My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018-06-07 Hearing Transcript - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless USE 17-074
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2018
>
2018-06-07 Hearing Transcript - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless USE 17-074
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2018 1:53:15 PM
Creation date
7/5/2018 1:53:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
you explain little bit more? Did you guys do any testing on that other street or whatever street <br />they were talking about? <br />DE LA GARZA: We did do some modeling. The problem with the park location is that it's <br />very close to our existing site, so we would end up having overlapping coverage. Overlapping <br />coverage is actually bad for LTE `cause it all operates on the same frequencies. You end up <br />having interference, and the sites will interfere with themselves. So, you end up having to tilt <br />your antennas down. They don't cover as far. It's not, from an efficiency perspective, it's <br />terribly inefficient, and it doesn't make the park a really good viable option because it's too close <br />to our existing site, and it also leaves a huge gap up to the north of section of houses that <br />wouldn't be, wouldn't be covered. And, if we are in a situation where we have to build denser <br />and denser or closer and closer to our existing sites, we end up needing more sites. So, from an <br />efficiency perspective and getting the most sites, the most coverage from one site, this location <br />that we chose is ideal for us. <br />AGUINALDO: If you go further little bit more north or to the dead end, would that work? <br />DE LA GARZA: Then, we would end up opening—you see the coverage hole, gap in the center <br />right there? The yellow that's in the—on the right, the right hand? <br />AGUINALDO: Mm-hmm. <br />DE LA GARZA: That would end up opening up that gap, and it would also cause us to have to <br />build more sites to completely cover the neighborhood `cause that's our <br />MARTIN: I also wanted to let you know that I did try to seek out those property owners on <br />the end, and I couldn't find anything viable. <br />CLARKSON: Okay, any other questions for the <br />DE LA GARZA: I hope I answered your question. <br />CLARKSON: Applicant. <br />RAFFIPIY: Question. The green shaded areas, that's the coverage area. The yellow shaded <br />areas are not the—that's the not <br />DE LA GARZA: I would say, I would say it's more marginal. I would have to take a really, <br />really close look at the legend in the corner there to <br />CLARKSON: So, it's like the green is four bars and the yellow is three or two bars or? <br />DE LA GARZA: It's not as, it's not as clear-cut as bars, because bars can indicate signal <br />strength, but if you have like interference where your sites are too close together, you'll get poor <br />signal-to-noise ratio. The sites basically they interfere with each other, and it causes you to have <br />slower throughputs, and it doesn't perform as well, but note from our previous coverage maps <br />EXHIBIT A <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.