There are a number of people for whom satellite and cellular are good options. If you get a good signal and have only 1 or 2 light Internet users in the house then these plans work well. For others, they may not work out so well.

First, availability. There are many in our area who cannot get a good cellular or satellite signal. From reports in the neighborhood, about a third to a half of us cannot get a good signal which leads to poor service.

Next, cost. A “typical” satellite or cellular plan costs around $80 per month. A typical cable or DSL plan costs about $40 per month and a typical fixed wireless plan around $60. So satellite and cellular customers pay up to twice what they should.

Finally, value. What do you get for your money? Here satellite and cellular services fall very short. They have very low data caps, limiting the amount you can use the Internet in a given month without paying extra fees.

Data usage is measured in Gigabytes per month. Limits are 5 to 10 Gigabytes for cellular plans and 7.5 to 25 Gigabytes for satellite plans. Above that you have to pay overage fees, typically $10 per Gigabyte. In contrast, DSL, cable and fixed wireless caps are 100 Gigabytes or more per month.

The “average” broadband household in the U.S. uses about 28 Gigabytes per month. Even with the most favorable pricing, the average household would pay $260 a month with a cellular plan or $160 a month with a satellite plan with their overage fees.

If you have only 1 or 2 light Internet users doing basic web browsing and email, you’ll likely stay within the monthly data limits. If you have 3 or more users or want to take advantage of services like NetFlix and YouTube or listen to Internet radio throughout the day then you’ll likely pay overage fees every month.

So I will continue to try and bring true broadband Internet to our neighborhood, because we need more alternatives than just cellular and satellite.

There didn’t appear to be any significant obstacles from a technical standpoint. There still may be legal or other reasons U of M could stop the project. The next step is for Air Advantage to negotiate a tower lease with U of M.

I have not been able to get a progress update from Air Advantage recently. I suspect no significant progress has been due to the bureaucracy at U of M or Air Advantage is just too busy. They are a small company which is rapidly expanding and may be short on resources. It is also possible that they have decided not to proceed with the project or could not get approval from U of M. I will get a response one way or the other and keep everyone posted.

One hiccup did slow progress. 123Net, the provider I had been working with, sold their wireless business to Air Advantage, a Frankenmuth based company. Thanks (again) to Dan Manning at ConnectMI.org for getting me in contact with the right people at Air Advantage.

Air Advantage is taking a proactive role and has been very responsive. I have a WUOM/Air Advantage meeting set up in the beginning of June to get the ball rolling and find out what it will take to provide service.

I’m sure people are wondering

1. When can we get service?
2. What kind of service does Air Advantage provide?
3. How much will it cost?

It’s too early to say if and when we’ll get service at this point, although I feel positive about it. I should have better information after our meeting in June.

Air Advantage currently offers service plans in the Thumb region that range from 1 to 5 Mbps for $38 to $68 per month. I will be asking if we can expect higher speed offerings now or in the future with a new build out like ours.

A huge benefit of Air Advantage is they do not have data caps like Satellite and cellular services. No speed reductions or overage charges. This is important even for the average internet household. If I were to upgrade my current slow, unreliable but unlimited 3G wireless plan for a new, faster 4G plan, I would average $180+ per month due to overage charges. For me it’s a no-brainer.

Initial communication with U of M by a neighbor indicated that a 123Net wireless system needs to be licensed, have legal permission to operate on U of M land, and not interfere with their radio astronomy work. It is by no means a sure thing, but it is positive that we did not get a flat denial. I have not been able to arrange a follow up meeting with U of M and 123Net as of yet.

There is also renewed activity with Charter cable. Charter is supposed to come through our neighborhood late March/early April to re-asses cable deployment. This does not mean we will get cable, but they are looking at the situation. If anyone spots and Charter trucks in the area, let me know.

The Charter involvement is thanks to Dan Manning at Connect Michigan (http://www.connectmi.org). Connect Michigan is a non profit working with the Michigan Public Services Commission to increase broadband adoption. I have been talking with Dan over the last few months. He recently got the ear of the Senior Director of Engineering at Charter and told him of our situation. This isn’t the first time Charter has surveyed the neighborhood. I’m hoping we have the right people looking at the problem this time so they can come up with a realistic solution, however.

We had a number of questions answered and have gotten direction as to next steps in term of residential wireless access. Some of the pertinent points from the meeting:

• 123Net offers two plans. A 16 Mbps plan equivalent to typical Cable internet speed for $60/month and a 1 Mbps plan equivalent to low end cable speeds for $40. The high end plan requires “Line Of Sight” to their tower. The low end plan does not.
• Line Of Sight means that, from an antenna mounted on your house (probably the roof) you can physically see their tower. The lower speed option is “Non-Line Of Sight”. It can go through trees and some obstructions.
• There is new equipment just approved by the FCC that would enable high speed connections without Line Of Sight. 123Net is getting the equipment for testing, it may be an option for people to get high speeds who are behind trees.
• 123Net has no data caps. Unlike Verizon, AT&T, HughsNet, and even Charter Cable, 123Net does not restrict the amount of data you can download or reduce your speed after you use a certain amount of data.
• 123Net will need to set up equipment on an existing tower or we would need to build a tower in the neighborhood. Existing towers include the U of M tower on Peach Mountain and the Sprint/Nextel tower on Barker Road. My best guess at cost of erecting a tower is $15,000 – $20,000.
• Ordinances require a tower to be 400′ from any structure and 150′ from the road. They must be built on public land. There is not any public land in our neighborhood, we would have to pursue a variance if we build a tower. As this is a community project for the public good, we may get some sympathy for a variance.
• There is a $200 hook up fee to install the necessary equipment on our house. We would not own the equipment. 123Net would come out for free to service it if we have any problems.
• Service requires an antenna be mounted probably on your roof. There are 2 kinds of antennas. The high speed service uses a 2 foot x 1 foot slightly curved wire mesh style antenna. The low speed service uses a 6′ long narrow antenna that looks like the blade of a hedge trimmer.

Next Steps:

I’ll be working with some neighbors to find out if 123Net can put their equipment on the U of M tower on Peach Mountain. This may be a long shot but it is worth pursuing.

If the U of M tower does not pan out, we’ll look at where we could put a tower in the neighborhood or if the Sprint/Nextel tower on Barker Road could service us.

I was hoping to get this meeting together by the end of July. That didn’t pan out due to peoples vacation schedules and my work schedule. The 123Net rep was tied up for most of August, but I think the time is right to try and pull this together.

I talked with the Township, and they will let us use their hall for a neighborhood meeting. I need to get a date from 123Net, and then I’ll get the word out to everyone.

A brief refresher on 123Net and their services. 123Net is a provider out of Southfield that services areas from Detroit to Saline. They bought 20/20 Communications, an Ann Arbor based wireless company, about a year ago.

123Net offers a form of fixed wireless internet access. It is not the same technology as wireless services from cell phone companies like Verizon or AT&T nor is it the same as sattellite internet.

Due to the much smaller up front investment, a 123Net build out of service is most likely more feasible than getting service from Charter, Comcast or AT&T. In the neighborhood meeting, I would like to get more specifics on their services, costs, and comparisons to Cable and DS&L. What 123Net will want to see is interest from a large number of us. So the more people that can attend the better.

When I have a meeting date, I’ll get the word out!

A 123Net representative will be driving around the neighborhood in the coming weeks, noting possible locations to install antennas. My guess is they need at least one tall location above the treeline that can “see” one of their other transmitting antennas. They may need a few such installations around the neighborhood to get us all hooked up.

Myself and a couple of other residents have mentioned they would help out in whatever way they can to get us hooked up. I won’t know what they may require until after they look around. I half expect that mounting an antenna mast 10 – 20 feet above a barn roof or erecting a tall utility (i.e. telephone) pole with an antenna on top may be what it takes.

I have mentioned to them about the very tall U of M tower on Peach Mountain that is visible by nearly everyone on Scully road. There are numerous reasons why it may not be usable, but if they could broadcast from that tower, they could cover a large portion of the township.

I have no further info at this point on costs or feasibility. My guess is that, even if we had to erect two or three utility poles/antenna masts, the build out costs would be significantly less than cable.

I will pass along more information as I get it. At this point we just have to keep showing 123Net that we have a strong desire for broadband and we are willing to work out the kinks to make it happen!

Note, 123Net owns 20/20 Communications, which I believe services their residential customers. I don’t want to confuse things at this point, but service may actually come through 20/20 Communications.

Hello everyone,

Charter has surveyed the area of Scully, Walsh, Valentine, Stoneview, Black Pine, Gleason and Timberlane roads. They have not yet looked at the areas on Territorial, Blue Heron, Donovan or other non-adjacent roads. I would guess that brining service to other neighborhoods in the area would average out to about the same costs if we were to proceed all at once.

Here I’ll review how much Charter wants to build out service and what the per household costs might be. For Scully and adjoining roads the numbers are:

Labor:      $197,272
Material:    $73,139
Allowances: ($65,400)
---------------------
Net Cost:   $205,011

I would guess many are shocked at this number. Some probably expected more. I’m not going to get into wether this is unfair or a good deal. I’ll just lay out the numbers as is.

Charter figures out labor and materials costs and “potential make ready charges, costs from the power company and other matters out of our control…” Each potential service hookup gets a $600 allowance. For our area, we have 77 homes and 32 empty lots which give us our allownace:

77 + 32 = 109 potential "hookups"
109 x $600 = $65,400 allowance

So this would give a build out cost per “hookup” of:

$205,011 / 109 = $1881

This $1881 would be a “best case” scenario and would involve:

1) Convincing everyone in the area to pay for hookup.
2) Identifying developers/owners of empty lots and convincing them to pay $1881 per hookup.
3) For neighbors who may own empty lots, they would agree to pay for multiple hookups.

If the build out cost were divided equally among the 77 existing homes (assuming everyone wants cable), the cost would be:

$205,011 / 77 =  $2662

In this case, we would then have to figure out how to reimburse residents as new homes (on those 32 empty lots) are hooked up.

In the more realistic scenario that not everyone wants cable or would pay the up-front investment, there are a few other options I can think of:

1) Grants throught the Department of Agriculture and Federal Communications Commission. Both of these organizations have programs to help build out rural areas.
2) Form an LLC or co-op which funds the build out and recoups their investment through monthly surchages on service.

Again, I don’t want to give my personal opinion at this point. I’d like everyone to think on this and post their feedback.

What do you think? Crazy? Doable? Unfair? Good deal? Let us know.

More importantly, 123Net wants to work with us and develop a plan to bring service to our neighborhood, which is very encouraging. Their cooperative attitude resulted in part from our web site and seeing the commitment of all of you. Thanks everyone for your support!

I have provided 123Net with a listing of possible antenna locations as well as information about local towers that are visible from our area. Surprisingly, there are 3 visible towers within 4 miles. It will take them some time to digest the information and respond with alternatives. At that point, we’ll probably meet with them as a group.

If 123Net does decide they can provide service, they offer 2 plans:

Speedwise, the base plan is about 30% to 100% faster than typical 3G and satellite plans (1.3x to 2x faster). I don’t have personal experience with their services, but from a technical standpoint their technology should offer a higher quality more consistent connection than 3G wireless or satellite. Did I mention it doesn’t have the ridiculously low data caps that other providers have?

Their service works by installing a transmitting antenna in a location able to “cover” the neighborhood. It broadcasts a broadband signal (they describe their technology as 4G). The base plan does not require line of site to their antenna. I assume this means it can operate through some tree cover or partially obstructed locations. The upgrade plan requires line of sight to the 123Net antenna. I suspect this means the Base plan operates in the 900 Mhz band and the Upgrade plan in the 5.8 Ghz band.

While progress on these things is never as fast as one hopes, I will continue following through with them until we have a plan.

Mark remembered me from Congressman Tim Walberg’s Coffee hour and again expressed his desire to understand more about the broadband issue. I reiterated that the State’s Uniform Video Services Local Franchise Agreement needs reformed. That that document usurps local governments power to serve their communities interests. Mark seems genuinely interested in the issue, but I think he currently has no time to work on it given the economy and budget issues.

County Commissioner Dan Smith was their as well. He has done some further research at the County and turned up a list of “tower” assets put together during the Wireless Washtenaw program. This is a listing of tall structures around the county that could hold antennas for a fixed wireless broadband system. This was a timely find, as I have been talking with 123Net about neighborhood wide broadband fixed wireless.

I also met Todd Girdis, President of IntelliHome Systems, a local small business. Todd was interested in what we needed as his company services many varied technology areas. While his company doesn’t build out broadband systems, he indicated he has worked with such companies. He was interesting to talk to and may prove a useful resource.

As always, thanks everyone for your help and support!