that cell towers cause health problems, but the cells pictured in the engineer’s report are not something I’d want terribly close to a home, especially when the 2nd floor of a home and the antenna are at the same elevation. Millimeter wave would not bother me in that situation.
    – Property Values – related to the density question above, and the technology involved, this could have varying impacts on a home’s value. If a pole with multiple boxes hanging off of it and fake mailbox or similar pad goes in front of a home, that home’s value will be lower than similar homes without a unit outside the home.

    How can the town even consider voting on this without more information? I mean literally, we could be looking at 100 in town or one every 3 poles depending on what technology is being deployed. This seems negligent.

    It’s also not terribly clear on what the advantages are – some technologies with the “5G” moniker are advertised as being a replacement for “last mile” wired connections. In areas without FiOS or cable, this will be wonderful. We have FiOS. We have Altice (Cablevision) and they are in the process of an upgrade to fiber. Do we need to layer a high speed wireless service on top of those two existing wired networks? I don’t think so… If this is just dropping microcells in areas that have coverage holes, that’s an ENTIRELY different matter. Again, totally concerning the town is either ignorant of the plan or is feigning such. Having concrete numbers is necessary for whatever revenue this brings in – I assume the permitting cost is different for a 20 site rollout vs. a 500 site rollout and the town needs to maximize any revenue they can generate from the carriers.

    Residents should also note that this vote got what, one day of notice? That seems improper.

LEAVE A REPLY