One reason why people object is because having a tower close by often affects property values, and peoples property are their main asset. People are very protective and passionate when it comes to their property. I have found that more affluent residential areas do not have cell towers near them.
Personally I sit on the fence with this sort of thing. Although there is no clear evidence that towers cause any long term damage to humans, there is also no evidence to suggest that they don't. It could be like smoking, or asbestos, which were both thought as safe (or even of health benefit with smoking) at one stage, where it takes decades to take affect.
I do recall that there was a TV station in Oz with a big microwave tower nearby, and a significant percentage of staff in it developed the same nasty disease, and there are studies that shows that they do cause cell damage. However whether this is going to cause long term health problems, the jury is still out.
I feel cell phone towers should be restricted to commercial and industrial zones, rather than in residential zones. In my area they are.
I also feel that we don't need a duplication of these towers or networks in different areas. I think if we are going to have different networks with their own equipment, that they should be be housed in the same area or even on the same tower.
robbyp: One reason why people object is because having a tower close by often affects property values, and peoples property are their main asset. People are very protective and passionate when it comes to their property.
If people weren't both luddites and complaining about crap cell signals (at the same time), you'd think a cell tower would INCREASE your property value, since you'd always get good signal!
robbyp: One reason why people object is because having a tower close by often affects property values, and peoples property are their main asset. People are very protective and passionate when it comes to their property.
If people weren't both luddites and complaining about crap cell signals (at the same time), you'd think a cell tower would INCREASE your property value, since you'd always get good signal!
Unfortunately it doesn't work that way, as cell towers are often seen a negative when buying a property. I personally used a cell tower that was being built nearby as a reason to put in a lower offer on a house, and it was worked.
If people want to reduce the risk of living in a house where cell towers may get installed nearby, they shouldn't live close to any commercial/industrial area, or a council owned park/reserve.
If you live in an apartment in the city, you are very likey to live close to a cell tower, as many buildings have them on their roof.
I also feel that we don't need a duplication of these towers or networks in different areas. I think if we are going to have different networks with their own equipment, that they should be be housed in the same area or even on the same tower.
i think the fact that vodafone/2degrees and telecom are operating on different frequencies might make that difficult - the 'optimal grid' would be likely different for each network.
also the NIMBY effect would still be strong and you would probably still end up with a network with lots of blind spots
I also feel that we don't need a duplication of these towers or networks in different areas. I think if we are going to have different networks with their own equipment, that they should be be housed in the same area or even on the same tower.
i think the fact that vodafone/2degrees and telecom are operating on different frequencies might make that difficult - the 'optimal grid' would be likely different for each network.
also the NIMBY effect would still be strong and you would probably still end up with a network with lots of blind spots
Actually their is a requirement for all cell phone companies in NZ to allow other phone companies to use the same tower, called co-location http://www.comcom.govt.nz/mobile-co-location-service/ However its my understanding that the RMA in NZ means that NZ cell towers are in most cases simply too short to allow more than one company to have their equipment on it without causing interference between networks. And/or where technically feasable it is actually cheaper in most cases to put up your own tower and not have to worry about the technical side of making sure there is no interference.
Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.
The funny thing is that 2degrees lobbied for this legislation before building their network. But they never really ended up using it!
This tower is TE RAPA NORTH. Currently a vodafone tower, but in the RSM database there is a licence for Two Degrees for the microwave link to it. Unless they are going to build one right next to it, then it looks like they are going to be using vodafones tower. http://maps.google.co.nz/maps?q=-37.7488793,+175.2392344
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
Trusted
Snowflake
