Companies tackle tower problems

Southwestern Bell and Alltel Communications have adopted different approaches in response to the burgeoning number of wireless subscribers in Northwest Arkansas.

Alltel says its towers are sufficient although it may do some “co-locating” — sharing sites with other companies.

Bell spokesmen say that, as the number of users grows, it will need more towers in the region. Although it may be open to “co-location,” the company is using “stealth technology” to camouflage its towers in some areas.

Hunter Stuart, real estate manager for SWB Wireless, says the situation is complicated in Northwest Arkansas by the uneven terrain.

“Take southeast Arkansas, the Delta, where there are no topological issues,” says Stuart. “In the northwest corner, where there are mountains and valleys, it makes cell siting a more difficult task.”

Stuart says the towers are configured with what is essentially a radio. “A tower can handle just so many radios before additional expansion is required.” Stuart says a tower can generally handle no more than 54 calls at a time.

The number of cell phone subscribers has skyrocketed in recent years — from just over 200,000 nationally in 1985 to more than $60 million in 1998, according to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association — and Northwest Arkansas customers are heavy users, Stuart says.

When a cell phone user tries to place a call while near a tower that’s already handling the maximum 54 calls, the result is a faster than normal busy signal.

“You’re trying to jump to a tower that is totally blocked,” Stuart says, and, naturally, few callers are pleased to get such signals.

For Alltel, spokesman Andrew Moreau says the company is co-locating with other providers on two Northwest Arkansas tower sites: one on Fayetteville’s Mount Sequoyah and another at the intersection of Arkansas Highway 412 and Interstate 540 in Springdale.

“This is where we’re making our towers available to other [companies],” he says.

The subject of new towers has proven controversial in a number of areas, including Fayetteville and Springdale, where neighbors of proposed wireless towers have protested.

“What we found elsewhere is that that’s an issue that’s being discussed nationwide, trying to keep the aesthetic beauty of a community,” Moreau says. “We’re trying to do our fair share to keep communities [aesthetically pleasing].”

Southwestern Bell’s plan to disguise a new tower as a church steeple has encountered protests in Fayetteville. The company had hoped to put an 86-foot tall tower inside a steeple at St. John’s Lutheran Church on East Township Road. Its request is still pending before the city’s Planning Commission, but area residents haven’t proven receptive.

Stuart says there are two sides to the issue because residents in other areas haven’t been hostile to the towers. For example, he noted Shinall Mountain in Little Rock, where there are numerous million-dollar-plus homes.

“That’s a segment that recognizes [the towers] as part of the environment. They accept and adopt [the structures].”

Stuart says some of west Little Rock’s most expensive housing is in a 40,000-acre development where many of those homes back up to wireless towers.

SWB, he continues, “is on the leading edge of using stealth technology: taking traditional structures, like a church steeple, that will house our equipment. When we vacate or move from the site, it will still be a church steeple.”

In other areas, the company has tried artificial trees — using a monopole disguised with imitation bark and wrapped with artificial limbs.

There are certain limitations to the artificial tree disguise, however, because 90-foot pine trees aren’t indigenous to all areas.

The towers don’t come cheap. Stuart estimates the expense of a new tower, from the time the site is identified to the time it’s brought on line, may be $750,000.

“The point being we have a considerable investment” in each cell site, he says. “It’s a very defined science, and we try to maximize our gain out of it.”

t