It's commendable that our elected officials are looking into ways to provide greater services to the town residents at little or no cost. However, as I stated at the council meeting, I feel it's imperative to weigh the aesthetics of the technology with the expected benefits before an accurate cost/benefit judgment can be made. Much of Steilacoom's value lies in the beauty of the view and the historical significance the view evokes. I would hope that any initiative undertaken by the town include the aesthetics and weigh those effects heavily along with the residents' perception.
Regardless of the economics and whether or not there is any cost to the town, there is no price for the loss of the beauty that is Steilacoom. Even if the town were to profit, it would still be inexcusable to construct unsightly devices projecting from the top of street lamps subjectively scattered throughout the town. It would be like giving us a dry July 4th parade or wind-less Salmon Bake by erecting a dome over the town. Neither solution would be desirable or acceptable for obvious reasons. The same principle applies to the current WiFi project. In fact I found over 30 references in the town municipal code referring to view preservation, some of them specific to wireless devices.
The majority of people I have talked to about this agree the devices are an eyesore and should either be removed or moved to more discrete locations. I would also suggest that any consideration of a permanent installation for this service undergo town wide scrutiny and public input to establish an acceptable design for neighborhood approval. At the very least I would hope that acceptance of services would include resident's ability to influence placement in their neighborhoods.
To that end, I have started a blog online for anyone to post their thoughts, comments or information about this or other subjects of impact to the town. It is open to anyone wishing to post a comment and is more valuable the more people leave comments, so I hope you will participate and use the forum to communicate with a wider audience of interested citizens.
13 comments:
I understand Michael's concerns regarding preserving the aesthetics of Steilacoom. As a happy resident, I find this a beautiful home.
I am adding a counterpoint to Michael's well-versed comments on the Wifi transmitters located atop the lampposts residing in Steilacoom. Once again proving the historic quote: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I do not find the innocuous Wifi transmitters unsightly. To me they look snazzy and sophisticated, seemingly replicating a seaside lighthouse, which metaphorically they are. These transmitters send out a signal that may be received to connect to our latest communication technology, the Internet. This is just another evolution, in the general interpretation of Moore's law. Computing and related technologies will double in sophistication and use every 18 months. This is a proven fact.
Wifi, is one of Moore's evolutions stemming from, interestingly enough, Ham Amateur Radio, which proudly, my Dad was a devout hobbyist. We in Steilacoom are participants of what we may call "future-history", as television in homes in the early sixties changed American lives, so will the impact of the expanse of Wifi. Given the alternatives, remember the popularity of satellite dishes, where dishes were hanging (usually not aesthetically) off of beautiful and not so beautiful homes? These Wifi lighthouses atop our streetlights look innocuous and stylized.
We need to remember that Wifi and the inter-related technologies are in and of themselves neutral conditions, it is how we as humans choose to use them that will make their difference as useful, aesthetic or not.
I for one, as a former college instructor in computer mediated communication and now as a consultant, would like to have less expensive alternatives to the Internet than Comcast. I also believe we need to bridge the technology access gap in our population. Whether we agree with the speech and ideas presented on the Internet, these are the technologies that support our democratic freedoms. Oddly enough this is what having a "blog" (web -log) is all about.
Let's give this experiment a chance; if in the future there are issues with more breadth and depth, then I say let's have an unbiased evaluation of the Wifi experience in Steilacoom.
Jeanette's comments have a curious marketing tone.
It's true that beauty, as art, food, literature, etc., is in the eyes of the beholder. The 'design' of the wireless access points is not so much the issue here, although I understand from CenturyTel that in their only other town-wide wireless installation in Vail, Colorado, they had to 'disguise' the devices as bird houses. I guess Vail residents didn't find them "snazzy and sophisticated." I noticed there any on Main or Lafayette Streets for visitors and residents alike to admire!
The issue here is the apparent ignorance of the overall impact in the rush to embrace newer technology at reduced or no cost. I would think due diligence in determining whether there was a significant need, desire or interest would involve resident input through public hearings and research and involvement in design acceptance and placement. Gathering of information and concerns in informed and collective sessions is essential in any successful project of this scope. Ignorance of that collective can be a sure recipe for failure.
Regardless that the proposed "free" wireless service is slower than a home network and doesn't approach high speed cable connections. It should also be public information, before testing, what the charges are for residents of Vail, Colorado, the only other town-wide wireless installation. Here's what I found from the Vail City website (https://vailwifi1.centurytel.net/ and click "Learn More"):
1 Day - $9.99
1 Week - $44.95
1 Month - $59.95
Annual - $300.00
Special Annual Subscription Rate for Vail Residents
1 Hour** - FREE
** Free plan is for speeds up to 300 Kbps. One hour free is available once in a 24 hour period.
Notice the "FREE" part, in small print on their website, is only available at the slowest speed, and only for 1 hour every 24 hours. Of course you could pay $300 annually, and at $25 per month, that's cheaper than Comcast, comparable to Qwest but slower. Of course you'd have to change your email account if you have one now with Comcast, Qwest, MSN, or whoever your current provider is. Plus you would most likely need to purchase and have a wireless card installed in your desktop computer, since they don't normally come with wireless capabilities. Most newer laptops however already have wireless network capabilities and would not need anything.
But these are all things we should have known, publicized and understood before installation and the point is that it doesn't make the devices attractive, and I still don't understand where the drive to rush in experimenting with our views, and our town, is coming from.
Hello,
The "ad hominem" in regard to the idea that I sound like a marketer is interesting, though not true.
I grew up near Chicago and respectively Boston, where we use words like "snazzy" and "sweet". I suspect I haven't become totally immersed in "Pacific Northwest speak" yet.
The conversation first started off on the aesthetics of the wifi transmitters and has proceeded to cost, which is a good progression. Though I am surprised you didn't print my last reply on the progress of the project so persons can understand the urgency for comments being made and call Centurytel themselves to ask about the project.
If cost is an issue, then we as citizens should be able to know the details of the contract and the price and bidding actions. Clearwire is another provider and is doing well in King County. Was there a bid request for the City of Steilacoom between CenturyTel and other wifi suppliers? Did CenturyTel win out? Where is the contract available for public view?
We can criticize all we want, but it is more difficult to ascertain the probable issues if we don't have an idea of the costs involved.
Having lived in Colorado, I can tell you that in the dead of winter in Vail, a head of iceberg lettuce is $3.50, and the summer it's cheapest at $1.50. Vail is an extremely expensive place to live and the cost of living doesn't compare with Steilacoom.
Michael, could you supply us with needed information on this blog site so we can talk about the actual costs and contract details?
Thank you.
It's not ALL about costs, nor is it ALL about aesthetics, although both play a part. It has to do with complete information and reasonable, considerate implementation. Sure, no one has come out and "told" the residents that the town would soon have high-speed internet for free; but the words "Free" and "High-speed" have been used in discussing this great "experiment" which our elected officials have determined we need to participate in. Both adjectives are misleading; nothing's free, and in today's world (and by Moore's law) 300kbps questionably disqualifies as "high-speed" status. Sure, it may not "cost" the town anything for this "experiment" besides a few hours of staff time and some minimal? power borrowed from 29 of our street lights (currently), but as I said before, cost is only a (small) part, used to convince us that we'll all be able to surf the net anywhere in town, anytime we want. Oh yeah, we forgot to tell you...it might partially obscure the sight of the sunset over Puget Sound, but hey, you can see what it used to look like without obstruction on your 'free' high speed wireless Internet access..right? Do you think they will rebuild Rainier Street this summer adding power poles and stringing telephone lines too?
I'm willing to bet that the prices listed on Vail's site for wireless will be pretty close to what they will want to charge us. You can't compare the cost of a head of lettuce in Vail, Colorado to the differences in cost for Internet access. One is a perishable agricultural commodity that obviously costs more to fly fresh into Colorado in the middle of winter; the other is not even an essential utility that has little ongoing requirements for 'freshness' costs.I also seriously doubt they will give us 24x7 free access and certainly not at the highest possible wireless speeds, which right now doesn't exceed 54mbps and is unlikely to approach even 11mbps in an 'open' system like this.
Jeanette's previous post doesn't appear here as it seemed to be no more than a status report of the current progress and state of the WiFi implementation. I feel that's something official town representatives should do, if they choose to, and not the intent of this blog. They can post their 'status reports' if they choose on the town web site, www.ci.steilacoom.wa.us
I don't have any additional information but would welcome posts from "official town representatives" or CenturyTel as well as residents opinions about this.
...and No, I don't know what the contract contains or if any other provider was given an opportunity to present a plan for similar service.
I make this comment to Michael, what I see is a man that has in the last few years acquired a view of the Puget Sound and does not like the small obstruction that has came before him. Is it the object that he complains about or is it that he is a Photographer and the pictures that he once took from his home now has a great piece of technology (a piece of art) in his pictures. I wonder what he would say if they put a cell tower there. Does he want to stop the rest of his neighbors from enjoying this the benefits of this unit?
For over fifty years I have been here in this small Town and I have seen many things change some for the better and some not so good. The one thing that I know is if you want an unobstructed view you buy or build in front and if you did not do this, you have no reason to complain.
If the lamp post is there anyway that little cylinder on the top is really not noticible. Would you also take out the lights? This discussion seems very silly and reinforces the idea that Steilacoom is populated by a bunch of old cranks. Kristy
As a long time resident of Steilacoom, I have a great appreciation for Steilacoom and it's beauty. That being said I do not agree at all with the thought that the street light antennas do much in the way of disrupting the views that the town has to offer.
I don’t see how adding a 25in tall antenna on the top of existing street lights really makes that much of a difference.
I would hope that as much time if not more, is dedicated to asking questions about how our town is loosing its beauty due to all of the development and loss of wooded areas. Everywhere I look in the town, more trees are coming down than antennas going up.
It is silly for people to complain about such unimportant issues.
My guess is these complaints are from the same residents who wish to stop trains from whistling. They are putting their want of a higher house value over the safety and concern for the community. Their “need” for “perfection” is standing in the way of the betterment of everyone in this community. Maybe this energy that is being used to complain should be put to good use by helping our local school system reach higher goals.
I understand the author's frustration with what was put up obstructing his view, I wouldn't want it in front of my window either.
I didn't attend the town meetings on this subject, I wonder if they showed the device and mapped the intended installation locations.
But, what about the light standard supporting the WiFi device? That's a piece of technology that's been obstructing your view for some time now?
Wow. I'm always happy to see someone excited about something. Were you ticked off when they put up the light pole? Would you be okay with the tranceiver if it were mounted over the main part of the pole?
I don't live in Steilacoom, but I have driven through the area and have been "Wowed" with the view that is now being 'changed' by the addition of these access points.
I'd very much enjoy a public service like that where I live, but I don't have a view. What other measures were considered? Was the option to mount the antennae a different way considered? Or how about another brand of product that offers a more aesthetically pleasing design?
At any rate, good read through the comments and kudos to the citizen looking after the interests of his town as well as his property.
I don't know if you noticed, but there was an article recently in the Tacoma News Tribune about town-wide wireless Internet experiences in other cities. The article which ran 5/22 can be found here from your web browser:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/business/story/68241.html
here's a few excerpts from that article:
"...nearly a year after its launch, Lompoc Net is limping along. The central California city of 42,000, surrounded by rolling hills, wineries and flower fields more than 17 miles from the nearest major highway, has only a few hundred subscribers..."
"...That’s far fewer than the 4,000 needed to start repaying loans from the city’s utility coffers, potentially leaving smaller reserves to guard against electric rate increases..."
"...Lompoc isn’t alone. Across the U.S., many cities are finding their Wi-Fi projects costing more and drawing less interest than expected, leading to worries that a number will fail, resulting in millions of dollars in wasted tax dollars or grants when there had been roads to build and crime to fight..."
"..."They are the monorails of this decade: the wrong technology, totally overpromised and completely undelivered," said Anthony Townsend, research director at the Institute for the Future, a think tank...."
"...Users today are struggling with e-mail and the Web over some wireless systems, yet video and online games will require even more capacity."
"Most people if they are going to do serious work aren't looking to be sitting in a park," said Eric Rabe, a spokesman for DSL provider Verizon Communications Inc. "They want to be at a desk where they have their papers or business records."
Just thought you'd be interested in others experiences with their WiFi experiments.
Michael
I recently passed through your town and was amazed at the changes since I moved away. The pringles cans sound horrible but there must be a better method to light your fair city. I have enjoyed your fourth of July fireworks on occasion and can't believe you would not only block your gorgeous view butadd so much light pollution.
Best of luck Micheal and hope town hall listens on better ways to spend the speed trap/parking ticket $$ that they have received from me over the years.
Jackson
Post a Comment