dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
20072
share rss forum feed

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON
reply to macsierra8

Re: how close can a cell tower be to a house?

said by macsierra8:

Building code height limits, engineering, city aesthetic codes, etc would make that totally impossible and impractical at best. Even if it did work you would be interfering with vital communications.

The same codes would preclude the initial cell tower install then and "vital communications" is open to interpretation.

As more evidence emerges of the harmful effects expect to see more opposition.

This is just the leading edge like the tobacco and asbestos industry bought off experts and suppressed studies a generation ago.


John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:6

said by peterboro:

The same codes would preclude the initial cell tower install then and "vital communications" is open to interpretation.

Utilities are not subject to height limitations.

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

said by John Galt:

Utilities are not subject to height limitations.

In the OP a comparable, or strategic trajectory deflection, in height to block the house at least may be achievable and remember height restrictions are not uniform across North America.


John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:6

1 recommendation

said by peterboro:

said by John Galt:

Utilities are not subject to height limitations.

In the OP a comparable, or strategic trajectory deflection, in height to block the house at least may be achievable and remember height restrictions are not uniform across North America.

I agree that there may be other options for the OP in that regard. Utilities are, almost without exception, unrestricted unless there is some overriding issue, such as proximity to airports.
--
»www.archive.org/details/Meatpies_1984



toby
Troy Mcclure

join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA
reply to DonLibes

I wish a cell company would come and install one near my house.

In big cities these are very common, they made to look like drain pipes, church crosses, steeples, anything.

The more of these small cell towers, the lower the power from the larger towers, so people should be happy, if that is what they are concerned about. More RF hits you when you use your microwave or watch your tv.



Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:12
reply to Pacrat

 

I wonder if it has camara in it?? (Could be why its so close to houses (To be used as a monitoring point))



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

Having a next generation mind control device embedded in it would be a better explanation for the proximity.
--
Wacky Races 2012!



fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2
reply to John Galt

Re: how close can a cell tower be to a house?

said by John Galt:

said by peterboro:

The same codes would preclude the initial cell tower install then and "vital communications" is open to interpretation.

Utilities are not subject to height limitations.

The utilities still have to apply for zoning permission here but they can easily override the town if they say no by going to the state PUC.


Reality

@cox.net
reply to peterboro

They could come out today and say with 100% certainty that some percentage of us will get cancer at some point due to this, and most folks would say so what. We ain't gonna get out of this alive. Wireless is now woven into the fabric of society.



LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to DonLibes

I'm going to say it's not a micro-cell site; and is more likley a DAS for smart meters, public transport, or some other use...

There's no microwave uplink visable (usually a small "drum" 12-20" across) to link the site to a larger network... Cell repeaters can't operate uplinks across the same antenna sectors used for cell service; nor is it common to feed fibre to a micro-cell site.

As for the safety - I'm a firefighter, a telephone/cellular tech, and have wrenched on and painted race cars for years. I'm getting cancer at some point - there will be no way for me to tell which of my potentially risky exposures, if any, will be responsible... I don't believe there's any great risk from Wifi or cell exposure; but we'll only know for sure in the future, after the technology has been around for 30-40 years...



Sell Tower

@151.190.0.x
reply to DonLibes

said by DonLibes:

1) Are there health risks?

No.
said by DonLibes:

2) Should we do something and if so what?

Nothing you can do except move.


whizkid3
Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY
kudos:9

2 recommendations

reply to LazMan

said by LazMan:

we'll only know for sure in the future, after the technology has been around for 30-40 years...

People have been using microwaves routinely since WWII, some 70 years. Electromagnetic waves, which includes microwaves, have been around since...hmmm...the big bang.

Unfortunately, the average tin foil hat wearer easily gets electromagnetic waves confused with ionizing radiation - the stuff from nuclear weapons - and panics; not realizing their walls are full of wires giving off electromagnetic waves that are much stronger when they fall upon the body than tiny antennas placed 30 feet high on a pole.


Sell Tower

@151.190.0.x

A laptop with WiFi is a bigger health hazard -- especially if it's sitting on your lap!



pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to LazMan

It is very hard to tell from the picture with all the lower level trees but it does look like there is a fiber run to the pole that does not continue past the pole.

It could be CATV, but the inline can looks suspiciously like a fiber amplifier.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.


Austinloop

join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX
kudos:1
reply to John Galt

Actually, they are, one cannot build towers above a certain height in the glide slope leading to an airport runway. The height varies with the distance to the runway, i.e. one cannot build a 200 ft tower a .25 of a mile from the end of a runway.



John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:6

said by Austinloop:

Actually, they are, one cannot build towers above a certain height in the glide slope leading to an airport runway. The height varies with the distance to the runway, i.e. one cannot build a 200 ft tower a .25 of a mile from the end of a runway.

I do believe I covered that...


netboy34
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Kennesaw, GA
kudos:1
reply to nunya

We call them East Cobb Redwoods because they look nothing like the pine trees around them, and they are mostly on the east side of Cobb County (county that I live in). They are mostly near schools and residential areas. One school has two on its property and they stick out like a sore thumb in the grove of pine trees that surround it. I think they actually draw more attention to the fact it is a tower than if it wasn't dressed up to begin with.

I saw a church where the flag pole in the front of it was a T-Mobile tower. just looked like a really thick Flag pole that was needed since it was high and a huge flag...


cooldude9919

join:2000-05-29
kudos:5
reply to pende_tim

said by pende_tim:

It is very hard to tell from the picture with all the lower level trees but it does look like there is a fiber run to the pole that does not continue past the pole.

It could be CATV, but the inline can looks suspiciously like a fiber amplifier.

Fiber amp?? Pretty sure it is a splice box/container, so yes it is fiber, but not an amp.


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada

1 recommendation

reply to whizkid3

said by whizkid3:

People have been using microwaves routinely since WWII, some 70 years. Electromagnetic waves, which includes microwaves, have been around since...hmmm...the big bang.

True enough - although the plethora of devices has increased dramatically in the last 5 years (WiFi and Cell) - I agree that EM waves are EM waves, and we recieve more from the sun then man-made sources; but only time will tell if we're right - or if we should have busted out the tin-foil hats, too....

Just remember - living is 100% fatal... No one gets out alive... :P


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to cooldude9919

said by cooldude9919:

said by pende_tim:

It is very hard to tell from the picture with all the lower level trees but it does look like there is a fiber run to the pole that does not continue past the pole.

It could be CATV, but the inline can looks suspiciously like a fiber amplifier.

Fiber amp?? Pretty sure it is a splice box/container, so yes it is fiber, but not an amp.

True, there is a lashback there (and a pretty sloppy one at that) with a splice can, but from this angle, it's impossible to say if it's connected to equipment at the pole, or if it's just coincidental...

cooldude9919

join:2000-05-29
kudos:5

said by LazMan:

said by cooldude9919:

said by pende_tim:

It is very hard to tell from the picture with all the lower level trees but it does look like there is a fiber run to the pole that does not continue past the pole.

It could be CATV, but the inline can looks suspiciously like a fiber amplifier.

Fiber amp?? Pretty sure it is a splice box/container, so yes it is fiber, but not an amp.

True, there is a lashback there (and a pretty sloppy one at that) with a splice can, but from this angle, it's impossible to say if it's connected to equipment at the pole, or if it's just coincidental...

True, it looks like all the cables go up the pole on the back side that we cant see. IMHO with it appearing to be the last pole with nothing past it, unless they have FTTH there, i wouldnt see them running fiber and stopping in a residential area like that for a different reason?


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada

Nothing says it isn't a "dip" - that the aerial structures go underground at that point... Again, no real way to tell from the OP's picture.

Or, the fibre could terminate there, and be feeding that radio equipment... Dunno...



Daarken
Rara Avises
Premium
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA
kudos:3
reply to DonLibes

Some kid should setup a table at the entrance to that subdivision and sell tin hats and underwear along with lemonade..
--
Getting it Done.


peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON
reply to LazMan

said by LazMan:

As for the safety - I'm a firefighter, a telephone/cellular tech, and have wrenched on and painted race cars for years. I'm getting cancer at some point - there will be no way for me to tell which of my potentially risky exposures, if any, will be responsible... I don't believe there's any great risk from Wifi or cell exposure; but we'll only know for sure in the future, after the technology has been around for 30-40 years...

You and I chose to do this stuff over the years but kids in school and living near these towers didn't. My son worked cell towers out west until recently and thankfully decided to go back to school.

Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Comcast
·CenturyLink
reply to DonLibes

Install a radiant barrier in your home. It is made out of metalized Mylar and is attached to the interior of the roof between the roof trusses. It is designed to reflect infrared energy coming in through the roof in the summer and radiant energy coming into the attic from the interior of the house in the winter. It also reflects RF energy and reduced my electric bill for cooling and heating. If you really want to block RF have clear metalized Mylar radiant barriers installed on your windows.

I tested a TV antenna in the attic before the radiant barrier was installed and after the radiant barrier was installed. After the radiant barrier was installed the TV signal turned to crap. The antenna functioned the same way as it did in the attic before the radiant barrier was installed, when it was placed outside. I also found that the insulation in the walls include metalized Mylar. That is why I have to sit by a window to get a strong cellular signal.


flashcore

join:2007-01-23
united state
reply to toby

said by toby:

I wish a cell company would come and install one near my house.

I am right there with you, hell they can come mount one on my house if it will just make my phone work reliably. It just sucks living at the bottom of 4 hills where the towers barely reach.

As for the "health" claims, I am not worried about what any of the nutjobs that claim that these things are hazardous, if they were I would already be dead from all the other wireless devices in my home.


Fronkman
An Apple a day keeps the doctor away
Premium
join:2003-06-23
Saint Louis, MO
reply to nunya

said by nunya:

They (Clear) put several of those stupid tree towers by my house. Those are the most ridiculous things I've ever seen! In no way, shape, or form do they blend in with the MO/IL landscape.

A simple monopole tower would be less of an eyesore than these.

ha, where are those things? what moron at clear thought sequoias grew in the Mississippi river valley?
--
Everyone should own a Mac! Go Bucks!

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON
reply to Mr Matt

said by Mr Matt:

Install a radiant barrier in your home. It is made out of metalized Mylar and is attached to the interior of the roof between the roof trusses. It is designed to reflect infrared energy coming in through the roof in the summer and radiant energy coming into the attic from the interior of the house in the winter. It also reflects RF energy and reduced my electric bill for cooling and heating. If you really want to block RF have clear metalized Mylar radiant barriers installed on your windows.

I don't know if you guys have this but there is Styrofoam with tinfoil on both sides and only costs a couple bucks more than regular. Our new buildings codes require a rigid styrofoam in many cases so when I do renos I just install that on the walls now. Better than nothing. Oh to answer your obvious objections no there are no wireless emitters to bounce around inside unabated.


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to peterboro

said by peterboro:

said by LazMan:

As for the safety - I'm a firefighter, a telephone/cellular tech, and have wrenched on and painted race cars for years. I'm getting cancer at some point

You and I chose to do this stuff over the years but kids in school and living near these towers didn't. My son worked cell towers out west until recently and thankfully decided to go back to school.

I can't argue for, or against, with any great conviction... We (in generally) are getting exposed to more and more of this type of radiation. There's studies that say it's harmless, there's studies that say it's harmful... As I said before, the only true test, will be time.

Studies are generally useless, I hate to say, because it's rare one doesn't start with an end in mind. Data can be manipulated, "events" excluded or included, to fit the overall end goal.

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

said by LazMan:

I can't argue for, or against, with any great conviction... We (in generally) are getting exposed to more and more of this type of radiation. There's studies that say it's harmless, there's studies that say it's harmful... As I said before, the only true test, will be time.

You and I may not be around to find out. But as long as there is "big money" and a large segment of the population who just have to have all their ridiculous little gadgets connected everywhere the truth will be suppressed as long as possible if history is any indicator.