The program Rocky Mountain Legacy # 801 "SKI!" A Century of Colorado Skiing" will be shown in HD on Monday, 2/25 at 20:00 (MT) on KRMA DT-18.

This will be coming from tape LOR-801.

---------------

weisco,

About all I know of the KRMA DT-18 stuff is;
a) theoretically they run an up-convert of their normal feed until primetime and (actually their analog feed is a down-convert of their DT feed ;-)
b) at primetime they pass the national HD feed (which many nights does not have any HD per se) and
c) sometimes they insert Local Origination (LOR) HD stuff (like tonight)

When I post the "Heads Ups" about National HD material broadcasts on DT-18 it is because the national PBS web-site does such a poor job with it's schedule. They generally list the first air date of an HD show, but do not specify when it repeats through-out the month. Also the heads ups also help with time conversion from Eastern time zones to Mountain.

The heads ups that I post are basically copies of internal emails that are generated whenever something "special" (not necesarily true HD) is being broadcast on the digital national feed or when they insert LOR.

Hmm.... KRMA's schedule is up-to-date for tonight... http://www.rmpbs.org/schedule/200202/25.html It'd be nice though if they mentioned HD in the description though. Actually I guess it would/should be correct as their analog signal is just a down-convert of their digital signal.

Tomorrow nights Nova program is listed as being in high-def on PBS nationals HD site here... http://www.pbs.org/digitaltv/dtvsched.htm#nov01

-John

weisco:

"NOVA: Life's Greatest Miracles" will be on KRMA ch18 tomorrow night and in HD. I got the following reply from KRMA (don't know why titantv is wrong):

The 2/26 program is in HD and will be broadcast on DTV 18.

The two station schedules are not always the same. Not all programs on Channel
6 are broadcast in HD.
Not all HD programs are simulcast with 6.


Donna Sanford
Programming
Rocky Mountain PBS

You cant really go by titantv at all in the evening or weekend hours on 18 because those listings are premised on 18 having local programming on 24/7 like it used to be in the old days (aside from the few times they plug in a HD program from National. But nowadays they just pass through National everynight from like 5pm to like 8am the next morn, preempting it once in a while for a new episode of "Spirit" or "Legacy".

I like how they do it this way now though. Much better passing through National every night. Get more chances at the National HD specials that before 18 would only plug in on their debut showings it seemed, but never on any subsequent ones.

A couple of items:

Did any of you folks watch the "Spirit of Colorado" on Sat.? How was it? Will it be rerun at some point in the future for those of us who missed it the first time?

Also, FWIW, I sent a message to someone at KUSA a few weeks back asking where to find their HD coverage of the Olympics. I got the regular canned reply that they do not have that capability at this time, so I wrote back and asked if they would be willing to meet with the AVS members and HD viewers like KRMA did to explain their application and its status. Would you believe I got a reply today? The only information is another person to contact who "is working on the application", but hey, at least it is a reply. I will continue to follow up on this, but really do NOT want to dilute the KRMA hearing support, so I do not plan to push hard for any future meetings until after the KRMA hearings. I would really like to arrange for someone from KUSA talk to us as well as KCNC and KMGH (all at the same time if possible). I will bet things can be arranged after their application submittal, when they will see the need for public support. Stay tuned.

JM

I believe that these other stations are only going to kick in the resources, whehter political or monetary, if they feel they are being left in the dust. I know they have corporate policies and long term plans and budgetary constraints and etc. etc., but please. Some commercial stations are, or wil be, doing a fair job given the circumstances but I really think that the political problems in Jeffco are interpreted as economic opportuinties (or at least captial improvement savings) by others.

Why do you feel that truly pushing KUSA, and others, would dilute the momentum established by us at the KRMA meet? The customers in my store are amazed that CH. 6 is leading the charge, given their resources, and are somewhat affronted , or offended, by the lack of leadership by the commercial TV "leaders" in Denver. Maybe the publicity generated by KRMA, and others, successes and efforts will motivate others to get it in gear. I mean, who wants to get beat out by publicly funded PBS?

I think that these stations should be pushed. That the public should be made aware of KRMA's efforts and how these commercial stations are not stepping up. As a matter of fact, these stations may actually be intentionally slowing down the process.

When the emperor saw his new clothes, he changed ... and we're building the mirror.

If I am out of line, PM me and set me straight.

Jeff

BTW... I've sent a total of 53 letters (16 Jeffco) to the appropriate parties. Hope this is helping.

Jeff
I don't think pushing the stations is out of line at all. I was referring to the issue of trying to set up a chance to meet with the LCG stations to ask questions etc. like we did with KRMA. My letter had requested that they set up a meeting with the AVS group like KRMA did so they can explain their policy to the public. I simply think that until the application is submitted by the LCG, it doesn't make sense to push them to meet with us like KRMA did. The KRMA meeting was beneficial to all of us since we were able to ask questions and discuss their application. It is easier to ask people to support the issue when we understand it ourselves. Until the LCG submits something I know they will not want to discuss their new design since it might tip their hand to the (S)CARE folks. Once the plan is submitted it is a matter of public record and at that point they will need our support. I am in favor of 'pushing' the stations, that is what motivated me to ask them about the Olympic feed. They (especially KUSA) need to know that there are people out here waiting for them to get on the air. I also think all of the signatures, and letters of support we get for KRMA are also a direct sign to the LCG that they cannot hide from the viewers any more. In the meantime, the pettitions being signed indeed encourage Jeffco to allow both plans to be approved. The LCG stations are being made aware that there are people out there with receivers waiting for them, and we know what we are missing due to their inaction. A meeting with them will be more appropriate later.

I think that these stations should be pushed. That the public should be made aware of KRMA's efforts and how these commercial stations are not stepping up. As a matter of fact, these stations may actually be intentionally slowing down the process. Indeed they should be pushed. They have been intentionally slowing down. They have not submitted an application to JeffCo in darn near two years – a year or so after they finally dropped the utterly insane lawsuit. I hope KRMA is successful and embarrasses them into action. From the sound of things it’s likely our main independent station (KWGN) will also beat them to the punch, which on the face of things will be a bit of an embarrassment as well but the retort will be “they (KWGN and KDVR) had the zoning, we don’t”. If and when KRMA gets approved they won’t have the zoning issue provide cover any longer.

I also think all of the signatures, and letters of support we get for KRMA are also a direct sign to the LCG that they cannot hide from the viewers any more. In the meantime, the petitions being signed indeed encourage Jeffco to allow both plans to be approved.This point cannot be over stressed to my way of thinking. The petition signatures can send a wake up call to all parties concerned. Then again if we only collect a couple of hundred signatures this will not be good.


I’d like to see a meeting with the LCG stations but I’m with jm in that I don’t see the point until they submit an application that’s supposedly been due “any day now” for a couple of months……

Hey JM

I got to watch the "Spirit of Colorado" the other night. I was great. I am not sure if it will run again or not.

Thanks to who ever posted the heads up that this would be on. Without that I would have missed it.

And yes this was the one that they showed us when we got to take the tour.

Very nice.

later
Joe

I'll just apologize right up front for inserting a quasi-commercial post here, but I think it's the right place.

A couple weeks back in this thread, notice was posted of a ridiculous sale on Radio Shack's largest outdoor antenna, the VU-210. I bought one of these at the low, low price of $4+tax, and though it sure looks impressive hovering over my neighborhood, it didn't change my inability to receive DTV down here in Old Town Louisville. Since it's not helping me, I figure maybe it can help someone else.

If you, too, would like to scare your neighbors by installing an antenna only slightly smaller than a Boeing 767, email me. I'm completely unwilling to even think about how to ship something this large, so you MUST be willing to come pick it up in Louisville, and in the great tradition of capitalism I'm asking a full $5, thus generating an enormous profit (and more importantly, relieving myself of the need to make change).

Just in case I have yet to make it clear, this thing is a monster. Even though it breaks down into two halves, you will need a roof rack or a very long vehicle to transport it, and you will scare your wife when you get home. If you live near DIA you will probably show up on ATC radar, and if you live on Lookout Mountain the neighbors will picket outside your house. On the plus side, you will probably be able to pick up broadcasts from alien civilizations (though whether or not it will help with HDTV in Denver depends entirely on your geography and the whimsy of the gods).

Bells,

I will be gracious enough to take it off your hands. I am in the LSVL area every day, so let me know when you would like to exchange for the enormous sum of cash you are asking for.

Jeff

720-566-3305

Bells,

By the way, I will also throw in a free 20 pack of admissions to the LSVL rec center that I won at the Chamber dinner.

Jeff

:(

Man, this thread has sure gone off the deep end! What were we talking about!?

IO,

We drift around a bit but this thread has stayed amazingly on topic for the huge number of posts and 1.5 years it has been open. It's a great community resource. Enjoy it!

-John

A little diversion from this neverending depressing saga is fine by me.
On a change of pace, my antenna move looks like it may be working out. So far I've been able to watch KCNC DT 3 nights in a row - a new record for me. The lower signal reading on KRMA DT hasn't proved to be a problem yet either...keeping my fingers crossed....

Well lets hope so Geof. Either that or the weather phenomenon lately is helping you as much as it is me. 35 has been pegging at or near 100 around the clock with these cold temperatures, whereas when the weather is "normal" it hovers around 65-72.

And 17 has been staying around 44-51 around the clock compared to usually 37 night 24/30 day.

I haven't been able to determine daytime readings yet but my KCNC DT reading dropped to 44 the other night (when it was real cold) while KRMA DT went up to 72. When I set the antenna the best I could get is 58 on both channels. Last evening KCNC was at 62...and KRMA 72. The readings seem random at this point. Strange.

I've actually watched a lot more KCNC (in HD) then I have in the last few years. I doubt I'll be tuning in to some of their anal sitcoms again but I will be a regular CSI viewer (I never watched it till I could receive HD). I've got to say HDTV is far better than NTSC.... damn brillant observation huh? :)

Originally posted by Geof

I've actually watched a lot more KCNC (in HD) then I have in the last few years. I doubt I'll be tuning in to some of their anal sitcoms again but I will be a regular CSI viewer (I never watched it till I could receive HD). I've got to say HDTV is far better than NTSC.... damn brillant observation huh? :)

Well Geof, I am not sure 'brilliant' is the word I would have chosen for that, but what the hey!
:D

I know what you mean about the HD version though. I would have never given CSI and The Agency the time of day if it were not for HD. I still won't watch them regularly, but they are an option now if nothing else is on. Actually in my own case I am lucky enough to have so many HD sources that other than live sports, I watch very few programs that are not in HD these days. If it is not in HD, it had better be awful good or it is not likely to get airtime at my place. I just wished more sports were in HD like on HDNet. HD is really the only way to watch sports. CBS is doing us all a great favor with the NCAA's. I wonder if KCNC will be willing to show the HD games here even if they are not in our 'market"? It would be nice if they would give us the option to view the HD game even if it is not on locally.


:(

Back to the original depressing subject, I just finished my draft of my letter to Jeffco supporting the MT. Morrison application last night. I figure to give it a day in case I think of something else to say and then I will pass it on to the appropriate parties. How is everyone else doing on their letters? I know a few have done them, and we had the one editorial in the paper. How is everyone else doing, have you sent your letter in yet?

Anyone out there getting HD OTA reception, on this side of HR? I'm about to get a CM4221 or CM4228 and was looking for someone who has "been there done that". I'm pretty much up on the highest part of Westridge in HR. I look down on Denver. Only issue is placement of antenna. It will most likely be above the garage with my other VHF/UHF antenna, that points at Lookout Mtn. Great reception there, just don't know about what I'm going to get with the low power HD from downtown.
Any advice would be helpful.

Thanks,

Well Keith I dont live in that neighborhood, I'm down southwest at Chatfield and Wads but my advice would be, get her up high and point her downtown. I'm sure 18 and 35 will be a lock (no pun intended) and you might even get lucky with 17. One way to find out right?

The thing is, you could probably get 18 and 35 with a real good indoor antenna even, but thinking about doing what you mentioned above will give you that shot at 17.

Thats basically what I'm doing, using a big Yagi outdoors and also getting about the aforementioned same results.

Any advice would be helpful

Take a piece of coax and hook up the antenna to your STB and then walk around/move the antenna around till you get a good signal. It's sort of like looking for water with a devining rod but you'll be using an antenna instead.

Would a pre amp be necessary or a waste of money? A rotor I think would be worth it, if and when we get something on Mt Morrison or Lookout Mts., but I'm not sure if a pre amp would do me any good.

Well again for 17 you might need all the help you can get. I dont use a pre-amp but I do have just a run of the mill RS amp inside the house just before the antenna gets split to my 2 digital tuners. It definitely helps me some.

Thanks for the replies and info. I think I'll go with a CM4221 and a rotor to begin with and see how it goes......
Besides I'm trying to help "spur on " the economy with all my recent purchases. I think I'll have to have an AVSforum open house when my theater gets finished to show my appreciation for all the info I've picked up here!

A preamp brings its own set of problems. If your antenna is only going to point to downtown that eliminates one potential problem source (in your situation). Here are the gotchas:

1) A preamp is subject to overload if it receives a very strong signal - that won't be the case from your location if you point the antenna downtown. However if you lived East of downtown and the antenna could see both downtown and Lookout that might be problematical.
2) A preamp will amplify noise just as well as it amplifies signal. There is no free lunch - a preamp is not going to improve the Signal to Noise ratio. In fact it will degrade it because it adds its own noise.

The best use of a preamp is to overcome downstream losses. If you're running the antenna directly to your STB the cable loss will be small and no preamp should be required. If your antenna feeds a splitter (or two) then a preamp can effectively be used to overcome the losses introduced by the splitter(s).

Minimize cable loss by using good RG 6 low loss cable.

Here's what I recommend: Find a good antenna position by moving the antenna around as I previously mentioned. While you do this have the antenna temporarily connected to the STB with a straight piece of RG 6 coax - use no splitters or other junk. Mount the antenna in the best spot you can. Once you get the antenna mounted get some signal strength readings (if your STB has that capability) with the temporary setup. Then connect the coax to whatever splitters you will need in the final setup and get the signal strength readings again. If the readings don't look too good it might be time for a preamp. If you do need a preamp get one that mounts on the antenna (or at least put it before any splitters). If the readings look fine you saved a few bucks....go buy a beer for all that work you just did...:)

Thanks Geof....:p

Originally posted by JMartinko


How is everyone else doing, have you sent your letter in yet?

I sent a letter to Jeffco (Planning Commission and copied commissioners) via U.S. Mail, and then submitted letters-to-the-editor via e-mail to the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News. I got a reply from the Denver Post that they intend to publish it, so that is good news.

We need to try to at least match CARE letter-for-letter, so I hope people are writing them.

I dropped petitions off at Soundtrack, Best Buy and Circuit City, but I haven't had a chance to follow up to see how they are doing. Best Buy and Circuit City both needed "additional approval", so I doubt much is happening there. The Soundtrack guys seemed pretty enthusiastic about it.

Mark

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you all about the color bar test.

We will air 5 minutes of bars on KRMA-DT at 7 pm March 5.

We can do this again if folks want/need it. Just let me know.

Good luck in setting yur monitors!

Bud

keithsimp,

More things to consider with a preamp...

If you are going to use a diplexer to combine the satellite and antenna signals and use 1 cable to go to your room (and another diplexer to split it again at the receiver), you will need a diplexer that has DC pass on both sides. They usually only pass DC on the satellite side. In fact, I don't know if one exists with DC pass on both sides or if it will work if it does exist. :confused:

FWIW, The preamps I've seen have a power injector at the TV end and an amplifier at the antenna end and won't work through a diplexer, even if you put the power injector at the antenna.

AAAAHHH CHOOO!

Pardon Me!

I hope you didn't send any bugs my way with the sneeze jm....

All,
KRMA does not want to collect the petitions. I will ask Jay to send out an email in a couple of days asking everyone who has gathered signatures to send the petitions directly to me or, alternately, to JeffCo (however, if the petition is sent directly to jeffCo we'll never know how many signatures were collected).

We will want to have the petitions submitted to JeffCo on or before the 15th so I will probably ask for them to be sent to me by the 8th or to JeffCo by the 12th. I will include both the address in the email Jay sends out.

Also, if anyone cares to write a letter to JeffCo here are the addresses:

Jefferson County Planning Commission
ATTN: Paul Rosasco, Chairman
c/o Heather Guterless, Jefferson County Planner
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 3550
Golden, CO. 80419


Please CC a copy to the County Commissioners:

Board of County Commissioners
ATTN: Michelle Lawrence, Chair
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 5550
Golden, CO. 80419

If I get time I will write a brief sample letter. If you live in Jefferson County please write. You voice can make a difference - it can literally be the difference between rejection or approval of this application.

Here are some points to consider in a letter to JeffCo (extracted from the Mt Morrision Tower site (http://www.mtmorrisontower.org/)).
Jefferson County Planning Commission
ATTN: Paul Rosasco, Chairman
c/o Heather Guterless, Jefferson County Planner
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 3550
Golden, CO. 80419

March 4, 2002

Dear Jefferson County Planning Board,

I support the Mt. Morrison Replacement Tower.

The proposed Mt. Morrison tower (both alternatives A and B) is designed for minimal environmental/visual impact and will blend into the surrounding terrain. Every visual aspect has been carefully studied to provide the least visual impact possible while complying with all of the local, state and federal regulations. Specifically, the application provides for:
* No net increase in the number of towers on Mt. Morrison;
* Removal of a major tower and transmission building from Lookout Mountain;
* No new access road to Mt. Morrison (the access road has existed since the 1950s);
* No new power lines are necessary (three-phase power to the Mt. Morrison site already exists);
* The Mt. Morrison transmitter building addition will have minimal visual impact;
* Neither tower alternative will be painted red and white. Instead the selected tower alternative will be painted in a color scheme that studies show is the least visible;
* No adverse impacts on Red Rocks sound equipment;
* Any vegetation on Mt. Morrison removed during construction will be replaced;
The analog Channel 6 tower site on Lookout Mountain will be restored with native trees and vegetation after the tower and transmitter building are removed.

The FCC requires that all television stations, both public and commercial, convert to broadcasting a digital signal, as follows:
* Begin broadcasting a new "digital" signal by no later than May 1, 2003.
* Stop broadcasting the old "analog" signal by 2006 or at such time as 85% or more of the households in the Metro area have digital television sets.

Jefferson County policy does not allow Rocky Mountain PBS to modify the existing Channel 6 tower to accommodate the digital equipment needed to comply with FCC mandates, so the public broadcasters must find a viable alternative site.

Mt. Morrison is the only site other than Lookout Mountain that will not:
* Result in a substantial loss of broadcast coverage to households;
* Diminish reception quality for public television viewers and public radio listeners.


Sincerely,


John Doe
County of Residence
Street Address
City, CO. Zip


CC: Board of County CommissionersOnce again, here's the address for the County Commissioners:

Board of County Commissioners
ATTN: Michelle Lawrence, Chair
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 5550
Golden, CO. 80419

On a personal note, there is a lot to like about this application. The more I review it the better I like it. Kudo's to the KRMA crew who obviously thought this out well. JeffCo wanted alternative's when the LCG was trying to get their first plan pushed thru. Eldorado is likely in the process of being rejected and this plan visually improves both Morrison and Lookout while reducing RF levels on Lookout. The NIMBY factor will be strong though which is why this needs support for all interested parties (especially JeffCo residents).

Look for my 'Letter to the Editor' in this Thursday's issue of Westword. I received a call from Westword saying they received a flood of letters on this topic (nice going everyone!) and would print mine mostly because it adhered to the 200 word limit and didn't look like a form letter.

I just called to find out the status of the Mt. Morrison tower case. The lady I talked to said that the case will be continued due to problems with the notification. Apparently the developer has to post signs at least 14 days prior to the hearings, and they did not pick up the signs until 13 days before. Therefore, by law, they must postpone the case.
I asked when it will be heard, and she said that hasn't been determined yet, but possibly on March 27th. However, if the case is not finished on that day (which it will not be, if prior cases are the norm) then they cannot get on the Planning Commission's agenda until June.

-Wabisabi

Thanks for the news Wabisabi.

The tower issue story continues to depress.....

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thankfully no one is in a hurry to get HD here in Colorado, after all, none of the other major cities have HD either.........NOT!

Bad news on the hearing. On the plus side, that is more time to collect signatures and write letters. Ron, nice work on the letter to the editor.

*****SIGH*****

Oh well, more signatures, letters and letters to the editor isn't a bad thing...I bet the folks at KRMA are pretty upset about this!

I was looking at the applications for extensions by the local stations and thought I'd post a link to the one submitted by KMGH. Gives an idea of what the LCG has in mind I guess.

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=61527

Bummer, according to that document, best case scenario is Fall 2003 for full power.

That is assuming that their plan goes through, and that the weather is good.

Anyone want to lay odds if we have full power by 2004? I would say it doesn't look good.

Later
Joe

Dan,

Thanks for the link! That looks to me like the most concrete information we have had in a long time, and as you say does pretty much seem to lay out the future of the HDTV battle here on the front-range.

Any C.A.R.E. folks lurking that would like to give us an idea of what ya'll are initially feeling about the (apparent) new tower and consolidation plans?

Personally it looks to me like the LCG has taken great strides in advancing their proposal to include more immediate consolidation, a smaller "footprint" building, burial of feeding lines, etc. I really hope that this one is the "gold" one.

-John

Excellent Link Dan - thanks.

This is the most we've heard or read on this issue in a long long time. The game plan is set down. Late 03, early 04 comes as no surprise to me for a "best case" scenario but I think it may be a bit longer than that....

Awhile back I was looking for a time line of some of the more relevant dates. The KMGH FCC filing provided those dates:

7/1/98 - Original LCG filing with JeffCo
8/3/99 - JeffCo denial of Application
1/4/01 - Dismissal of the lawsuit filed in JeffCo District County Court
5/1/02 - Second LCG filing with JeffCo
6/02 - JeffCo Planning Commission recommendation of 2nd filing
Fall/02 - JeffCo Board of Commissioner decision on 2nd filing
Fall/03 - Construction Complete (Best Case Scenario)

Looking at the dates above one can see that the JeffCo Planning Board and County Commissioners took 13 months to review, and ultimately reject, the original application. Some of that time may have been due to late submissions by the LCG (i.e., the Browne Report) but even halving this yields 6.5 months. If we assume 6.5 months that puts the JeffCo decision in December not early fall which means an '04 on air date.

I am not trying to be overly negative but I won't bet that we'll see a best case scenario. The JeffCo process could take longer (as I suggest above) and, should the JeffCo Commissioners vote favorably for the LCG application, (S)CARE could appeal the case to Jefferson County District Court. Frankly, I am not going to look into the tunnel to see if I can see a light at the end of it because I fear the there's still a train in there....

Too bad; I was well into "testify" mode. My letter went out last week (or the week before, you know how time flies). Keep 'em coming!

Mike

Geof said...

"Frankly, I am not going to look into the tunnel to see if I can see a light at the end of it because I fear the there's still a train in there...."

LOL, Geof

I'm hoping that, as has been insinuated here, that there may be some sort of back-door dealings here between LCG and JeffCO that may leave the schedule more or less intact. But, I always seem to take the optimistic view <grin>

-John

Reminder: Tonight KRMA is broadcasting the color bars for us on channel 18 - 7:00 to 7:05.

Does that mean the red bar should look, umm.. red? ;)

Get the blue filters out. We should be able to adjust both color and tint....

Thanks for the reminder Mark - I was going to do that but I forgot ;)

You all should know that I have resigned my position at KRMA effective March 22nd. The decision is based soley on economics and has nothing to do with my frustration with the DTV situation in Denver or any other issues at KRMA. I am moving to AT&T Broadband to work as chief engineer at the Digital Media Center in Littleton.

James has asked that I be available to help out with the Jeffco project(s) as the need arises and I look forward to doing so.

I will also keep tabs on this forum to stay up to date.

Do not give up! DTV WILL come to Denver!!

Bud

Bud,

Congratulations on your move! Thank you for everything you have done, and I'm sure, will continue to do for Front-Range area HDTV enthusiasts!

-John

Thanks for all your help Bud and good luck with the new job.

BTW, now that you're going to AT&T maybe you can get their butts in gear on getting Cable Modem service in my neighborhood (or better yet some HD channels) :)

Please continue to visit our "little" thread and help keep us straighted out.

Good luck Bud! We appreciated you coming by here and letting us know what was happening. I echo Geof, see what you can do about adding some HD channels to ATT cables lineup!

-Mike

Postponed until June 5 & 12.

-Wabisabi

Wabisabi,

Thanks for the update... maybe I will actually get a letter written by then ;)

-John

You guys think that maybe 2005 or 2006 might be our earliest opportunity for a "best case" ending?


Giant SIGH !!

Jeff

Originally posted by wabisabi
Postponed until June 5 & 12.

-Wabisabi

Wabisabi,
What exactly are these dates - Planning Commission meetings or County Commissioners meetings???

If they are County Commissioner meeting dates when will the Planning board meet??? March 27th? And ??

Thanks for the updates,

All,
nagging mode on...
Please don't let this delay stop the signature or letter writing campaigns...we still need to demonstrate solidarity and determination....
nagging mode off...

Best of luck to you Bud with AT&T. I sincerely hope the move is a good one for you. Don't be a stranger around here! :)

Well, it looks like those of us in Northern Colorado (and Southeast Wyoming) who were hoping to get HDTV from Cheyenne this spring will be out of luck. I see that KGWN (CBS) has filed for an extension due to financial hardship:

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=61746

The request seems to be for six months (November 1, 2002), but when you read the explanation it sounds more like they are planning for the end of 2003. Maybe six months is all they are allowed for now, and they have to keep re-applying for more time.

The NBC station in Cheyenne (KKTU) has also filed for an extension:
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=61751

Their analog signal has very limited range so I don't know the odds of being able to receive that one in Ft. Collins/Greeley/Loveland.

From what I can tell, the Cheyenne Fox channel is still on schedule. So, we will actually have two sources of non-HDTV Fox digital. :rolleyes:

Mark

P.S. Good luck, Bud!

Originally posted by mbuchana
Well, it looks like those of us in Northern Colorado (and Southeast Wyoming) who were hoping to get HDTV from Cheyenne this spring will be out of luck....

Nuts. Thanks for the update, sort of.:(

Hello everyone,

I have been out of the loop for a while and am surprised (sort of) to see the Mt. Morrison app. delays. My letters of support for the application went out Feb. 23 and I encourage everyone to follow through on the show of support for KRMA. I thoroughly enjoyed the hospitality KRMA showed us last month and appreciate the leadership they have shown in the broadcasting community in Denver. (Bud, congratulations on your new position).

Now that there is concrete public information on the LCG app, should there be a shift in focus to support the LCG app coming up in April? I know 2003, 2004, 2005... seems a long way off, however, the next few months may be critical to resolution (or non-resolution) of this issue...

Don

Wow, right in the middle of a show, during prime-time!

I had enough time to check my 2 rps. They were pretty close and not enough to mess with.

Geof,

Disappointing news but still motivated. I have sent 52 letters, 20 Jeffco, of far. Varying verbage (I mix up the text a little each Friday).

This weekends are going specifically to the planners and commissioners you directed.

Maybe we should pitch in on a BUD, some great software hacks and pick up networks directly ourselves:D

Bud
Congratulations on your move to the new job. Thanks again for all of your help in the DTV situation here in town. We all recognize that you and KRMA have without question been the leaders in the Denver area in DTV. Best of luck in the new position. Maybe now you can join our little forum as an 'interested party' and help shed some light on various issues that come up. Your inputs here will always be welcome.

Wabisabi
Thankds for the inputs on the hearing date. This certainly is not speading the transition here in Denver, but what else is new.

Assuming the LCG application is perfect, and they get the signs up more than 14 days in advance, etc .....


Why would the Planning Commision rezone the land from residential (that is what the land is currently zoned, correct?) to industrial (or agricultural with an antenna exemption or whatever LCG is actually asking for)?

Pro:
Rezoning would eventually consolidate several existing NTSC & FM antennas into a single tower (less visual pollution).

Supposedly this combining will lead to less RF at ground level over the long term (there are hot spots now) (though certain stations are currently broadcasting at reduced level due to RF contraints).

TV towers have been on Lookout 'forever' and it is the right thing to do for the greater Denver metro area

This should kill 3-4 birds (TV antenna hearings) with one stone.


Con:
LOTS more RF when the ATSC stations go full power, until the NTSC go dark (say at least 4 years).

There appears to be other plots of land up there that are already appropriately (or less unappropriately) zoned - See CH 31/32 tower

'Rich' people with good laywers are going to sue even if every 'i' is dotted and 't' is crossed.

Mad 'Rich' people will make your next reelection campaign ugly.

Possibility that ATSC and NTSC signals will coexist for a long time so this just adds to the RF levels.


-----
I am trying to be fair and look at it from the Planning Commision point of view. Any more pro/cons?

Originally posted by donyoop


Now that there is concrete public information on the LCG app, should there be a shift in focus to support the LCG app coming up in April? I know 2003, 2004, 2005... seems a long way off, however, the next few months may be critical to resolution (or non-resolution) of this issue...

Don

To all:
The news seems pretty bleak at this point. Delays in the KRMA hearings, LCG applications in April, Cheyenne stations delaying their applications. Apparently this region is not nearly the high tech capital that it is touted to be. It is indeed discouraging to hear all this news.
Just to let you know all is not lost, I am working on a meeting with representative(s?) from the LCG on their application similar to what we did with KRMA. I have a tentative agreement from a lead person working on the LCG application to meet with our group but have to hammer out some details and some understandings. Keep your fingers crossed. More later when I have the information. I simply wanted to let you all know that the LCG does seem to be interested in our support. The news is not ALL bad, just most of it.

In the meantime, I cannot stress enough that we must support the KRMA application with our letters etc. The extension gives us more time to get signatures, and organize them into a single submittal. Let's not waste the extra time we have.

Geof,

These are Planning Commission dates. No BCC dates have been set yet.

On a side note, the LCG information says they expect to have a planning commission hearing 6 weeks after they submit an application. They must be dreaming. The reason the Mt Morrison tower case is delayed until June is that those are the first open dates. So, one can assume that in two more months, the first open dates will be at least two months further out than June.

-Wabisabi

Thanks for clarifying Wabisabi. I was hoping these were BCC dates but I wouldn't have bet on that. Realistically this means July or August for the Board of County Commissioner hearings and we don't know how long that process will take.....

I agree that the timetable outlined in the KMGH FCC submittal is unrealistic. In my mind 1st or 2nd qtr '04 is more probable (and even that's probably optimistic)...

As to supporting the LCG effort that's fine by me but they haven't submitted their plan and won't until late April if the KMGH FCC submittal is accurate. Therefore I think its premature to start "lobbying" JeffCo. Unlike the LCG application, the KRMA application is real, and is before JeffCo, and we do know what their plan entails, so we can speak/write intelligently about supporting their plan.

However, the petition supports towers on Morrison as well as Lookout - the petition is not specifically tied to the KRMA application. IMO getting signatures on the petition will be beneficial to both applications - it demonstrates our support to JeffCo, and perhaps as importantly, to the local stations themselves.

With the news that I may not be able to get any OTA HD signal this year:rolleyes: and the news that Bud is moving to ATT cable, it got me to thinking. Is there any letter writing that could be done to our cable companies to encourage (plead) them to carry HD signals??

Ironically enough, last night I was called by some ATT salesperson telling me that I could have a free month of digital cable. I told him that I would sign up right then and he would have a customer for life if they had HD channels. He told me that they WERE digital quality....blah, blah, blah. You know how that went. He had no clue and even after I explained that there were 2 CBS/ABC channels (one in SD, one in HD) he still told me that the quality was incredible, digital, blah, blah, blah.

I know the same thing would happen if I called the local office (already tried that once). So, Bud, or anyone else, any thoughts on where a letter could be directed??

Originally posted by mknoebel
With the news that I may not be able to get any OTA HD signal this year:rolleyes: and the news that Bud is moving to ATT cable, it got me to thinking. Is there any letter writing that could be done to our cable companies to encourage (plead) them to carry HD signals??
So, Bud, or anyone else, any thoughts on where a letter could be directed??

Not meaning to be a curmudgeon, but I think "Santa Clause" might be your best bet at this time. The only cable companies of any size I know doing HD of all the locals are in NYC and Comcast in Philly. Of course the locals there are also on the air too (except for the Trade Center stations that were knocked down). There are a couple of towns here and there with HD cable (mostly experimental), but not too much beyond that.

The cableco's are very reluctant to invest that much bandwidth on stations only a handfull of customers can get, since they would have to cut dozens of SD channels to have the capacity. I think you will see OTA HD in Denver before the cableco's will even consider it. Your only other option is a major investment in a big satellite dish and a bunch of receivers, or the Canadian solution of Express View.

Just got off the phone with my contact on the LCG. He is a planning consultant for the group preparing the application for Jeffco. He is willing to try to arrange a meeting with the LCG station members, preferably at one of the stations, to discuss the new LCG application details. Locations are still TBD, but we agreed that the week of March 25th might be a good place to start. I suggested we avoid late in the week since I think that is the week of the heavy NCAA basketball tournament games and would not want this to conflict with some HD telecasts of the games on CBS. I expressed to him that we would really like the meeting to include representatives of some of the stations (especially KMGH and KUSA) to discuss issues and ideas, and he will follow up. I also suggested that like KRMA, we would enjoy a tour and some time visiting with the engineers if possible.

Is there any interest in the forum for this meeting? :D

Also is this a good week for most, or have we forgotten some major event which will have most of the members busy that week??
:rolleyes:

Please give me some feedback on this issue, and if it looks good I will try to confirm a time and place.

To hell with them....whoops, just kidding ;)

YES, that would be fine by me....more than fine...Godspeed jm.....

jm,
Absolutely, let's get together with them. That week looks good right now.
Jeff

JM

I would be interested in attending such a meeting. The week you mention looks, as of now anyway, like it would work for me !

Thanks for your efforts,

Phil P.

jm,

That week looks great for me right now. I'm in.

The week of the 25th looks fine to me. I'll be there - just say where and when.

Monday is great, as long as it aint on a Thursday, I don't wanna miss CSI on channel 35! hehe.

The week of the 25th is fine for me as well. I'll be back from Pebble Beach by then :D

Later
Joe

Please excuse my Ignorance !!!

I have seen it repeatedly refered to ...
What is
CSI
???
spose if I was a network YV junkie I would know... but I am not...and I don't !!

HELP !!

THX
Phil

What is
CSI
???

It's a CBS program on Thursday nights (Crime Scene Investigators)....

Originally posted by JMartinko

Is there any interest in the forum for this meeting? :D I'll be there any night that week (the 28th is my birthday -- wink, wink, nudge, nudge!)

Geof
THX...
I am learning...:eek:
!

Phil

Seems like that is shaping up to be a good week. I expect to set the date before the weekend since it seems to be a good week. I will post the information and location just as soon as I get this set up.

So far, the 25th works for me. I hope I can attend this time!

Originally posted by RonAuger
Look for my 'Letter to the Editor' in this Thursday's issue of Westword. I received a call from Westword saying they received a flood of letters on this topic (nice going everyone!) and would print mine mostly because it adhered to the 200 word limit and didn't look like a form letter.

Ron,

Did the letter make it in? I didn't see it either on-line or when I was browsing the new Westword at lunch.

JM, that week looks fine to me!

-John

Don't know what happened. I have a call in to Patricia Calhoun. She called me last week to ask some questions and told me it would be in today's issue.

I'll post an update once a get in touch with her.

Hey everyone. Just wanted you to know that out here in western Highlands Ranch I'm able to recieve 17, 32, 35, and 80 (?). I've just hooked up the antenna (CM4221 and no pre-amp ) and have it sitting in the family room. I'm surprised to get 17 - ABC and can't figure out where 18 - KRMA is, but then what the heck is 80? It looks like PBS. Is that what my Sony is calling 18 ??
Thanks to everyone for the pointers. Now I have to figure out when to install....

Right on Keith. Guess now it's the Crazy 8's.

As far as 80 goes, when KRMA is passing through the Network feed on nights and weekends it maps to channel 80 on some receivers, but 18 it is.

There are two letters in support of the Mt. Morrison replacement tower today in the online Denver Post (including mine!). Too bad the hearings have been postponed.

Thanks to Marilyn Tyler of Lakewood.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1002,416,00.html

Mark

No news yet on the firm date for a meeting with the LCG. They promised to get back to me this week, so I will let everyone know as soon as I hear anything.

On another subject, I sent the following message about a week ago to KCNC to about the HD and multicast coverage of the NCAA tournament. This was at the time I re-posted the press release from CBS about their HD coverage of the tournament.

********

I have read the press releases from CBS regarding the potential availability
of several HDTV telecasts in the early rounds of the college basketball
tournament, as well as the fact the some DTV stations will also provide the
out of market games (non-HD broadcasts) in a multicast format on their DTV
signals. Does KCNC plan to provide this multicast of out of market games
(not shown on your analog telecast) during the tournament this month? Will
you make available the HDTV telecasts to the DTV viewers even if the game is
not on the analog telecast for this market?

**********

I received the following reply yesterday from Wendy Holmes at KCNC.

____________

Thanks for writing. As of this moment, we have only the information you saw
in the press releases. I am passing your e-mail on to our Operations
Manager, David Layne, who will e-mail you back when we get updated
information.

__________

It sounds like they do not yet have a plan (or perhaps a clue??) as to what will be available to them and what they can or will show. It probably wouldn't hurt for those of you who are basketball fans to call or write them to request them to show any multicast or out of market HD games available for their DTV channel. As Paul Newman said in the movie "Slap Shot", "Let 'em know your there!"

Congrats Keith... I think we know what you'll be doing this weekend :)

Good job on the Letter Mark...I liked both of them. This is great stuff......

Good letters Mark and Marilyn!

-John

I agree with Geof and JohnJr. Great letters indeed. The link was posted while I was writing my note so I didn't see it until after I posted. This is the kind of stuff that will eventually get the attention of the Jeffco Commissioners. I especially like the comment:

"Please remember that this message is brought to you by the same people who bought very expensive homes in the middle of a tower farm on Lookout Mountain and now holler that the towers must come down."

Couldn't have said it better myself.
:)

I live in Wildcat Ridge. Basically at the south end of Quebec St. Is it possible to get OTA HDTV channels in this area. I have a pretty clear shot to downtown (About 20 miles away). I found a web site that showed me that I could get it with a high distance HDTV antenna. I can't find the web site again however!

Can someone let me know if I have a shot at some broadcasts? What channels?

Thanks in advance!

Is this site pretty accurate?

http://www.antennaweb.org/antennaweb/

Can someone let me know if I have a shot at some broadcasts? What channels? Oh yeah, you have good odds on 18 (KRMA DT) and 35 (KCNC DT). KMGH (17) is a crap shoot. You'll get 32 (Fox) but they don't have any HD. Welcome aboard....

Is there a local good place in Littleton to buy an HDTV antenna?

I have to put the unit in the attic.

Looking at the channelmaster 4228A.

Do I need a pre Amp? If yes, which one?

kimbray,
The Channelmaster model you mentioned is fine. I don't think they're sold locally. You can order it from Stark Electronics (http://www.starkelectronic.com/).

You might also find an antenna at Radio Shack but maybe not as big as the Channelmaster you mentioned.

Here are some recent posts on antenna & preamp questions (page 64 of this thread):

------------

Take a piece of coax and hook up the antenna to your STB and then walk around/move the antenna around till you get a good signal. It's sort of like looking for water with a divining rod but you'll be using an antenna instead.

------------

A preamp brings its own set of problems. If your antenna is only going to point to downtown that eliminates one potential problem source (in your situation). Here are the gotchas:

1) A preamp is subject to overload if it receives a very strong signal - that won't be the case from your location if you point the antenna downtown. However if you lived East of downtown and the antenna could see both downtown and Lookout that might be problematical.
2) A preamp will amplify noise just as well as it amplifies signal. There is no free lunch - a preamp is not going to improve the Signal to Noise ratio. In fact it will degrade it because it adds its own noise.

The best use of a preamp is to overcome downstream losses. If you're running the antenna directly to your STB the cable loss will be small and no preamp should be required. If your antenna feeds a splitter (or two) then a preamp can effectively be used to overcome the losses introduced by the splitter(s).

Minimize cable loss by using good RG 6 low loss cable.

Here's what I recommend: Find a good antenna position by moving the antenna around as I previously mentioned. While you do this have the antenna temporarily connected to the STB with a straight piece of RG 6 coax - use no splitters or other junk. Mount the antenna in the best spot you can. Once you get the antenna mounted get some signal strength readings (if your STB has that capability) with the temporary setup. Then connect the coax to whatever splitters you will need in the final setup and get the signal strength readings again. If the readings don't look too good it might be time for a preamp. If you do need a preamp get one that mounts on the antenna (or at least put it before any splitters). If the readings look fine you saved a few bucks....go buy a beer for all that work you just did...

------------

More things to consider with a preamp...

If you are going to use a diplexer to combine the satellite and antenna signals and use 1 cable to go to your room (and another diplexer to split it again at the receiver), you will need a diplexer that has DC pass on both sides. They usually only pass DC on the satellite side. In fact, I don't know if one exists with DC pass on both sides or if it will work if it does exist.

FWIW, The preamps I've seen have a power injector at the TV end and an amplifier at the antenna end and won't work through a diplexer, even if you put the power injector at the antenna.

Sorry, no firm time and date yet for a meeting with the LCG members. I was told they would try to get back to me before the weekend, but I guess it didn't get worked out. My last conversation with my contact indicated that Tue. or Wed. were their choice. I will post information as soon as I know anything.

Geof or Dan,
How come I'm only getting PBS at 80.3 and not at 18? Is one the national feed and one the local? Or is my reciever picking up the station number as 80.3? I'm also getting signals at 17.1 and 17.2, both ABC. Is this unusual? Great pictures though, from all stations that I can recieve. Is there a listing on the web for all the HD stuff on ABC, CBS and PBS?

I wouldnt worry about it showing up as 80 keith as long as you're getting programming on it 24/7. During the weekdays you should be seeing Spirit of Colorado shows that are upconverted to 1080i by the local station. Then nights and weekends you should be seeing true 1080i in the form of the National PBS demo loop or shows. Some receivers show it as 80 because thats the designation the National PBS uses. Some receivers show it as 6-1 which is a form of remapping to make it simple (to match analog 6), and some use a combination of both, like the Dish 6000 which shows it as 18 during the day and maps it to 80 at night. Which receiver do you have?

As far as 17, yes there should be 2 channels. 17-1 is a stretched version of 17 (7) when theres no true HD being shown, and switches to HD when there is an HD program. Alias and The Practice tonight for example. 17-2 is always simply a 4x3 digital version of analog 7.

Also, you can go to titantv.com for local digital listings though for PBS it still assumes that Spirit of Colorado is on 24/7 which it always used to be before they started passing through the National stuff at night. So nightly listings on that channel arent accurate.

A more comprehensive listing of all HD shows available from all Networks including movie channels if you subscribe to those off satellite and listings for some of the National PBS shows can be found at:

http://www.hdtvgalaxy.com/broad.html

Keith, Did you get the antenna mounted? I'm envious of you being able to receive 17.....you lucky dog...

Lets hope he answers your question in the affirmative Geof instead of tormenting us further by saying.. No, actually it's still on the floor in the family room! ;) Cause even I with having it outdoors cant always decode the signal. A phenomenon that used to drive me nuts (and the wife by me saying..See, it's almost there it's, almost there!), but I've finally accepted it. Only in principle mind you since I have other means of seeing the ABC HD programs anyway, but still.

Lets hope he answers your question in the affirmative Geof instead of tormenting us further by saying.. No, actually it's still on the floor in the family room! Yeah, no kidding - that would be insult to injury :)

Somedays I am barely able to receive 35. Since moving the antenna I have been fairly lucky and it's come in every night but it just eaks by sometimes with more dropouts than usual. Too bad they can't use a better spot to broadcast HDTV from - like Lookout Mtn.....

Got in the office this morning and found an email sent late Friday night confirming the meeting with the LCG. The meeting will be at KCNC's facility (1044 Lincoln Street) on Tuesday March 26th beginning with a social half-hour from 6:00 to 6:30 followed by the meeting at 6:30.* If the start time is too early for people it can be delayed, but they would prefer to keep it earlier. I will try to fill in details of who will be in attendance as I get that information in the next few days, but in the meantime I would like to get a first cut at a headcount for the KCNC folks. Let's try to get this meeting even better attended than we had at KRMA. Since this is with the LCG, I would expect there to be even greater interest than the last meeting. This will be a chance for us to get insight into the new LCG tower design, as well as ask questions about the networks. During the social time, we can also compare notes and perhaps gather the petitions for the KRMA tower application.

I'll be there!! Did the say if the application had been submitted yet?

The latest news I have is that the application will be submitted in April. Obviously that is one of the main questions which will be discussed.

:D
On a "lighter(???)" note, I found this article posted on one of my BUD forums. Just when you think its a tough HDTV story here:

BC-Netherlands-Hostages, 4th Ld-Writethru, a0502,0710
Armed man takes hostages in business tower in Amsterdam
By MARCEL VAN DE HOEF Associated Press Writer

AMSTERDAM, the Netherlands (AP) - A gunman apparently upset with the quality of wide-screen television grabbed as many as 40 hostages Monday in the tallest building in the Dutch capital, the former headquarters of Philips Electronics.

Police were negotiating with the man, reported by some to be armed with a machine gun and explosives. After three hours of talks, six women were seen leaving the 35-story Rembrandt Tower office complex.

"An armed man entered the tower and is threatening people with a weapon. He won't let them go," said police spokeswoman Elly Florax. No one has been injured, she said. ...

In a statement faxed from the office tower to NOS state television, the gunman said he was protesting the "arrogant manipulation by the vendors of wide screen television," and complained that consumers were being misled about the quality of the product. Florax declined to comment on the man's demands.

The four-page statement, reproducing parts of six letters of complaint previously sent to a Dutch newspaper and the Consumer Board, was printed on blank paper. One page had images comparing wide screen television with a regular screen.

*****

Certainly it is hoped the situation will never get that bad here in Denver.

Sorry Geof and Dan. The antenna is still sitting in the chair in the family room/kitchen. Yesterday was not good for fun work, had to do domestic WAF stuff. I need to get over to Home Despot or RS to pick up a mast and brackets. Which has better selection??

I'm in!

Thanks for setting this up, jm!

I'm going.......

I'll be there on the 26th. Looking forward to seeing you all again.

I'll plan on being there although there is a slight chance I will need to be in Florida.

Keith - you are lucky....enjoy !

Nice work, jm; see all of you there!

Mike

Six people is pretty pathetic based upon our last turnout. What about all the lurkers and other folks who went to the last meeting? Will anyone from Ft. Collins, Loveland or up north going to be able to make it? We really need to get a larger crowd than last time since this involves all of the rest of the LCG stations.

"Now I don't want to get off on a rant here, but:"

IF YOU WANT THE LCG TO GET OFF THEIR B*TTS AND GET THIS APPLICATION IN, GET TO THE MEETING AND TELL THEM! IF YOU WANT TO PRESSURE KUSA AND KMGH TO GET INTERIM LOW POWER STATIONS ON THE AIR, GET TO THE MEETING AND TELL THEM! IF YOU WANT TO PUT (S)CARE AND JEFFCO ON NOTICE THAT WE WANT ACTION, GET TO THE MEETING AND SHOW THEM! If you are satisfied with the state of HDTV in Denver and don't care if it ever gets on the air, stay home!

I suspect we will have a neat tour of KCNC afterwords if we have a great crowd. What about it folks? Is anyone else going to be there? Since you have been out getting signatures and letters perhaps you have met someone who might be interested in this meeting. This would be especially true of Jeffco residents who might want to speak at the hearing when the time comes. This is the perfect opportunity to find out what is being proposed! Let's get going and get the expected turnout up.

OK, I am off the soap box.

Originally posted by JMartinko
Will anyone from Ft. Collins, Loveland or up north going to be able to make it?

Yes! Sign me up!

Mark

Hey there jm, you're beginning to sound a bit cranky - like me :)

That said I agree with everything you said. How about it folks ????

I will be there JM,

Count me in!

Well I am one of those lurkers that plans on showing up next Tuesday evening! I really wanted to go to the previous gathering, but it conflicted with another appointment.

I am looking forward to hear about others experiences with HD. I live way East at E470 and Quincy. I am currently only picking up KDVR and KRMA (was getting KCNC but it stopped working a couple of weeks ago) with the ChannelMaster 4228 and the amplifier mounted in my attic.

I haven't had a lot of luck getting many signatures on the petition, but I do have 6 so far!

Looking forward to the 26th!

Steve

Welcome b5lurker. Six signatures on the petition is great - far more than zero, which is what we would have without your help. You're right that the meeting is the 26th but just to make sure - that's two weeks from Tuesday.

As to the petitions, I think the prudent thing to do is to have everyone hang onto them and continue getting signatures, unless you think you've got all you can get. If that's the case you can get them to me or JeffCo. I'll ask Jay to send out an group email in the next few days that will spell out the details. I believe the petition applies to both the KRMA and the LCG applications so any and all signatures may help convince JeffCo and the stations we are serious.

Count me in for March 26th !

Thanks for setting this up.

Later
Joe

I'll be there on the 26th

Thanks JM!

-John

I'm in Paris reading this thread but I'll be back in time for the meeting.

Turns out the situation is the same in Europe. The hotel I'm staying in has Sony direct-view 16:9 Hi-Def televisions in every room. Of course, there's no Hi-Def programming to watch. I'm not sure if there is any being broadcast but the local cable couldn't carry it anyway (ala AT&T).

John Tyson
Wheat Ridge

I'm going to try and make the meeting on the 26th, as well.

Here the count thus far:

Jeffden (?)
Ppasteur (?)
pokers (?)
RonAuger
dr_mal
pokers
markdl
MrinDenver
Mbuchana
Freddie
Jetlag
b5lurker
joej
BrianRL
JohnJr
Johnty
Keithsimp
JMartinko
Geof
jeffwalter
Jotaman
mtnhigh

Folks with a (?) after their name expressed an interest in attending but before the date and time were set. So far we have 22 possible folks to attend the meeting. We need more folks (let's shoot for 40:)). This will be an interesting meeting folks - perhaps as entertaining as a movie (well maybe not a first rate movie ;) ) but it will cost nothing - such a deal. Learn about the application, get a tour (maybe) and show your support...sounds like a fun way to spend a Tuesday night.

Note: edited to add mtnhigh to the list.

I have been thinking about the petitions and wonder if everyone would like to get together on say a Sunday (this Sunday?) and meet up in JeffCO (Golden City Hall). Then we could all spend a few hours collecting signatures from within the boundaries of JeffCO.

From the emphasis that KRMA put on JeffCO residents testimony at the hearings, I have to feel that if we could collect a thousand or so signatures from JeffCO that may be more effective than the say 50 I might get from my neighborhood in Greenwood Village (plus yours).

Plus, to be honest, I would feel a lot more comfortable "soliciting" strangers, if you know what I mean.

Finally, I kinda over-bought for this years Christmas and have a tech-gadget that many of ya'll might enjoy. It's a little thing that reads power-consumption from a wall outlet and displays the power-consumption and what it may cost you a month to operate said device(s). I hereby offer that up to whomever can prove that they got the most petition signatures. I'm going to set "my" deadline for this competition to the LCG meeting (26th), and assuming your petitions went through Geof, whatever Geof says (or you can prove... but by the 26th).

If we can get together on a Sunday and do a JeffCO sweep, I hereby offer up my vehicle, etc, whatever I can do to help.

-John

ps. If ya'll think I'm off base on the JeffCO sweep, just tell me. My offer of a prize for most petitions, stands.

That's the spirit JohnJr.....a petition competition...great idea...Not sure about Sunday, had plans, but will keep it in mind.

I'll be there.

Still doing "letters", have 61 total, 26 Jeffco
Send friends and neighbors...I'm easy when it comes to AV sales but noone leaves my store alive without signing a letter!!

Jeff

Great Jeff...this is great...I think it's going to take this sort of effort to pull this off....I've gotten 2 JeffCo residents "together with a letter" but it does not compare.

JeffWalter

61 letters???

I am not worthy!

:)

Jeffwalter,
Nice job! Do you know if anyone has visited your competition across the street (TBP) and left them any petitions to sign/pass out? I would think they would be interested.

Keith,

as a retailer I would like to say for Jeff "No Comment"

That isn't Jeff's business and he woudn't know.

-John

John,
With all due respect, as a retailer it would seem that this petition would be of common interest for all retailers in the area. Putting aside any "competitive" fears on this matter would seem like the most logical thing to do. It seems that there is more of an upside for all retailers in the metro area if and when the HD broadcast issue gets resolved. But I am being way too logical on this issue, that's probably a silly thing to do.
The only retailer that I have seen that is giving any public support, on this forum, to this matter has been Jeff. I know some have approached Soundtrack, about the petition, but have not heard anything.
BTW, John, do you represent a retailer that has an interest in this matter? If so that is good. I only ask because I'm fairly new and am not familiar with your posts. Sorry.

I will be there Tuesday night as well.

Can someone post about:

1) Where to go, what time to show up, etc.
2) These letters or petitions you are signing and getting
signed...are they copies of a master letter and where can I
get one to collect signatures?

Jotaman said,
1) Where to go, what time to show up, etc.
2) These letters or petitions you are signing and getting
signed...are they copies of a master letter and where can I
get one to collect signatures?Good to hear you'll attend the meeting - I've added your name to the list.

We now have 21 attendees - please keep signing up folks.

To answer your questions:
1) The meeting will be at KCNC's facility (1044 Lincoln Street) on Tuesday March 26th beginning with a social half-hour from 6:00 to 6:30 followed by the meeting at 6:30.

2) Here are some points to consider in a letter to JeffCo (extracted from the Mt Morrision Tower site (http://www.mtmorrisontower.org/)).
Jefferson County Planning Commission
ATTN: Paul Rosasco, Chairman
c/o Heather Guterless, Jefferson County Planner
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 3550
Golden, CO. 80419

March 13, 2002

Dear Jefferson County Planning Board,

I support the Mt. Morrison Replacement Tower.

The proposed Mt. Morrison tower (both alternatives A and B) is designed for minimal environmental/visual impact and will blend into the surrounding terrain. Every visual aspect has been carefully studied to provide the least visual impact possible while complying with all of the local, state and federal regulations. Specifically, the application provides for:
* No net increase in the number of towers on Mt. Morrison;
* Removal of a major tower and transmission building from Lookout Mountain;
* No new access road to Mt. Morrison (the access road has existed since the 1950s);
* No new power lines are necessary (three-phase power to the Mt. Morrison site already exists);
* The Mt. Morrison transmitter building addition will have minimal visual impact;
* Neither tower alternative will be painted red and white. Instead the selected tower alternative will be painted in a color scheme that studies show is the least visible;
* No adverse impacts on Red Rocks sound equipment;
* Any vegetation on Mt. Morrison removed during construction will be replaced;
The analog Channel 6 tower site on Lookout Mountain will be restored with native trees and vegetation after the tower and transmitter building are removed.

The FCC requires that all television stations, both public and commercial, convert to broadcasting a digital signal, as follows:
* Begin broadcasting a new "digital" signal by no later than May 1, 2003.
* Stop broadcasting the old "analog" signal by 2006 or at such time as 85% or more of the households in the Metro area have digital television sets.

Jefferson County policy does not allow Rocky Mountain PBS to modify the existing Channel 6 tower to accommodate the digital equipment needed to comply with FCC mandates, so the public broadcasters must find a viable alternative site.

Mt. Morrison is the only site other than Lookout Mountain that will not:
* Result in a substantial loss of broadcast coverage to households;
* Diminish reception quality for public television viewers and public radio listeners.


Sincerely,


John Doe
County of Residence
Street Address
City, CO. Zip


CC: Board of County CommissionersHere's the address for the County Commissioners:

Board of County Commissioners
ATTN: Michelle Lawrence, Chair
100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 5550
Golden, CO. 80419

------

If you (or anyone) send me a Private Message with your email address I will send you the petition in Word document format.

Originally posted by keithsimp
John,
The only retailer that I have seen that is giving any public support, on this forum, to this matter has been Jeff. I know some have approached Soundtrack, about the petition, but have not heard anything.


FWIW, Listen Up also has copies of the petitions, although I have not checked to see if they are pushing to get signatures or how many they might have. I expect Listen Up to have a representative (Mark Cleveland) at the meeting at KCNC as well, he has us penciled in on his schedule. Mark would have been at the last meeting as well, but his mother passed away that week and he was out of town. Mark has said that several other people have approached Listen Up to support the petition, and management has given their approval.



As for information on the meeting, Geof posted the particulars again.

The meeting will be at KCNC's facility (1044 Lincoln Street) on Tuesday March 26th beginning with a social half-hour from 6:00 to 6:30 followed by the meeting at 6:30. If you are new to the area or just not familiar with Denver, you can get directions from your home (or office) at:

http://www.mapquest.com/directions/main.adp

I have asked for some parking information from KCNC (whether we can use their lot or not) although I think there is street parking in the area. I will let you know what they recommend. I will try to see that this information is posted again close to the meeting day as a last minute reminder and help for those going to the meeting.

jm -
Thanks for the update on the retailer support. That's good to know. I just might pay a visit down to The Big Picture, see where they stand and possibly drop off a petition and letter. Couldn't hurt.

Support from retailers could yield our biggest cache of signatures. I was at Soundtrack the other day and it was so busy I had to wait 15 minutes to talk with someone about an equipment rack I wanted. That said I have not approached anyone at Soundtrack about the petition (I guess I should be flogged) but if anyone feels comfortable with approcahing/phoning the store manager for your nearby store please do so.

I have left a message for the Park Meadows Soundtrack Store manager to call me regarding the petition and will post the results of the conversation if he calls me back.

Wanted to repost the details on subscribing to the HDTV group email list. This list is maintained by one of our fellow area enthusiasts (deepcscuba, aka Jay) and he's certainly not spamming everyone with a bunch of useless junk email. The list is a great way to get a message to everyone so I encourage everyone to sign up. An added benefit is that we know how many folks in the area are interested in HDTV.

We'll distribute details on how to return the petitions using the group email list (but I'll probably post the details here too).

Anyway to subscribe send an email with 'Subscribe' in the subject line to: denver-dtv@attbi.com

The Park Meadows Store manager called back and referred me to corporate. He said corporate HQ would need to approve the idea and if they did they could coordinate with all the local stores...standby for more....

I cannot lurk any longer in this forum as I can't ignore your cries for support. I really should get involved as:

1. I am a Jeffco resident for 13 years, currently live in Evergreen, yet lived on Lookout Mtn for 8 years. I know some of the CARE folks, many of whom reside in Lookout Mtn. and Genesee.

2. I am an environmental consultant and deal with NIMBY issues and public relations on a daily basis. However, I am not a electromagnetic radiation expert, but I do understand and practice basic risk assessment principles.

3. I recently purchased a Sony KP-57HW40 HDTV and am frustrated that I cannot get an OTA HDTV signal. I am currently on cable, and am not willing to switch to satellite until more HDTV broadcasts are available and until the copywriting, Direct TV/Dish merger, and other issues get worked out.

4. I have and will continue to personally benefit from the value that this forum site and its members provides.

In other words, I too want my HDTV.

So, I will try to clear my schedule to attend the meeting on March 26.

I will send a letter to the Jeffco Planning Commision indicating my support for the Mt. Morrison location.

I will also share what info I know starting with a letter to the editor in the Canyon Courier, dated March 13, 2002, proclaiming the advantages of placing new towers on El Dorado Mtn. and identifying falsehoods about the basis for location of towers on Mt. Morrison. The article also implies that the real facts will be aired when testimony is heard on the Mt. Morrison location. I wish I could add a link to this letter to the editor.

Has anyone else tried to get an OTA signal from the foothills? I am on elevated terrain at an elevation of 8,000 feet, but have not purchased a STB for OTA reception.

Please bear with me I am a neophyte to these forums and have to learn the protocols and tricks that are used.

Keep the faith.

Welcome mtnhigh. This is exactly the kind of support we need. Letters to JeffCo will be great, especially from an ex-Lookout resident. If you want the petition form drop me a Private Message with your email address and I'll send it right out.

mtnhigh
Welcome to our group, feel free to contribute anytime, "most" of the time we go pretty easy on each other, although some of the old timers might take a shot at each other on occasion since we have a lot of history behind us. Glad to have you aboard and look forward to having you join us at the next meeting.

To all:
On another topic, is anyone watching KCNC's digital coverage of the NCAA's today. I don't suppose they are doing any multicasting of the out of market games on the DTV channel are they?? Can anyone at home try a quick re-scan and give us a report, since I don't get home for a while yet.

Thanks for the kind greetings.

Here'a link to last week's (3/6/02) editorial in the Canyon Courier, which favors the Mt. Morrison location.

http://www.canyoncourier.com/canyoncourier/myarticles.asp?P=327123&S=492&PubID=6116&EC=0


A reply to this editorial as a letter to the editor is in this week's (3/13/02) edition of the Canyon Courier disputes many of the things stated in this editorial. This letter will likely not be available on-line until next week.

Thanks mtnhigh for the link and welcome!

My gut feeling is that you would receive the OTA that most of us (Denver area) receive, IE CBS and PBS. I doubt if you could break into the crazy-8's that are receiving ABC.

John... I had my Dad scan the channels at home and he reports 4x3 upconverts on both 35.2 and the DISH CBS HDTV channel. I looked at HDTV Galaxy and they are not reporting any HDTV NCAA for today... just tomorrow.

-John

BTW, I'd just like to say that I'm pleased as punch at all of the positive feedback we collectively have been able to achieve as a group recently. The letters to the editor, the petition drives, the meetings with KRMA/LCG, etc. It's all great work... keep it up folks!

The situation seems as muddled as ever, but I'll tell you, it's not for lack of effort on our end!

-John

I'm happy to see the Canyon Courier editorialize the Morrison application and the fact they endorse it is really great. No doubt the other side will take shots but at least this is taking place in public for their readers to witness. Perhaps a few well worded responses of our own might be published as a reply to the reply....

Thanks for the link mtnhigh...

JohnJr
thanks for the update. Yes, the only HD telecasts this week are from the east regionals in Washington at the MCI Center. Those games are tomorrow afternoon and evening. Today there are only SD telecasts. From what I have read on other threads, in a few cities the local stations had arranged to use the DTV feeds in the multicast mode to show not only the 'in-market' games, but also the "out of market" games at the same time. It is a great concept. My guess is that it would not be popular here, because all those DTV viewers would not be seeing the 'local' commercials on the out of market games. I had asked KCNC if they would try this but they did not reply what they would do. The same people who say there are only a few dozen viewers of the DTV feed anyway use the reverse argument to say that they would 'lose' too many viewers (commercials) to the out of market games. Go figure!

I do not know the regional telecast breakouts for tomorrow, but I doubt we will get any of the East bracket games as the 'in-market' game. None of those teams are from the Big 12 or from this region. I would also feel sure that even if in this region they switch to an east bracket finish of a game they will not switch to the HD feed. I guess we will find out tomorrow. I have other "methods" of accessing other games anyway, but it would have been nice to have them all on the KCNC feed. It would simplify the process of switching back and forth. I doubt that is a big concern for the folks at KCNC though. At least they are on the air for the finals, so I won't complain too much here.

JohnJr,
I agree with most of your sentiments. I think the process of gaining county approval is difficult and complex but not out of the ordinary for zoning issues. This is just more visible for most of us here. While I still question the LCG stations motives and zeal with past actions (we'll see about their future actions) I think the county zoning process requires public input - from both sides. The Board of Commissioners should act in the best interests of their community and if they primarily hear from just one side ((S)CARE) why should we be surprised if they listen to that side and vote in their favor. The bottom line is we need to express our side of this to even things out - to let them know there are two sides to the issue, that the other side does have a voice. We should not be intimidated nor afraid to voice our opinion. This is the way our democracy works and we should be a part of it.

Cool John, I think I understand... you were hoping for KCNC to pass along some out of market feeds on 35.1, .2, .3 .4 That would have indeed been cool! It would have helped for awareness of the DTV channels, etc.

BTW, everyone... s(CARE) has updated their web-site since the last time I was there anyway. In summary: they support El Dorado and are against Lookout/Morrison. The one thing I noticed that I don't think I have seen here, is that a s(CARE) proposal to JeffCO about modifying Zoning regulations to make it even tougher to get something on Lookout or Morrison has been postponed by JeffCo. That may be the second s(CARE) loss that I can recall.

From their website....

4) Jeffco has postponed CARE proposals to the zoning resolution that would protect our community from broadcast radiation.

http://www.c-a-r-e.org/

-John

Originally posted by Geof
JohnJr,
I agree with most of your sentiments. I think the process of gaining county approval is difficult and complex but not out of the ordinary for zoning issues. This is just more visible for most of us here. While I still question the LCG stations motives and zeal with past actions (we'll see about their future actions) I think the county zoning process requires public input - from both sides. The Board of Commissioners should act in the best interests of their community and if they primarily hear from just one side ((S)CARE) why should we be surprised if they listen to that side and vote in their favor. The bottom line is we need to express our side of this to even things out - to let them know there are two sides to the issue, that the other side does have a voice. We should not be intimidated nor afraid to voice our opinion. This is the way our democracy works and we should be a part of it.

Geof,

I couldn't agree more. If you want it (whatever it is), you better be prepared to fight for it.

-John

Originally posted by Geof
JohnJr,
The bottom line is we need to express our side of this to even things out - to let them know there are two sides to the issue, that the other side does have a voice. This is the way our democracy works....

In theory that is true, the other bottom line is that having a lot of $$$$ to spread around works better, but this is not the proper forum for that discussion.

I do agree that it is very necessary for those of use here to support our side of the debate in order to help 'offset' the NIMBY's on the (S)CARE side. I am very thrilled and encouraged with the recent enthusiasm and results form the members here. For some of us 'old timers' in the thread, it has been, and still is a very long struggle that probably should not have been necessary if the LCG had handled things properly the first time. That horse is long out of the barn and now we have to do what we have to do. (Did I get enough cliches into that last sentence, or should I work on it some more? :) ). I do believe the LCG was willing to meet with us thanks to the turnout for the KRMA meeting, and so it grows. Look for even more exciting things to happen given the apparent turnout for the next meeting, as well as the apparent number of letters which are being generated for the Jeffco Board. Who knows maybe a couple of years from now we will be able to turn on our stb's and get the same number of channels the people in 85% of the country get today!!! Now there is a thought! :(

Keep up the great work folks, there IS a light at the end of the tunnel, its just a REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY LONG tunnel.

jm said,
I do agree that it is very necessary for those of use here to support our side of the debate in order to help 'offset' the NIMBY's on the (S)CARE side.From the (S)CARE site: Now, more than ever, we must make our voices heard. Please write or email the Planning Department caseworker with your comments (copy CARE attorney Deb Carney at deb@carneylaw.net). PLEASE attending the hearings and sign in and INDICATE YOUR POSITION AT THE HEARINGS! You do not need to testify.What we are trying to do is no different than what (S)CARE is doing, and they have financial motivations, we do not. Each and every person is important if we are to win this battle. I hope everyone takes a few minutes before June to write a letter to JeffCo and help gather petition signatures....

Hi all!
It's been a while as i have been out-of-town for what seems like two months. I wish i could make the meeting, but am headin' out again that week.

mthigh,
I live on the west edge of Genesee and can only get 18, 32 & 35. I've tried and no way we're gonna' get 17 this far away. You're gonna need a big antenna, like a Channel Master 3023 to get a shot at 18/35. 32 should be no problem. I've got the above CM antenna in the garage ceiling and it seems to pull-it in fine. I also have a Wineguard UHF-only pre-amp (it does help a few units of strength with the far signals, but hurts on the high-power 32)

As far as waiting to get into satellite, just do it! You're really missing out on some awesome programming like HDNet, HBO, SHO, CBSHD form LA, PPV etc. who knows... With what i've been reading lately, the DirectTv/Dish merger is not lookin' very good. So, it's still gonna' be a choice.

wb Ernie!

Hey, so can you make it Sunday for the petition drive? I'm figuring we'll (I'll) start at the top of Lookout and work my way down... just for grins <smile>

-John

JM,

Any word yet on who (from LCG) will be attending the meeting on the 26th? I'm assuming that at least the KCNC folks will be there :) Any word from the others?

markdl
I haven't been able to get that information. I haven't been able to connect with my contact this week. I will give him a call and see if I can find out some more detail. He had promised to let me know, but didn't say when...he was not in the office much of last week or this week, and is difficult to contact.

Seems like we have posted this information before, but I was browsing the FCC site on the status of stations and couldn't find out anything about KWGN. Does anyone remember if they had plans to be on the air by this May as required, or did they apply for an extension. I do remember they are zoned similar to KDVR and are not in the same mess as the LCG.

In past emails they've said May, but by the same token they have filed:

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getattachment_exh.cgi?exhibit_id=62217

DP1
OUCH! Thanks for the post, now I remember why I was confused. They were indeed saying they would be on the air, but the application certainly says they have no shot, even saying that a law suit would likely be necessary. So much for any Rockies HD telecasts except for the ones on HDNet.

*****
BTW, I saw the KCNC TV schedule for today, and none of our regional games are from the MCI center, so unless KCNC decides to give us a break and show an out of market game on the DTV side we won't be getting any NCAA HDTV this week.
:(

If anyone is at home and has any updates on what they are doing, I can't get to see anything till after work today anyway.

They're currently showing the HD game on the digital channel and the regional game on 4.

Oh, and yeah the HD game looks alot better! ;) But then again I have no way to even get a good signal on 4 to begin with because I dont use a VHF antenna at all, and dont subscribe to our locals from either DBS provider or cable.

I just got an email from Don Rooney (director of engineering) at KWGN. He said that they ran into "some issues" with their tower site - hence the extension application that will give them until November 2002 if granted. I imagine the "issues" were those spelled out in the application.

And something else that I haven't heard before - KWGN is planning on broadcasting in 720p rather than 1080i.

As far as the Rockies broadcasts, he said that KWGN doesn't produce them, but would check with them about their plans for HD broadcasts in the (far distant) future.

Dan, thanks for the update on the DTV side of KCNC. That was nice of KCNC to give us a break and show the HD games even though it was out of market. Hats off to them and a big thanks to David Lane. We will have to be sure to thanks them at our meeting. Now if I just wasn't stuck in the office the rest of the day....:rolleyes:

markdl
Thanks for the KWGN update. I noticed a couple (?) or Rockies games on the HDNet baseball schedule and it got me wondering when they would be on the air. I would think they could carry the HD games with permission from HDNet to use the feed. I guess it will be a 'non-issue' this season. A big "Thanks" to the (S)CARE :mad: folks on this one!

If I am in town, which is a bit unclear right now ( often travel on short notice, and there are few things that may break to take me awy anytime), I will be at the meeting. I am very interesting in hearing first hand what is being said !

Phil P

BTW.

Finally ! I just sent off my 2 letters to Jefco about support for the Mt. Morrison PBS site.

Please guys, If I can get off of my butt and do this... ANYBODY can :)

Phil P

I guess I'm not the least bit surprised by KWGN's extention request. When I called them awhile back I got nothing but vague answers to specific questions and that didn't register with their comments about being online in May. I am sure (S)CARE will examine all of the gritty details regarding their JeffCo application and be kind enough to intrepret JeffCo rules for the JeffCo planning board. KWGN is not going to have an easy time of it and slipping past Novenber would not surprise me in the least...OTOH, I don't think I really care. I mean how much true HD will they broadcast anyway. If it's just upconverted NTSC we already get that crap from KDVR. Perhaps KWGN will do it better than KDVR (which I think is quite easily doable) but if it's upconverted it will,well, be upconverted.

Speaking of KDVR, those folks have not answered any emails and they refuse to fix their damn lipsync issues. Not only that but the x-files look better on TV 31 than DT 32. I guess they don't watch their own DT channel because even Stevie Wonder could see their DTV stuff is crap. HINT to KDVR (if they're reading): Look in the shadow details on your digital channel - it absolutely bites. It's macroblocking, looks green rather than black, and ruins the whole picture. Oh, and you might turn up the sound and watch the lips move. The sound won't line up with the movement of the lips. This is called a lipsync problem. In case you are unaware, the sound and lip movement should be in sync.....

Originally posted by ppasteur
BTW.

Finally ! I just sent off my 2 letters to Jefco about support for the Mt. Morrison PBS site.

Please guys, If I can get off of my butt and do this... ANYBODY can :)

Phil P I guess I'm a tad cranky but I will say good job Phil - and I agree with your last sentence.

Geof
Are you implying there are lip synch issues on KDVR. I was so enthralled with the Faux "High Resolution Widescreen" picture I must not have noticed.
:rolleyes:

BTW, just so we keep it straight, I do NOT blame KDVR for the fact that Mr. Murdoch hates HD and FOX will not broadcast it, but come on guys, the lip synch issue is obvious if you ever turn on your own channel. You might complain that no one watches your DTV signal, but that might just be that you make it unwatchable.

Originally posted by JohnJr

Ron,
Did the letter make it in? I didn't see it either on-line or when I was browsing the new Westword at lunch.
I got a letter back from Westword.

"We weren't able to run your letter last week since the (Mt Morrison) meeting was postponed. .... Feel free to submit an updated version of your letter ... as the Jeffco meeting in June draws closer. I promise you'll get top priority."

Well, I don't know how much I believe that ... but I will write again in June, and to the JeffCo planning Commission again.

I checked at the Ft. Collins Best Buy, Circuit City and Soundtrack about the petitions I had left there a couple of weeks ago while helping a friend shop for a new HD set today.

Best Buy said their "non-solicitation" policy prevented them from doing anything with it. Circuit City had about led me to believe that when I had dropped it off earlier, and today they didn't know anything about it--while telling me you can get "7 HD channels, including all of the networks, on DirecTV." Eventually, I did convince the guy otherwise, with help from another sales guy there who had heard rumors of the Lookout Mtn problems and knew more about what DirecTV and Dish really offered.

No one knew about the petition at Soundtrack either, but the sales guy we were working with sure was anxious to sign it. That was even before my friend dropped $$$$ there on his new set...

I should have kept better track of who my contacts were at each store, but if the employees weren't aware of it, I figure it is safe to assume that nothing was done, unfortunately. But maybe I raised some awareness of the problem.

Mark

OK, maybe I'm being too sensitive about this, so I would like opinions from this group.

When we all met at Channel 6 in February, they were hot to get as many Jefferson County residents as possible to testify at the hearing, then scheduled for 3-13.

I volunteered; a few days later I took a call from Ken Smith who requested that I appear at a certain time on a certain day. I agreed, without reservation. The he asked me to expedite a letter to the commission. Again, I agreed and got it in the mail that same day.

Since then, no one has been in contact with me. Hell, I wouldn't even know the hearing had been postponed without this thread. Maybe they're just too busy. Maybe they no longer need my testimony. No one called from Smith's office or from Channel 6. They just assumed I'd find out somehow, I guess.

I am willing to go the extra mile to help get a tower. While I do not expect a medal for my efforts, neither do I expect to be ignored or taken for granted.

What do you guys think? Maybe they just didn't like my letter. Maybe I'll be busy come June.

Mike

Well Mike, IMO I think you have some vaild points - it does seem like a one way street. Perhaps you should drop an email to Tiffany or Ken Smith and let them know how you feel. If they're acting this way with you it's likely they're treating everyone the same and to put it simply, it's not very courteous. I agree that helping them is one thing but feeling like you're being taken advantage of is another.

Well folks, things are starting to take shape for the meeting at KCNC next week. I just got a short email this morning from the representative of the LCG and here is the latest update.

KMGH will have a rep there. They are still waiting to hear from KUSA. KCNC will likely incorporate a tour of the facility during the social hour (FYI, that is 6:00 to 6:30 PM). It will be lead by an on-air personality. They are not sure who that will be yet as that is during their news broadcast. They are also working on parking info for us, and I will post that information as soon as I get it.

It looks like they are making the effort to make this a valuable and fun meeting for us, so lets make sure we have a great attendance so it will be worth their time. Not sure what the latest count was, but I think we were approaching 20 or so.

Mike,

I would agree with Geof that the best thing to do may be to place your feelings of abandonment in an email to the folks at KRMA. I agree that they should be keeping you in the loop as they are expecting so much from you. Thanks again for all your help!

-John

Tonight the Jeffco Board of County Commissioners hears the rezoning case for Eldorado mtn. It is supposed to start at 6:00PM in hearing room 1. I don't expect anyone from here to testify, based upon the testimony heard during the Planning Commission.

Anyway, there is a short article in the Denver Post about the tower cases.
Denver Post Tower Article (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1002,53%257E469420,00.html)

-Wabisabi

Mike,
I would definitely send an email to Tiffany on the lack of contacts from them on the hearing delay and see what she has to say. It does not make a lot of sense to me why they would drop the ball like that unless they have the feeling it will be rejected anyway. I am not sure, but I know Geof and others have speculated that the whole Mt. Morrison application may really be a side effort to force things onto Lookout by elimination of the other sites (Morrison, Eldorado, etc.). It does, however, seem pretty early for them to be throwing in the towel unless they are simply stalling to see the reaction of Jeffco to the LCG submission. I will be interested to see at the meeting next week how the LCG has incorporated the KRMA equipment into their proposal. I suspect there is a LOT of political stuff going on behind the scenes here that even we don't have a clue about. I am also convinced that is NOT a good sign.

Now that you mention stalling I will put forth one scenario I wonder about.

Let me lay the foundation for my curiosity:
KRMA was open and upfront with us concerning their Morrison plans. They mentioned they were still a part of the LCG. When I questioned James Morgese what they would do if both plans were approved he said they'd deal with it if and when the time comes. Fair enough answer. He also mentioned that they would not wait on the LCG application outcome to begin the Morrison development. Again fair enough answer.

Now I know I have a suspecting mind but what if KRMA really prefers Lookout over Eldorado? I think this is an entirely valid assumption because they will lose some viewers if they move to Eldorado (James mentioned this during the meeting) and because they will forever pay rent to the BCDC if they move to Morrison. Now then, if they like Lookout better, but would commit to Morrison before the outcome of the LCG application is known, what could they do? Well for one thing they could stall the Morrison application. But how to do that without making it look like they're stalling? Well gee, how about not posting a sign 14 days in advance (as required by law), thereby forcing JeffCo to reschedule. The end result is a delay that doesn't looking like a stalling tactic. I'm not saying KRMA intentionally orchestrated the delay but it's possible and it most certainly works to their advantage at this time. And because it is to their advantage it makes you wonder - no?

Then again, maybe I'm just warped and twisted - err no comments on that please :)

Geof
I would have to agree that KRMA would prefer to be on Lookout. It just makes more sense. They don't pay rent, and they are used to the set up. In addition, by being the only one on Morrison it also precludes the usual share and share alike stuff the could do with the other stations in the same building on Lookout. You know, like "Can I borrow that wrench?, or I need a longer cable, have you got one I can use till I get one made, or my transmitter crashed, can I borrow that power supply till the new one gets here on Monday???" Or how about the case where a nob needs a tweak and no one is at the site except someone from another channel. You call the room and say, "hey, could you go over to our area and turn nob A from 6 to 7 for me so I don't have to send out a tech". I would think that the standard operating costs on Morrison will be higher since this type of cooperation is not available. I just have to believe they would prefer Lookout. Finally, who has been the head of the LCG the whole time? James Morgese. That tells me they are PLENTY interested in Lookout.

Well you could take my suspicion one step farther. As I mentioned to James during the meeting it seems like the Morrison application serves 2 purposes: one, if approved they have a decent location from which to broadcast and two, if rejected leaves one less alternative site in JeffCo. If Eldorado is ultimately rejected that leaves Lookout and Morrison (in Jefferson County) so, as jm out it, rejection of Morrison zeros in on Lookout by process of elimination. Since there is decent cause to believe KRMA prefers Lookout over Morrison one wonders if they really want to pursue Morrison if they thought Lookout could get approved. I mean after all, getting one site approved in JeffCo is going to be difficult - how easy would it be to get 2 sites (Morrison and Lookout) approved?. So, going with that thought, what if KRMA was actually concerned that Morrison would get approved and diminish the chances of approval for Lookout. Again, a delay works to their advantage because it allows them to judge the JeffCo and (S)CARE climate after the LCG app is submitted. Perhaps we over-zealous AVS'ers are contributing too much to the Morrison thing and we should be more concerned, and concerted, towards the Lookout thing....

I think there is one other reason for KRMA to prefer Lookout. The interference issues by co-locating with Ch 17 (KMGH) etc. are reduced.

That being the case, I don't think the sign placement thing was a stalling tactic. If they want to delay the Morrison application, I think KRMA would (or at least should) simply state that it has become the backup plan to the LCG Lookout application, if that is looking promising. I don't see the need for "tricks."

I'm sure this has been a difficult trade-off for KRMA--the proposal that is perhaps the best (Lookout) vs. the one that has the best chance of approval (Morrison).

Mark

What is missing from your conspiracy theories is that if towers are denied on Eldorado and Mt. Morrison, what makes you think that Jeffco would approve one on Lookout? Almost every reason for denial of a tower on Eldorado and Mt. Morrison could be used for Lookout, as well as many other reasons unique to Lookout.

In my opinion, if both Eldorado and Mt. Morrison are denied, there is NO WAY Jeffco would approve a tower on Lookout.


-Wabisabi


However, just because you are paranoid does not mean that there isn't someone trying to get you.

Wabisabi you may be correct about Lookout being impossible if Eldorado and Morrison are rejected. It's hard to believe that JeffCo could approve 2 sites though. If Mossion is approved I can't see that helping the Lookout application but I could see it hurting it....

Conspiracy theories aside, I want to be clear that I am not accusing KRMA of anything - just a bit of idle speculation on my part to (perhaps) amuse us on this Monday and maybe build some drama for next weeks meeting. Something to ponder at least.

I just received a confirmation that KUSA will also have a representative at our meeting next Tuesday (March 26). That should cover the major networks. They will be there, will you??????

From this mornings' Boulder Daily Camera

http://www.thedailycamera.com/news/eldorado/19ltowr.html

Thanks for the links and updates!

-John

This is too funny -- you can't build a tower anywhere near people, 'cause you'll give 'em cancer and they won't be able to sleep. You can't build a tower in the middle of nowhere, because then you're destroying the natural beauty of the outdoors.

Oh wait -- it's not funny at all :(

Originally posted by dr_mal
This is too funny -- you can't build a tower anywhere near people, 'cause you'll give 'em cancer and they won't be able to sleep. You can't build a tower in the middle of nowhere, because then you're destroying the natural beauty of the outdoors.

Hey, you know this IS Colorado! Gotta run, driving one of my SUV's up to the mountains to enjoy the fresh air and peace and quiet!

From "The People's Republic"

:D :D :D :D :D

Yippee, my PPPoE is back up... MSN now acknowledges I have a valid account as policed by their secure server after my CSR escalation fiasco.

JM, count me in for the meeting on Tuesday, the 26th.

I also have suspected that the Mt. Morrison app is a second choice to Lookout, just based on coverage. I still fully support KRMA in their application, however, I still can't figure out what's going on with Lookout and KRMA's role.

Hopefully, Tuesday's meeting will be enlightening and will have some positive news when it seems there is little hope... Tick tock, Super Bowl on ABC is only 10 months away. Lookout isn't going to happen before then. Will KMGH be at the meeting?

On a better note, the hi-def bracket games last weekend were fantastic, especially the robotic hi-def camera shots behind the backboard. Thanks KCNC. I'm looking forward to the next 2 weekends.

Don

Just got an email on the parking at the meeting next week. So I don't screw it up, here is a copy of the paragraph.

*******
Parking will be available on the opposite side of Lincoln Street (west side) from KCNC in a lot marked private. There are spots designated as 'private' and 'KCNC'; we have made arrangements for the guests to park in either that evening. The lot will probably accommodate 20 Ü 25 cars. The rest will need to park on the street.

************

Sounds like first come first serve. Don't be afraid to car pool that night, and also, don't hesitate to bring any interested friends who might not be active in the forum, but would like to get involved in this issue. I would sure like to get the attendance to top the KRMA meeting.

In addition it sounds like we should plan on getting there a little before 6 if we want to take the tour. I don't know if folks who wander in at 6:10 (for example) will be able to join the tour or not.

This is a good way to spend a couple of hours and be informed in the process. It's not everyday we get to see the inside of a TV studio - don't miss your chance !!

Just got off the phone with my LCG contact. We had a lengthy discussion of some of the issues they can expect to be raised next Tuesday, so I gave it a shot.

I suggested a discussion of:

What is the new design for the tower? How is it different from the original application? How many towers would be eliminated once the analog signals are turned off? How have you addressed the issues which Jeffco used to reject the first application? What will be the radiation intensity levels in the populated areas around Lookout, and how do they compare with the current levels, and how do they compare with the levels proposed in the original design?

Also I said these issues would be raised for sure:

Is KRMA included in the new Lookout design and application? What would be the proposed schedule for the application, and assuming it is approved, construction of the new towers?

What do the stations propose to do during the interim in order to give the Denver area at least some access to DTV? Does KUSA plan to broadcast in any format? Will KMGH consider changing the location and power level of their interim transmitter?

What can the AVS forum group do to help with the application?
Are there things other than letters that would be helpful?


The representatives are anxious to answer our questions, as they obviously will be hearing many of the same questions in the months to come at public meetings and hearings, so if you have any other questions you intend to raise, let me know in the forum and I will pass them along so the representative will hopefully be able to give us some answers. The more they know in advance, the better prepared they can be. I also suggested handouts (with a design description, picture and perhaps talking points for letters to Jeffco) similar to what KRMA prepared would be useful for talking points to other people after the meeting.

Also, they have said if the meeting attendance grows beyond 30 or so they would like to know in advance so they can be prepared to deal with that, so we will need to take a approximate head count again this weekend and let them know on Monday. I think from my rough estimate we are sitting around 20-25 people at the moment.

From what I can tell here the count thus far:

Jeffden
RonAuger
dr_mal
pokers
markdl
MrinDenver
Mbuchana
Freddie
Jetlag
b5lurker
joej
BrianRL
JohnJr
Johnty
Keithsimp
JMartinko
Geof
jeffwalter
Jotaman
mtnhigh
Ppasteur
donyoop
Mark C. (Listen Up)
Mike D
mknoebel
Malcolm


So far we have 26 possible folks to attend the meeting. We need more folks!

Please PM me or post a message if the list needs to be corrected/added to.

jm,
1) How are they going to address the alternate site question. They will need to explain why they need to be on Lookout and why Eldorado (if the Pinnacle case hasn't been decided), Squaw, or Morrison (or even some large tower built directly in the path of the DIA runways) are not viable alternatives - i.e., do they have an updated "Browne report".
2) How are they going to combat the so called (S)CARE technical experts - we know they are going to claim Lookout isn't a great location and that Squaw and/or Eldorado is wonderful. I think they need to counter this will decent well thought out rational technical argument - can they do it?
3) How are they going to address the safety issues rasied with their previous application (partly covered in your response).
4) Are they going to address how they will insure they comply with RF safety levels. In the past they've been caught with their pants down (so to speak) claiming to meet all FCC regualtions yet the (S)CARE Engineers have proved otherwise. This doesn't help their credibility - are they going to propose something to negate the lack of trust the stations have created for themselves?
5) Are they going to address the application and it's status with regular updates on their nightly newscasts?

Geof,
You can count me in as well for next week ( remove the ? ). I have had some pages to catch up on after a couple of weeks away from any computers. I am looking forward to hearing the LCG folks positions on some of the previously posted questions.

Jeff

You can count me in for sure next Tuesday. I'm leaving town this evening and won't be back until Monday PM, so probably won't be able to confirm at any other time than now. -Brian

Jeffden - done.

Geof
Thanks a lot for doing the 'count' for me. You can also add a Mark C. (Listen Up) and a Mike D. (a lurker and interested party) to the list, although I have not confirmed with them since last week. I will let you know if they find out they can't make it.

Also, thanks for the comments on issues to discuss. I have saved them and will pass them on in a email later this week. I think most of the issues will be covered as I told him we would really like to see the issues used for rejection in the previous application addressed in detail. I also talked extensively to him about the issue of PR and news coverage from the stations themselves. It is a touchy issue for them as they do not want to be seen as directing the news departments, so I asked why not use some short PSA's to address the upcoming transition to DTV to make people aware of the change. I think that is more an issue to direct to the stations themselves. The only thing he asked is that we try not to stray too far off the topic of the application for too long discussing the low power options, and I told him I don't think that will be a problem. Although I know the issues will be raised I am sure we can make our views known and keep is short. If anyone else thinks of some particular issues you will want to discuss let us know.

Also, just so folks are aware, KCNC will provide some snacks and drinks at the meeting, but not a full dinner, so if you are starving you might grab a bite on the way.

I'll be bringing along that power-geek toy I talked about earlier in the thread for award to the person that collects the most petition signatures.

JM/Geof ya'll have covered most of the questions I have thought of to date. Course I reserve the right to make one up on the spot too ;)

-John

PS. on the tour ya'll may get to see some of my "stuff" ;)

Originally posted by JohnJr
Course I reserve the right to make one up on the spot too ;)

-John



Sorry, questions made up on the spot will be accepted only if you slip me a fifty.......OK, how about a twenty?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Well I'm shooting for 50 signatures at least... but it'll be at least 20 :)

-John

Just a heads up:

>From: Debbie Kerley [mailto: Debbie_Kerley@KRMA.pbs.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 5:11 PM
> Subject: HD feed
>
> The program Great Performances: "Kurosawa" will be fed in HD
> on Thursday 3/21 at 19:00 & 22:00 (MT) ...
> ... broadcast on KRMA-DT 18

Ron
Thanks for the 'heads up' on the show, and btw, great picture you have there!

I have been reading this thread for a while and read most of the info on the s(CARE) site. I am trying not to get caught in all of the details and determine what the Jeffco Commissioners will need to ultimately decide on in order to allow towers to be built and operated that will transmit HDTV locally. I am trying to comprehend this and apply the KISS principle to prepare for the upcoming meeting with the LCG and public hearings with Jeffco.


Basically, it boils down to the following conditions:

1. The foothills west of the greater Denver metro area represent the optimal location for broadcasting radio and TV station signals. This is the reason why the towers were originally located on Lookout Mtn., even though private residences and residential zoning existed on Lookout Mtn before most of the towers.

2. The s(CARE) folks have identified human health risks as the major issue for adding any new towers or expanding the capabilities of existing towers on the Lookout Mountain site. They claim that some of the existing towers have not been properly permitted and/or have not operated within proper limits for permissible exposure. They cite medical research studies linking an increased probability of human health risks to prolonged exposure to EM radiation.

3. Alternate locations along the foothills for siting broadcast towers are limited in terms of their technical suitability, accessibility, existing use, and proximity to residential areas.


So this basically comes down to a tower siting problem related to potential health risks. You can debate the technical +/- of possible locations, or dispute the research cited by s(CARE) or even consider the advantages or disadvantages of different tower designs and the impact of towers on aesthetics of landscape quality, but basically the Jeffco Commissioners need to find a location where the existing and future use of towers will not cause a significant human health threat. This is the burden of having to prove a negative.

Why?

Because they are public servants who need to protect the public health and welfare of the county. Health comes first and caution prevails when potential health risks are at stake.

Because exposure to EM radiation from nearby towers is an involuntary risk to residents that is controlled by local land zoning and FCC operating permits. Yet, if a person is exposed to radiation from cell phone usage, this is considered a voluntary risk as the person can control their use of a cell phone. Like it or not, involuntary risks are regulated and subject to scrutiny.

Because the possible link between EM radiation and human health is fledgling and not conclusive at this early stage. It is safer to do nothing than to increase exposure until this relationship is better understood.

For these reasons, the Jeffco Commissioners will not want to site new towers and create another problem like Lookout Mtn at another location unless they believe this will reduce the overall problem.

So what needs to be decided?

Can the broadcast towers at Lookout Mtn. be redesigned and rebuilt to accommodate the phase out of analog broadcast and transition to digital broadcast, yet over time reduce their radiation levels within acceptable levels? If the radiation levels at Lookout Mtn cannot be redesigned/rebuilt to reduce radiation levels and yet accommodate digital broadcast, then an alternate site must be located to allow the building of new towers to replace one or more towers to reduce exposure levels at Lookout Mtn.

If the alternate site(s) can only be in Jefferson County foothills due to its central proximity to the greater metro area, then which sites are suitable for broadcasting without a potential significant health risk? Which sites are least populated by residences that may be exposed to tower radiation and the surrounding land use controlled by Jeffco or another government agency? Are the only viable sites Mt. Morrison, Lookout Mtn., Squaw Mountain and El Dorado Mountain?

In terms of the Mt. Morrison site, is this site being considered as a solution to the health problem (real or not) at Lookout Mtn? Or is this a solution for just one broadcast company to transition to a digital signal before others? How much relief can the Mt. Morrison site provide to reducing radiation levels at Lookout Mtn.?

The economics for justifying the costs for developing new sites that will allow towers on Lookout Mtn. to be replaced are not a consideration of Jeffco. Yet, the potential buyout of residential properties near the Lookout Mtn towers and/or legal costs from wrongful deaths and/or health damages claims from residents are real concerns to both Jeffco and the broadcasters.

The Jeffco commissioners need to select the site(s) that will allow broadcast towers to serve the metro area in the future, yet minimize potential exposure to nearby residents. It may be possible that more than one site (i.e. Lookout Mtn and Mt Morrison) will be needed to balance this trade-off.

I've seen a similar dilemma play out between public interest groups who take on both the government agency and responsible party for cleanup of former industrial sites.

In order to develop and support a solution, I am trying to make sure I understand the basics of the problem and that we are all on the same page. I hope I helped clarify the major factors rather than regurgitate what's already been said.


By the way, I will mail my letters in support of the Mt. Morrison site to the Jeffco Planning Dept. and Commissioners tomorrow. Also, my wife agreed to watch the kids while I attend the meeting with the LCG on Tuesday.

P.S. Santellavision, thanks for the input re: your OTA reception in Genesee.

mtnhigh,

Well said! I would like to add some to you analysis.

Mt. Morrison is also very close to a large population. With Idledale and Genesee within a mile or so. Don't get me wrong, I've worked at TV stations for many years where the broadcast facilty was at the tower site. No one that i knew who worked there (and still do) since the stations started broadcasting ever had medical problems associated with EM Radiation. Those stations are still there and are still broadcasting with no reported ill effects to employees.

But, under your theory of public safety as a high consideration, JeffCo may have to remove Mt. Morrison from the acceptable list. So, what does that leave us?
Eldorado or Squaw. Both NOT with a high station acceptance factor due to the amount of infrastructure costs and/or rent involved.

Thus, as we've all speculated, if the stations don't get Look Out, they'll probably wait until 2006 and make the total analog to digital change overnight with no JeffCo approval needed.

Some comments:

Squaw Mtn isn't suitable for a number of reasons but the biggest problem is that it would reduce the number of viewers who could receive the signals. Me for example. Ch 12 is on Squaw and my TV's don't even pick up snow much less a picture.

RF intensity falls off with the square of the distance. In other words someone 200 ft from the tower will have 1/4 of the RF levels as someone 100 Ft from the tower. There is a significant (HUGE) difference in RF levels when a tower is in your backyard versus being a mile away.

The LCG application will build one tower to broadcast NTSC and ATSC signals for the LCG stations along with some FM stations. This will significantly increase the amount of power emitted from Lookout mountain but this does not necessarily mean that RF emissions at the ground level will dramatically increase. Depending upon siting, geography, and antenna radiation patterns it is conceivable that the RF levels in the surrounding vicinity would actually decease, but it would probably be difficult to convince nearby residents that is the case.

Keep in mind that the ultimate goal of (S)CARE is to have every tower removed from Lookout (they have publicly stated this). To that end they will not listen to any rational alternatives unless the alternate is complete and utter destruction of the towers with no new towers added. This position is not conducive to negotiating other alternatives. The end result, if the (S)CARE folks win, would be prime number-one real estate with a great view overlooking Denver but just 30 minutes from downtown. This of course translates to vastly increased property values. The real problem here is not health related, it is all about money. Think about it. By playing the health angle (S)CARE can elicit sympathy and no one can readily dispute their concerns because that is proving a negative. If, however, they came out and said they want the tower off the mountain so their property values would skyrocket how far would that argument go? Seems to me that if anyone is really concerned about health problems they'd either pack up and move out or not move there in the first place. They want their cake and eat it too.

Originally posted by Geof
Ch 12 is on Squaw and my TV's don't even pick up snow much less a picture. Kind of interesting ... I'm 7 miles north of Elizabeth and I got a watchable (albeit snowy) picture. According to MSMappoint, that's 50 miles by the crow. There must be a reception "trough" closer to the foothills for Squaw.

Great summary mtnhigh!

I think others have added great comments too. To me, when I simplify things, there are two issues here.

The first, can we question the RF safety standards set by the FCC. Although one can always question such things and force you to prove the negative, the facts are that there have been dozens of locations around the country similar to Lookout where people have lived for long periods near RF TV towers, and to this date no one has ever shown or proven medical damage. In the litigious society we live in, I think that in itself says and awful lot. There really is, to this date, no evidence that the exposure to the FCC listed safe levels is anything other than safe. The folks from (S)CARE are indeed using that as a cover to try to reap windfall profits in their property values.

The second issue, as brought up by mtnhigh, is the issue of involuntary exposure. Nearly all of the residential zoning rules which are now in place on Lookout were brought into law long after the original TV and radio towers were in place and in use. My assertion is, that anyone living on Lookout is not receiving 'involuntary' exposure, but rather, much like the cell phone user, receiving only voluntary exposure. No one forced the people to pass zoning laws to allow them to live there, and no one is forcing them to stay.

I strongly feel that to move the towers to another location will simply put the problem off for another 10 years. You will never get all of the towers moved from Lookout, so the net effect will simply be to visually pollute even more of the front range area for future generations. Let's face it, with the growth in population which is inevitable, even if you put the towers on Squaw, Eldorado, or Mt. Morrison, how long do you think it will be before a developer sets up a new group of homes near those mountains, and those people organize to try to get the new towers out of their new location. It is inevitable that people will move in closer to the new towers no matter where they are. What is the solution? To me, it is obvious, leave the towers and the problem in one location, Lookout Mt. This seems entirely fair, since the people living there have all moved in since the towers were erected, were aware of the issues involved when they bought their land, and have always been free to move if they were unhappy. I do believe (I hope to confirm this next Tuesday) that the new LCG tower will indeed reduce the RF emission levels near the area, and I think that is adequate. The LCG stations, are also property owners, 'residents' and taxpayers on Lookout Mountain. Enough is enough, the metro Denver area deserves to have access to DTV just like every other major community in the US.

BTW, Geof, even on the eastern edge of north Boulder, the best I can get on channel 12 is a snowy picture, although I will admit I have never tried to optimize my attic antenna for channel 12 only, but from my house, the two sites are in the same general direction.

Goef,

Your comments are right on the mark. The public health concerns argued by s(CARE) is the sheep's fleece, while the money if the wolf in disguise. The public health concerns make a stronger argument than the concerns of a hundred of more residents on their property values that are located in close proximity to the Lookout Mtn. towers. A site needs to be selected that will meet the technical requirements for broadcasting yet minimize the exposure to nearby residents. Is that Lookout Mtn, Mt. Morrison, El Dorado, or some other location? The Jeffco commissioners will not likely sacrifice public health for a better broadcast location. The potential liability for making the wrong decision with knowledge of possible health hazards is far too great. For Jeffco, it is about the legal costs for creating a future potential liability.

I lived on Lookout Mtn for nearly 7 years between 1989 and 1996 at a location a mile away where the towers were not visible. Our home doubled in price during this period. We moved to Evergreen as we needed a larger house for our family and we did not want our kids to be bused to middle and high school in Golden via I-70. I did not move because of health concerns or impacted property values. Except for those residents in close proximity to the towers, I doubt that many the property values of most residents have been significantly impacted on Lookout Mtn.

Many of the residents that purchased homes in the shadow of the towers made a conscious decision to buy even though one or more towers were already in place. Many of the older homes were originally built as summer cabins or retreats for people living in Denver. These homes have been upgraded over time and now exist as permanent residences. The funny thing is the more s(CARE) folks argue about the potential health concerns from the towers, the more they are contribute to degrading their property values. I doubt that many residents on Lookout Mtn will incur a loss on the value of their property if they truly wanted to sell. The real problem is that they cannot afford to buy another property that offers the physical setting of the foothills, with its relative isolation, views and proximity to Denver.

The point I am trying to make is that Jeffco and the FCC will seriously consider public health concerns since they have to find a site that will protect public health in the future and to avoid creating another Lookout6 Mtn. problem (real or not). The costs associated with making the wrong decision is a financial risk to the county far greater than the potential claims for compensation for impacted property values for residents in the immediate vicinity of the towers. One wrongful death or injury case will make up for alot of lost property value. The tower owners will likely share in the liability for these litigation cases, if damages are awarded to the plaintiffs.

Once the public health concerns can be resolved through siting of any new towers, the real issue of financial compensation to the s(CARE) folks will emerge. If s(CARE) is not careful, they can be seen as another greedy group of landowners who want government to bail them out for bad decisions they made in purchasing property.

The public health issues must first be resolved to avoid future liability and then put the burden on S(CARE) to demonstrate real property value impacts.

I apologize if am on a rant, but I am trying to see the forest for the trees.

As I recall Squaw sets further West that the other sites and I think the main problem is geography -- the mountains are limiting the coverage area. The one positive aspect of Squaw from a JeffCo perspective is that it's in Clear Creek County, not Jefferson County.

Jm, I agree with your rationale to leave the towers on Lookout.

The radiation issue really gets me. I have yet to see a valid medical report that states that being in proximity to the radiation levels being emitted from the towers is a health hazard. But of course, if enough people claim that to be fact, over time it becomes fact regardless of any scientific evidence to back it up.

So, here's another tack...we all lose local television in 2006 unless something is done about it now. That statement isn't true, as we all know, but if enough people were to make that claim long enough and enough times, it will become just as true as the entire radiation scam.

On another topic, isn't KCNC broadcasting guide data in their broadcast stream on 35? I thought I remembered hearing that awhile back. If so, anyone have any idea why I'm not receiving it through my new hipix card? Are any of the other stations sending the guide data?

My feelings are these:

In our current discussion, the only way for the Jeffco commissioners to cover the county's butts legally would be to approve a Lookout site. You guys have stated our views that we would view the current owners in the area to have been exposed to voluntary risk and not an involuntary one. At any other site, a NEW approval of towers being added would bring about the potential legal problems that mtn high writes about. Jeffco officially would be in the position of placing a new potential risk on whatever alternative mountaintop which could open them up to potential liability.

However, I believe that a Lookout plan, that includes an eventual reduction in towers and radiation levels would be considered resonable if ever challenged in court proceedings from sCARE homeowners trying to assign culpability to the county. I would find it hard to believe that any reasonable jury would see fault with the elected officials in approving what would amount to an updating of facilities with the added bonuses of less tower pollution and lowered radiation levels.

Now, I know that CARE is utilizing their influence and spreading basically propaganda claiming wild stories about sleep deprivation, etc. and the possibilities of further health risks that are not proven or even evidenced coincidentally. To date, they have ZERO individuals that are diagnosed with anything that would require damages. ZERO!

So, the health risks are overstated ( what a surprise ) and the basic plan is one that fundamentally should be approvable and is the best site for coverage to boot. So, what went wrong with the LCG original plan? They severely miscalculated and threw together a proposal with numerous flaws that could have been and probably should have been challenged and subsequently denied. My contention is that a well crafted plan ( hopefully this time around ) that accomplishes the goals of eventually reducing RF and visual polluiton which has it's I's dotted and T's crossed and does not come across as arrogant or threatening and includes data requested by the Jeffco Commissioners has the best chance of being approved. I seriously doubt that any other site in Jeffco can be approved that would not potentially create it's own set of problems and open the county up to far greater liability issues.

So watch, the meeting next week will probably prove every one of my points wrong! wouldn't be the first time.

Jeff

Oh you're absolutely right Mtnhigh. I've said it before. Once health issues were brought into the fray, contrived or otherwise, there was no way the commissioners werent going to take a long hard look at it. They'd be foolish not to when for all intents and purposes it still just comes down to.. TV basically. Certainly it would be a little different if there were a true drop dead date as far as OTA television goes. But of course we're nowhere near that type of situation.

Thats said, it does make me wonder why it's such an issue (getting a tower built) in our little corner of the world when places like NYC for example had/have full power antennas atop the late WTC buildings and Empire, which directly "affects" far more people in close proximity than our situation does.

Oh well.

Originally posted by markdl
The radiation issue really gets me. I have yet to see a valid medical report that states that being in proximity to the radiation levels being emitted from the towers is a health hazard. But of course, if enough people claim that to be fact, over time it becomes fact regardless of any scientific evidence to back it up.

I heartily agree with this statement. As I stated earlier, if there was a shred of evidence the levels were unsafe, the way law suits are filed for money in this country, somebody, somewhere, would have filed a suit against the FCC rules and a station (NYC, Philly or other locations with a high concentration of towers near populated areas) by now. Remember, this is a country where you can win millions by suing McDonald's because their coffee is too hot. There just isn't any evidence that these levels of radiation are dangerous. Even (S)CARE had to back down from supporting Eldorado after we pointed out to them (Al Hislop) in this forum that the levels they called 'safe' on Eldorado were actually higher than those that would be seen on Lookout with the new towers. I agree with Jeff's point, the safest way for Jeffco to avoid future legal action against them is to keep the towers on Lookout and to try to reduce the emissions, which hopefully the new tower will do.

I agree that any new or redesigned towers should remain on Lookout Mtn. as long as there is no credible public health risk and to minimize other potential impacts (health, aesthetic, land use) at other locations. Assuming that new tower designs can accommodate the transition to digital broadcast and radiation levels can be kept within acceptable exposure levels, then towers should remain on Lookout Mtn. Why create another location where the same potential problems could reoccur?

I believe the solution needs to focus on reducing and capping the radiation levels from Lookout Mtn. to whatever is deemed protective of public health. This can be accomplished by capping the emission levels and allowing emission credits to be bought and sold among the broadcasters. This approach has been used by EPA and states for managing air pollutants to prevent further degradation of air quality from a variety of regulated sources. This approach may also be used to cap the number and overall size of visible towers.

The problem that I see is that not all of the broadcasting stations are willing to support this approach. Those with existing facilities that are permitted to operate at higher powers are at an advantage under this approach.

If the broadcasters do their homework, I believe they can demonstrate to the Jeffco commissioners that widespread evidence of potential health hazards from prolonged RF exposure does not exist. Until this is resolved, I do not see this moving forward unless a plan is developed and approved to reduce and cap the existing exposure levels on Lookout Mtn.. As long as the exposure caps are maintained, then changes can be made as needed to accommodate the transition to digital broadcast.

Sorry Tonto, but this Lone Ranger does not have any silver bullets.

I'm not sure JeffCo would deny an application for "health concerns" if it meets FCC regulations. That said, they sure could nit pick the application and deny it for other reasons. That is why many of us feel like the LCG needs a "bulletproof" application wherein every aspect of the Jefferson County Telecommunication Land Use Plan is addressed. I do agree that the LCG needs to vigorously address the health concern issue (and the interference issue), both politically and public relations wise. Time will tell if they are up to it.

Assuming that new tower designs can accommodate the transition to digital broadcast and radiation levels can be kept within acceptable exposure levels, then towers should remain on Lookout Mtn.

Ahh, this is a question that has bothered me since the beginning of this mess... How do you keep all the Radiation levels within' FCC specs? Currently, some FM stations are broadcasting at reduced power from Lookout because they were measured above the legal limits. If we add 6-8 Full-power new digital transmitters to all the existing analog channels 'till at least 2006 or more likely well after that with FCC extensions depending on market saturation of DTV) If they grant an variance to let the levels go over for a limited transition time, aren't those FM stations gonna' be upset?

So, how can we 'physically' keep the levels below the FCC limits? The area is at the EM saturation limit right now. I totally agree that after the 'switch' we will have less ugly towers and less overall EM radiation. But in the transition period, i don't see a way to keep that many x-mitters in that small area under the current limits.

Well in my mind the thing is the commissioners are under no pressure whatsoever at this time from either side, really. To me, theres only one entity that could make this happen sooner rather than later and that would be the Feds. But, as we know, they dont feel compelled at this point. If they did, the CARE folks folks wouldnt stand a chance because the whole region would be looked out for rather than a "neighborhood".

However since this issue means nothing to the populace as a whole theres no reason to expedite it. Ya gotta understand that sure, those of us on internet forums think it's important .. whether we reside in Denver metro or Tuscaloosa Alabama. But outside of this realm it's not even on folks' radars.

Witness the fact that in 2 other markets for example, Los Angeles and Philadelphia who combined have 19 OTA digital channels available to them (10 L.A., 9 Philly), that in even those areas the people arent buying into the ability to view the digital channels. Thats over 8 million tv households combined. If the people dont give a darn there (based on digital tuner sales) what makes anybody think that people around here care?

I realize that a number of factors might eventually come into play so as to make people perhaps care.. inexpensive tuners..cable carriage, etc. though as it stands now god only knows when it will happen.

Mtnhigh,

The FCC already has standards in place for safe radiation level emissions, and have had them in place for quite a while. And the stations that are broadcasting on Lookout follow those standards, and are in compliance with them. This was info from James Margese at KRMA last month.

The problem that we're fighting here is that the s(Care) people are claiming that the limit that the FCC imposes is not safe, not that broadcasters can emit whatever level they want to. The fact is that if the stations broadcasting fall under the limits mandated by the FCC, then the landowners have no basis for a legal action against Jeffco, the stations, or anyone else. That's why the standards are in place to begin with. If the LCG stations can prove to Jeffco that the new emissions from the digital broadcasts will fall below the set maximum that the FCC mandates, then they should have nothing to worry about. If the landowners want to take legal action, they should take it against the FCC for setting the standards. Just my opinion, of course...

The RF levels for Ch 6 or 9 or 4 or whatever won't change by adding channels 17, 18, 19, 34, 35. The energy is not all concentrated in one frequency band - it's spread out. The higher frequency ATSC channels also helps mitigate interference issues because consumer equipment is less suceptible to higher frequency interferrence. This won't reduce interference caused by Ch 6 (say) but the point is it probably won't make matters much worse.

As I mentioned earlier, distance makes a HUGE difference. That is part of the reason the LCG wanted a high tower - the higher the antenna the lower the levels of RF at ground level. Taller antennas also yield better coverage which is another plus.

Geography can be an important factor. I do not know where the proposed tower would be located but if it's a block farther away from the nearest house this will make a tremendous difference in RF levels at that house.

Antennas have a directionality that can be fairly well determined by the design. They want a wide horizontal dispersion but a narrow vertical dispersion (there's no sense beaming most of the RF power down into the ground or up into space).

Just for clarification, the emissions levels proposed even in the original LCG application would never exceed FCC limits. The few points that have been measured in excess on Lookout were caused by faulty or poorly tuned equipment. Higher towers would greatly reduce this risk, as would co-location, which would make it easier to control frequency interactions. As stated above, (S)CARE has based their argument on the assertion that the FCC limits are not adequate or safe. There has been nothing published in any major journals that would indicate (S)SCARE has a case. (S)CARE and Al Hislop even argued in this forum last year(?) that similar radiation levels from antennas proposed for Eldorado would be safe until it was pointed out to him that the Eldorado levels he called safe were actually higher than the levels that would appear on Lookout with all the new stations on a new tower. Al left the forum shortly after that and has not returned.

Mark,

Thanks for your comments. and reminding me about the basis for the FCC standards. I believe the argument over the FCC permissible exposure levels is based on the exposure scenarios used to develop these levels. I can't recall specifically, but I thought the FCC levels are based on tower worker exposures and not residential exposures. The worker may have a less chronic exposure since a worker typically works eights hours a day, 250 days a year, over a 10 year period. Yet, a resident is assumed to be the maximum exposed individual with a more chronic exposure of 24 hours a day, for 350 days a year, over a 30 year lifetime. Epidemiological studies of safe exposures for workers are commonly used to extrapolate residential standards. This is commonly accomplished by applying a safety factor to account for the chronic exposure. I really do not want to go any more in the details re: this highly technical area.

The s(CARE) folks do not believe the FCC standards are applicable for residential exposure, and are eager to cite any study that furthers their cause without objectively reviewing all relevant studies. There are few studies of any type of exposure that last 30 years. Too often medical science learns about dose-response exposures the hard way after the fact (black lung, asbestos, smoking, etc.). Yet, you would think that as pointed out by others in this forum that any health hazards from RF exposures would have appeared and be recognized by now. I doubt that there will be any studies over the next few years that can resolve how much is safe, although CSU is apparently trying to determine if there is a statistically significant increase or cluster of health impacts for Lookout Mtn. residents relative to the general population. The broadcasters will need to do their own homework to counter S(CARE)'s arguments and possibly consider what type of safety factor could be accommodated.

My point here is that any plan that reduces and caps the radiation levels below the FCC standards (assuming that these are for worker exposure and this can be designed and accomplished) as a safety precaution will be more acceptable. The only other alternative for keeping the towers at Lookout Mtn. and ensuring that residential exposure is minimized is to relocate the nearby residents. Otherwise, we are back to finding another site.

If the broadcasters are able to plan a reduction of radiation levels as safety factor, then it seems to me the arguments of s(CARE) will be less credible and this is as close as a win-win as you can get.

The s(CARE) folks do not believe the FCC standards are applicable for residential exposure,I don't know about that. The FCC requirements are imposed on every tower across the country regardless of whether it's in a residential neighborhood or the boonies. I believe what is at question is whether or not those requirements are valid - whether they too high. I guess the end result is the same - they want the RF requirements lowered. I guess if someone is claiming these are "worker" requirements that is another way to confuse and conquer....to tell with reality....

How does the LCG make the JeffCo Commisioners believe they are telling the truth with their new proposal about not illegally adding equipment later and not exceeding FCC radiation limits. We all know that (S)care has proven and documented the problems before.

The stations got themselves in this spot by illegally adding new (non-permitted) antennas/radar domes etc. Not measuring radiation levels of their own faulty equipment. What is the LCG going to say that will prove they are going to be 'Good' broadcasters now after their, let's say, not spotless record?

Originally posted by JMartinko
Just for clarification, the emissions levels proposed even in the original LCG application would never exceed FCC limits.

Actually, there was one point that had existing levels of about 98% of the permissible levels, and the new LCG tower would have added about 4% to that spot, according to the report that the LCG submitted.


I'm not sure what you mean by the few points that have been measured in excess on Lookout were caused by faulty or poorly tuned equipment. There were spots that were measured by the FCC at levels of up to 250% of the standard. These spots were caused by the FM stations KKHK/KOSI. A few months ago they replaced their antenna and these "hot spots" are no longer even close to the standard.

Wabisabi

Wabisabi
The hot spots (as I understood from discussions with Bud at KRMA) were the result of the power from the three stations being added in phase at a particular spot on the ground. That is part of the reason the three stations need to be located on the same tower, as this allows the spacing of the antennas (as well as their patterns) to be adjusted to prevent such problems. When the spots were discovered, the FM stations were required to reduce their power (which they did) until they could correct the problem. I assume they needed new antennas with more controlled patterns with lower directivity toward the ground. That was done and all is well now. The field intensity levels in the entire area are certainly higher than at my house, and I would suspect they do approach, in some areas, the legal limits. If you remember, Bud told us that the new low profile design on Mt. Morrison would exceed the safe levels in a couple of spots on the ground and that these areas would be fenced off to prevent any people from entering these areas. It is true that the allowable levels are higher at the base of the antenna where the workers would be, and those limits are higher than the residential limits since the exposure is limited. I did read the radiation level report from Eldorado and a summary of the report from the first LCG submittal, and I do not recall any instances of areas where the LCG design would have exceeded the safety levels in any residential area, although it has been a while since I read that stuff.

The question really is, are these "hot' areas controlled so that people do not enter them without knowledge of the hazards, and also that these areas do not occur in grounds where people live. It is permissible to exceed safe levels in controlled access areas and that happens all the time. I spent many years testing geosynch communication satellites (often for television broadcastors) for GE Space Division back east, and our final test was always to turn on the spacecraft at full power in the test chamber. We were required by OSHA to calculate the field intensities and identify any unsafe areas. The company took that test very seriously. The areas in front of the antennas, often out to as much as 20 or 30 feet far exceeded safe levels even for momentary exposure. Levels were high enough to 'cook your eyes' in a matter of seconds. The areas were roped off, flashing lights were set up and the entire test area was sealed so that no one was allowed in during powered test. For any case on Lookout, or on Mt. Morrison, the levels would be excessive only based upon prolonged exposures, and those areas are not where people live. Frankly one of the hesitations I have in supporting the low profile tower on Morrison is the fact that such and area would exist, even if it is fenced off. Some times a fence is simply a temptation for kids to try to get in. I have not seen the levels proposed from the new design for the towers for Lookout, so I cannot comment on that. I hope those issues will be addressed on Tuesday. It is tough to carry on a serious conversation about the levels until we know what the predictions are.

Originally posted by Geof

So far we have 24 possible folks to attend the meeting. We need more folks!


It looks like I'll be able to make it down! Add me to the list of those attending.

-Mike

Good to hear Mike. I've updated the list.

I'm glad we'll have some folks attending that cannot receive the low power stuff but want it. I think that is a good message to send to the stations....

A few posts back it was mentioned that those of us on internet forums think that our issue is important ..... But outside of this realm it's not even on folks' radars.

Actually, there are outside Colorado concerns here. I'm currently visiting a friend who's company is doing due dilligence to open a "western office" of about 50-60 people. Most of the managers/staffers at his company that would be relocating (about 7 to 10 people), are already on the HDTV bandwagon, and have over-the-air equipment since broadcast HDTV is up and going in their current location. For my friend and the other's relocating, broadcast HDTV is an important factor in selecting the City of relocation, a close second factor behind client base. Needless to say, they aren't considering Denver, even though a couple are from Colorado. I'm trying to get him to write a letter stating their relocation criteria, but he's reluctant because they don't want public knowledge of thier plans for competitive reasons....I'll work on him over the weekend, but understand where he's coming from.

On a separate note, I agree with the comment a few posts back that states how a concept can become fact when repeated enough, even if it really isn't. I'm reminded of a simple slogan that when repeated, could have swayed people... that slogan is, "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit".

Maybe we need a simple catchy slogan for the cause, like, ..."Its no lie, RF will not make you die"....?????

Originally posted by BrianRL
Actually, there are outside Colorado concerns here. I'm currently visiting a friend who's company is doing due dilligence to open a "western office" of about 50-60 people. Most of the managers/staffers at his company that would be relocating (about 7 to 10 people), are already on the HDTV bandwagon, and have over-the-air equipment since broadcast HDTV is up and going in their current location. For my friend and the other's relocating, broadcast HDTV is an important factor in selecting the City of relocation, a close second factor behind client base. Needless to say, they aren't considering Denver, even though a couple are from Colorado.

That seems like a bit of a stretch Brian. When deciding where to locate I should think things like education, and economy, and climate, and transportation infrastructure, and taxes, and parks and recreation, and cost of living, and housing just to name a few would rank just a little higher than HDTV availability especially when no matter where I might otherwise choose to live I can just buy a particular black box and get basically all the Network HD there is to get anyways if I'm that worried about it.

To each his own though. Oh, and heres a tip. Tell your friend to scratch Phoenix off the list of western cities to consider. Even though it's a bigger market than ours, *nobody* there gets CBS HD from the local broadcaster because they dont send it out.

How does the LCG make the JeffCo Commisioners believe they are telling the truth with their new proposal about not illegally adding equipment later and not exceeding FCC radiation limits. We all know that (S)care has proven and documented the problems before.

Good point. Doesn't this combined with a plan to guarantee capped or reduced RF levels imply independent 3rd party testing on a regular basis (paid for by LCG of course)? This would require regular calibration of the equipment to traceable standards (sounds like JM has been through all of that) which is expensive. The funding of this kind of testing is sort of like the soft money problem; who would trust the results unless there were independent sets of independent 3rd party testing (this would be ridiculous)? The logistics for this kind of testing are tough.

Also, (speculation hat on) it seems like neither the broadcast community nor Jeffco would support periodic public RF testing. I do not believe they would like Lookout RF levels to be continuously announced in a public forum, no matter how low the levels are.

Also, I believe that would just feed the (s)cary strategy of (s)caring anybody who will listen to them.

I guess the best scenario is for a few FM stations (such as prescribed in the Mt. Morrison app) to move off of Lookout to theoretically keep long term RF levels below current levels even during the analog/digital transition period.

Don

One thing to remember, once the new site is set up and calibrated and brought on the air, there should be very little variation in the measured levels unless there is some equipment problem (broken antenna from the weather, a broken or leaky cable or such), which is 'usually' obvious since many viewers or listeners would lose signal, or unless the power from the transmitters are intentionally changed, which is not likely to happen. The less you mess with this type of equipment the longer it lasts and the less problems you have. I doubt the engineers are up there fiddling with the gear most of the time unless there is a problem.


I would think some sort of periodic testing is really only looking for slightly damaged antennas or leaky cables, or an intentional increase in power level, which is unlikely. I doubt, in general, you would see much variation at all over time. As I recall (I think I usually trust my memory, but sometimes I forget if I do or not), in the last application I believe the LCG did propose to have periodic independent testing paid for by the LCG. The FCC can also test any time they are concerned about a problem, and may do so occasionally anyway. It is also possible that Jeffco could hire a firm to provide the testing. I do believe that standard safe practices would have the LCG members doing this on their own anyway as well, just to prevent accidents and lawsuits. My guess is that there will be plenty of monitoring going on, especially during the time when both the analog and DTV channels are on the air. I am sure that this issue will be thoroughly reviewed before any building permits are approved by Jefferson County. I believe this whole topic is fair game for Tuesday, since our questions will be the same questions Jeffco and the (S)CARE folks will be asking.

Isn't the measuring of emissions Al's job? Or maybe someone could just poll the neighberhood once a week at 2 A.M. and see who is unable to sleep and awake. :D <j/k>

-John

JohnJr
You may be on to something here, we could take turns calling the folks on Lookout each night about 3AM and ask them if they are sleeping. If they are awake, the level MUST be too high.
:D :D :D

Add my name to the list of Tuesday meeting attendees. Looking forward to meeting everybody.

Malcolm

Good to hear Malcolm. I've updated the list - we're now at 26 people.....anyone else care to attend??

I am curious - where is Hot?? Are you still around reading this stuff? Long time no hear from.....

I saw that he posted something a few days ago in the HDTV Recorders section.

Good question Geof!

He didn't make the last meeting at KRMA and I don't recall his posting here in our thread for a while. HOT, or was that a.k.a. HOT are you there? Are you going to make our meeting next week? The thread misses your valuable inputs.

I was out of town for the KRMA meeting. I just got back in town today. I have put the KCNC Meeting on my calendar for 6:00 PM next Tuesday.

I will try to be there.

Welcome back Mike. No progress on this mess since you were gone - it should feel like old times......(sigh)......

Hey Mike a.k.a. HOT, welcome back to town, sure hope you can make the meeting on Tuesday. The 'beauty' :( of this thread is that you can disappear for months and when you come back nothing has changed. (I'm not saying that's a good thing, just the reality).
:( :mad: :( :mad:

FYI. Here's a link to the FCC's RF safety info page. This page provides links to bulletins re: safe RF exposure and some recent guidance to local gov't agencies re: permitting of RF broadcasting for safe exposures. I have not read this info yet, but plan to review it prior to the meeting on Tuesday.

http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/

My ears or eyes must be deceiving me. I've watched a bit of Independence Day of KDVR DT and I can detect no lipsync issues. The picture certainly isn't HD but it is a full 16x9 widescreen. Could it be that KDVR has resolved their lipsync problem?

Too bad Executive Decision isn't in HD - I'd be watching that if it were.

I know this is a bit off topic, but I couldn't wait until Tuesday night at the meeting to tell you guys! I went to the Circuit City in Littleton (Southwest Plaza) late today and they are clearing out the Sony HD100 floor model. Some locations also have extra open HD boxes that they activated and used for 2 weeks during the Olympics (now CC corp. has pulled the 119 feed and went back to the hard drive loop). This location said many times they will move open items for 50% off the regular price. It might be worth calling around or stopping in for a good deal.

By the way, to keep with the tpoic, I am a definate on Tuesday and look forward to meeting you guys!

:cool:

Time: 6:00 PM Social Hour/Tour
6:30 PM Meeting

Location: KCNC
1044 Lincoln St
Denver, CO
80203-2714


:o :o :o :o :o

This is just a final reminder of the meeting tomorrow night. I have tried to summarize the important details here since they are in posts that are scattered about the thread.

The meeting will be at KCNC's facility (1044 Lincoln Street) on Tuesday March 26th beginning with a social half-hour from 6:00 to 6:30 followed by the meeting at 6:30. KCNC personnel will incorporate a tour of the facility during the social hour. It will be lead by an on-air personality (not sure who yet as that is during their news broadcast). Parking will be available on the opposite side of Lincoln Street (west side) from KCNC in a lot marked private. There are spots designated as 'private' and 'KCNC'; KCNC has made arrangements for the guests to park in either that evening. The lot will probably accommodate 20 to 25 cars. The rest will need to park on the street.

The meeting will be attended by members of the LCG group which has prepared the DTV tower application for a new tower on Lookout Mountain. Representatives from KCNC, KMGH, KUSA, and possibly KRMA will be in attendance to discuss and answer questions about the towers and other issues.

The following items were already presented to the LCG as likely discussion points:

What is the new design for the tower? How is it different from the original application? How many towers would be eliminated once the analog signals are turned off? How have you addressed the issues which Jeffco used to reject the first application? What will be the radiation intensity levels in the populated areas around Lookout, and how do they compare with the current levels, and how do they compare with the levels proposed in the original design?

Is KRMA included in the new Lookout design and application? What would be the proposed schedule for the application, and assuming it is approved, construction of the new towers?

What do the stations propose to do during the interim in order to give the Denver area at least some access to DTV? Does KUSA plan to broadcast in any format? Will KMGH consider changing the location and power level of their interim transmitter?

What can the AVS forum group do to help with the application? Are there things other than letters that would be helpful?

From further discussions of the issues here in the forum I expect a great deal of questions and discussions on the radiation levels from the new tower in comparison with existing levels?

For those of you needing directions, use this link and type in your home address and the KCNC address and you will be all set.

http://www.mapquest.com/directions/main.adp

I don't expect to re-post this information again, so copy this posting if you need a copy of the information.

DON'T FORGET TO ENTER JohnJr's petition contest. John has promised a door prize for the guy with the most signatures. If you are not finished collecting and not ready to turn in your sheets, bring a copy for the contest. John described his prize in this paragraph from one of his posts.
********
"Finally, I kinda over-bought for this years Christmas and have a tech-gadget that many of ya'll might enjoy. It's a little thing that reads power-consumption from a wall outlet and displays the power-consumption and what it may cost you a month to operate said device(s). I hereby offer that up to whomever can prove that they got the most petition signatures. "
************

Weather reports indicate dry roads and a warm day. Recent counts indicate a turnout from between 25 to 30 people. See you at the meeting.


:cool:

In my unending quest for grace, I managed to take a "bad" step last night after I got back into town, while playing fetch with my dog. After spending most of the night in the ER, and a confirming MRI this morning, I am schedled for surgery to repair the rupture tomorrow. I am really bummed that I won't be able to attend tomorrow's meeting at KCNC, and am also bummed at the long recovery/rehabilitation time I'm facing.

I would appreciate an update on this site after the KCNC meeting, and hope you all have a productive meeting.

-Brian

Ouch! I'm sure there will be a summation and comments on the meeting. Good luck with the rehab...

That's tough Brian! I hope everything goes well in surgery!

One more reminder/addition to JM's post above about the LCG meeting. I will be bringing the "toy" to give to Geof and if he has a decided number of petititions winner, it will be awarded then. If you don't want to actually turn your petitions in tomorrow (so you can collect more), photo-copy what you have and show/give them to Geof tomorrow.

Thanks,

-John

PS. One more suggestion I have for things to do at the meeting is that I would love a "introduce yourself" portion. Where folks can say Hi, I'm JohnJr from the forum. Just a quick around the room.

JohnJr
Thanks for the reminder on the petition contest, I pulled my post together before the coffee had kicked in and it is a Monday. I have updated my meeting post with a paragraph about the contest.


Brian,
Sorry to hear about the injury. Hope the recovery is swift and complete. In the meantime, it sounds like you will have plenty of time to enjoy your HT and the latest in HD programming. Hey it could be worse.

Originally posted by Geof
My ears or eyes must be deceiving me. I've watched a bit of Independence Day of KDVR DT and I can detect no lipsync issues. The picture certainly isn't HD but it is a full 16x9 widescreen. Could it be that KDVR has resolved their lipsync problem?

Too bad Executive Decision isn't in HD - I'd be watching that if it were.

Geof,

If KDVR has started to deliver true 16x9 480i that is indeed great news! Not HDTV but AFAIK it is included in one of the new ATSC digital TV standards.

I forget what the show is that I like on KDVR that is broadcast wide-screen from Fox; I just remember missing the fact that I couldn't get it that way because of KDVR.

-John

The Jeffco Board of County Commissioners heard more public testimony tonight on the Eldorado Tower hearing. It is a shame that no-one spoke in favor of HDTV in concept, even if they did not like this site. (I did not testify either, even though I did attend the hearing). I think we missed (potentially) a great opportunity to get a feel for what the public hearing process is like.

The case has been continued until April 9th at 9:00 AM. It is likely that they will make a final decision that day.

There was considerable testimony about alternative sites, and more specifically about Squaw Mountain.

Later, someone spoke trying to convince the Board to get the FCC to change the DTV modulation to COFDM instead of 8VSB. (I think this went WAY over the Board's heads)

-Wabisabi

There was considerable testimony about alternative sites, and more specifically about Squaw Mountain.

Later, someone spoke trying to convince the Board to get the FCC to change the DTV modulation to COFDM instead of 8VSB. (I think this went WAY over the Board's heads)

Did any noteable people testify for Squaw? Was it basically (S)CARE or did some local politicians also speak up?

8VSB or COFDM is irrelevant to this matter. It's still RF and it will kill anyone who thinks about it too hard, let alone sleeps under it's influence. In fact COFDM would likely be worse for JeffCo because the transmitter power levels would have to more than double their RF output to keep the same coverage area. God, the stations would be killing off half the Front Range viewers if they made that change.......<tongue in cheek mode off>

Did any noteable people testify for Squaw? Was it basically (S)CARE or did some local politicians also speak up?

No politicians spoke, but some RF Engineers talked about the coverage from Squaw as compared to the coverage from Eldorado. They presented a letter from Channel 12 saying that they were satisfied with the coverage from Squaw. An engineer from "The Peak" FM station also testified that Squaw was a good site to broadcast from.

The point of all this testimony was to convince the Board that there is an existing, approved tower site that can handle everything that is proposed for Eldorado. If the Board thinks that this is the case, it must turn down the application for rezoning. (this is something to do with the zoning resolution and tower rezonings)

If the Board decides that Squaw is an alternative site, they probably will have to decide the same thing for both Mount Morrison and LCG. After all, how can it be an OK site one month, but not the next?


It looks like we will know their answer on the 9th.

-Wabisabi

I'm delighted Ch 12 is happy with their coverage area. Should JeffCo think that is fine I guess I will have to bill them monthly for getting my local channels on Satellite or cable because I sure as hell won't be able to pick them up OTA....I am going to drop them an email to that effect.