AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 388 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,326 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Due to the sure size of the origional thread, I need to close it and start this thread to continue it...Thanks all for such a great posts.


Here is the origional thread.... HERE


Thanks!


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

David Bott
It's A World Of Entertainment...Experience It!

AV Science/AVS Forum Admin
http://www.avscience.com
http://www.avsforum.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
Welcome to the continuation of the Denver HDTV Tower thread.


Thanks Dave, I did see a free movie on ExpressVu HDTV, however I thought it was a glitch.




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

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,658 Posts
Quote:
I personally feel the towers belong on Lookout, and if the neighbors object (as long as the towers are safe according to FCC standards) then they shouldn't have bought there in the first place.
I absolutely positively agree.


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

Geof
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
FYI reminder for those of you with access to the PBS feed tonight (EVu, C-Band, or KRMA), this half hour program is scheduled for 8:30 MST on the national HD feed according to the PBS web page.


KARTCHNER CAVERNS: ALIVE WITH WONDER

January 12, 2001—10:30 p.m. ET(check local listings)

KUAT

Note: High Definition

Imagine squirming through a tiny hole on a remote Arizona ranch and discovering a fascinating -- even mystical -- underground environment. This program explores the beauty and natural wonder of a 'living cave,' with a richness and diversity of formations such as 'soda straws,' 'butterscotch,' 'bacon' and 'fried eggs.' Kept secret for 14 years in order to protect it from cave hunters, learn how this marvel of natural architecture was formed (and is still forming), and examine the extensive construction and ongoing preservation efforts necessary to protect this fragile underground ecosystem





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

jm in Boulder
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
OK fellow enthusiasts. Here is your opening to do something and perhaps show you really want HDTV in Denver. I just got off the phone with Tom Plant (my local state representative, and the person mentioned in the Boulder Daily Camera article I posted earlier today). I discussed the entire situation with him and plan to talk with him again tomorrow. He said that although he thinks it is premature to get the legislature to step in to prevent the towers from going to Eldorado, he is willing to listen to our story, and would consider introducing a bill at the state level which might bring this issue to some resolution before the courts can finish.

I will need your help on this one. It will require more than watching TV though, it will require some effort on our part to help Tom understand the issues, and then for us to come to a consensus as to what should be done at the state level to solve this problem. I am willing to spearhead this effort (as long as it doesn't cost me any money), but I will need support in providing ACCURATE information for Tom, as a well as the state legislature needs to be involved. As I mentioned in a previous post today, I plan to also talk to Terry Phillips this weekend as well, so I hope I can also get some support in the Senate as well.


Here is a copy of the letter I sent Tom after we talked on the phone. I sent him a copy of my letter to the FCC from Sept. and told him I will be willing to answer questions and provide information as needed to help with the cause.


******

Tom

Thank you very much for taking the time to call me back this evening. This subject is so extensive and has been going on for so long that it is nearly impossible to cover in a short time. The bottom line of what myself and most of my fellow HDTV enthusiasts feel is that the new digital towers should indeed be placed in a single location, and that location should logically be Lookout Mountain, since it has been the existing site for nearly 50 years for nearly all radio and TV towers. I do NOT want the entire front range covered with TV and radio transmit antennas, but since they are necessary I would hope the towers can continue to be confined to a single location. This is the only way to limit the visual pollution involved.


We believe that although the local affiliates have been dragging their feet on the issue to save costs, it is true that Jeffco officials show no indication of wanting to solve this problem other than to 'move the towers somewhere else'. The impact of their lack of decision is that the entire front range area including numerous counties, are being deprived of the privilege of receiving HDTV signals. Business which sell digital equipment are also impacted. This strikes me as an urban planning issue in which all of the people in a dozen counties are being held hostage while a special interest group in Jeffco (CARE) ties up the Jeffco commissioners in the interest of getting the TV towers off of Lookout in an effort to drive up their property values. I hope you will be willing to work with those of us interested in getting HDTV to the Denver area, as we are now pretty much the ONLY city in the top 20 TV markets without access to HD network television.


I have enclosed a letter on the subject which I sent to the FCC in September, in which I requested the FCC step in and force Jeffco to allow the towers on Lookout Mountain. I hope this will help you begin to understand the problem. I would be willing to help you in any way I can to understand the problem and prepare legislation if you agree that is the proper course. I can also bring a large group of HDTV enthusiasts to bear, who have been following the issue on the national Audio/Video Science Forum for several years. We could bring numerous local citizens, as well as national experts, to help in this matter.


Thank you for your time, I hope to talk to you again soon. (The letter is a Microsoft Word document, but I can resend it to you in another format if that is necessary).


John Martinko

Boulder, Colorado


********


I hope we are all on board in trying to get this situation resolved, and I think this is the best way to do it, unless we are all willing to sit back and let this thing play out in the courts. To me this is a regional planning issue. Jeffco does not have the right to hold half the state hostage from HDTV in order to keep the CARE members voting for them.


I would like to hear some of your ideas on how we could propose legislation in this matter. Please post it here. If we can convince Tom and/or Terry to introduce legislation, we will need supporters to show up at meetings etc. and we will need people to help research issues and answer questions. This might not cost you money, but it may take up some of your time. Let me know your thoughts on all of this. I hope I will not be out alone on this one.


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

jm in Boulder
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Here is the latest news on the Eldorado Tower in today's Daily Camera.
http://www.bouldernews.com/news/local/12ltowr.html


It mentions a group formed by Eldorado citizens to keep the towers out of Eldorado. It also mentions that Tom Plant and Alice Madden are now involved. I have a call through to Tom Plant this morning since he is my local rep. to discuss the issue. I hope to bring him up to speed. I also left a message with Chris Barge and hope to catch him today as well. I am also hoping to get a chance to talk to Terry Phillips the State Senate Assistant Minority Leader at a post election party tomorrow night here in town.


My personal feeling is that we need to align ourselves with the Eldorado folks, but also to try to use this exposure of the issue to bring this to a head in the state legislature as well. I personally feel the towers belong on Lookout, and if the neighbors object (as long as the towers are safe according to FCC standards) then they shouldn't have bought there in the first place.




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

jm in Boulder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
Legislators get to introduce five bills each year. With approval of the leadership a late bill can be introduced.


If we want a bill this year it has to be submitted soon.




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

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,658 Posts
John,

I agree that Lookout Mountain is the best place for these towers, and any future towers as long as FCC safety and Health requirements are met. The problem is the land is not zoned to allow anyone to construct a tower and therefore the first step is to get the property rezoned. I agree that JeffCo is (in effect) holding the rest of the Front Range hostage but do we really want the state stepping in and forcing JeffCo to rezone the land for these towers? Where does this process end? Do you want the state telling Boulder County how to deal with their land use issues?


I’m not sure what state legislation could do other than stipulate some sort of Front Range Scenery (or visual impact, etc) requirement but then again the state would effectively be telling JeffCo how to use their land.


I suppose a carrot could be dangled and that would be for the state to buyout the Lookout Mountain residents if JeffCo changes the zoning on all of the existing lots but I am not sure the state would be willing to fork over the dough for that. I don’t think an eminent domain case can be made with respect to these towers and HDTV.


I wish I had better ideas but I’m just an idiot into [electronic] toys….



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

Geof
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Geof:
John,

I agree that Lookout Mountain is the best place for these towers, and any future towers as long as FCC safety and Health requirements are met. The problem is the land is not zoned to allow anyone to construct a tower and therefore the first step is to get the property rezoned. I agree that JeffCo is (in effect) holding the rest of the Front Range hostage but do we really want the state stepping in and forcing JeffCo to rezone the land for these towers? Where does this process end? Do you want the state telling Boulder County how to deal with their land use issues?


I?ot sure what state legislation could do other than stipulate some sort of Front Range Scenery (or visual impact, etc) requirement but then again the state would effectively be telling JeffCo how to use their land.


I suppose a carrot could be dangled and that would be for the state to buyout the Lookout Mountain residents if JeffCo changes the zoning on all of the existing lots but I am not sure the state would be willing to fork over the dough for that. I donÂ*´hink an eminent domain case can be made with respect to these towers and HDTV.


Geof

I have run out of patience with this whole process. As a native of this state, what I am most concerned about is that we are going to end up with radio towers on Lookout, KRMA and more radio towers on Mt. Morrison, three huge towers on Eldorado (probably not being used for the most part), and the entire view of the front range from Denver looking like an antenna parking lot. We have one mountain "polluted'" with towers, and I would prefer to keep it that way. It also works for technical reasons better than the others as well. As long as the FCC power flux density requirements are met, I think the towers should be there. If Jeffco wants a single tower with all of the DTV stations (which I think is a VERY good idea BTW) then so be it, if they want each station with its own tower, so be it. I am sick of this whole mess and I do not feel like waiting for the courts to make up their minds in a few years. As we all know, courts always have the last answer, but they don't always get it right. This is a chance to get it the way we want it. In addition, I am quite sure we can get support here in Boulder for anything that prevents towers on Eldorado, and that probably includes a lawyer and/or financial support from the good folks that live up that way as well as Boulder County. For that reason, I am going to do my best to pursue this. It will not hurt our chances if others from the forum are willing to help. That may be in a lot of ways from helping find information, contacting your own state reps to support the bill, to showing up at the capitol to show support. I am trying to do something to counteract the influence being welded by CARE in Jeffco. This is a regional planning issue that affects more than just Jeffco county. Since Tom said he might consider a bill to keep the towers off Eldorado next year, I simply figured why not do us both a favor, and just force the towers onto Lookout where they belong anyway. It helps solve the dilemma the Boulder folks have as well as ours, and I think we need the support of more than just the half dozen of us who write this forum.


I would hope others would be willing to kick in some time, or at least some phone calls of support to their local reps. I think we have all made enough calls to the Jeffco commissioners and we know what good that has done.


As Dennis Miller said to kick off the new season last night on HBO,

"That's just my opinion, I could be wrong".


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

jm in Boulder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,658 Posts
Quote:
....what I am most concerned about is that we are going to end up with radio towers on Lookout, KRMA and more radio towers on Mt. Morrison, three huge towers on Eldorado (probably not being used for the most part), and the entire view of the front range from Denver looking like an antenna parking lot. We have one mountain "polluted'" with towers, and I would prefer to keep it that way.
I agree with that. I even said that several times very early in the original thread. If the State Legislature thinks this is something that can be legislated I am all for it. I guess what I did not make clear is I didn't think this could be legislated, but hey I could certainly be wrong. I certainly think JeffCo and CARE need wake up calls and a reality check.


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

Geof
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Geof

The first thing I talked to Tom about is whether it was even possible to legislate in this matter. He seems to think it is based upon their investigation for the Eldorado case. That is why he was looking at doing something next year if it was still an issue. I plan to talk with him at length on that subject. I was also hoping for some suggestions and insight from the forum members on ways to attack the issue. Understand here, that Tom's motivation for doing something is tied to the Eldorado towers and the local Eldorado "nimbys". I am just hoping to provide them some focus on the real issue as I see it. Eldorado, Mt. Morrison, etc. would not even be on the table for consideration if the towers were being built on Lookout. "Help" get the towers built on Lookout, and the Eldorado problems go away. Until or unless CARE can show me that the towers will exceed FCC allowable power levels on Lookout, I simply want to let the folks here in Boulder help us keep the towers there. I also think a side benefit is that if the state gets involved, we may see HD transmitters sooner than we will if we leave this to Jeffco, CARE, the LCG and the courts. I do not think that the legislature's motivation in all this will necessarily match mine. Politics sometimes makes strange bedfellows.


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

jm in Boulder
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Geof:
I agree with that. I even said that several times very early in the original thread. If the State Legislature thinks this is something that can be legislated I am all for it. I guess what I did not make clear is I didn't think this could be legislated, but hey I could certainly be wrong. I certainly think JeffCo and CARE need wake up calls and a reality check.

I just got back from meeting with Tom Plant. I also talked to Alice Madden the other state rep from Boulder as well as a chance meeting of one of the organizers of the new group of Eldorado citizens getting together to fight the towers on Eldorado. It was interesting to say the least. I don't feel like getting into this tonight, I have things to do, but I will let you all in on a couple of things.


One of the members of the Eldorado group is an EMC expert from NIST, and that will help in dealing with all of the radiation issues. I also offered my services, as well as the support of the group for any 'research' that needs to be done. There will also be some meetings at the state house on the subject next week. I will try to post any info I get on any meetings, although I don't know if anyone here can get out of work very often to support such meetings.


Geof asked the question of what can the state do. The beauty of working with the state reps, is that they also have legal councils. Both Tom and Alice told me that they have already asked their legal advisors to help to see what the legal issues are with Eldorado, and they will expand the research to include what can be done to keep the visual pollution of towers from getting outside of Lookout. We now have legal help on our side as well. Geof, I can't answer your question just yet, but I can assure you if there are legal remedies at the state level we will know what they are very soon. This is one of those times when all of my years of working in politics as a precinct committee person come in handy. I would be even more excited about all of this if I heard from some of the other members of our Denver group here in the forum.


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

jm in Boulder


[This message has been edited by JMartinko (edited 01-13-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,658 Posts
John,

Good work. Just keep working the problem as you're doing. Once we know what the State Representatives think the legal options are that may determine what, if anything, we can do to support this.


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

Geof
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
KCNC lost me for the AFC playoff game which I watched in HDTV from WBZ-DT in Boston on my ExpressVu 6000.


Denver needs a digital tower.


I like the idea of getting the Colorado General Assembly involved.


Governor Owens needs to see HDTV.


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

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,658 Posts
Quote:
KCNC lost me for the AFC playoff game
They lost me as well. I did not watch the game and will not watch Ch 4 until they get something going on their DT channel.


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

Geof
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Well, I DID watch the game and even in nasty NTSC.


Large Screen HDTV: $5000


ExpressVu HD receiver for the playoffs (with subscription)for HDTV viewing: $600


That shot of Al Davis nearly in tears at the end of the game: "PRICELESS"!


Al Davis doesn't own the Raidahs, Shannon Sharpe does!


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

jm in Boulder


[This message has been edited by JMartinko (edited 01-15-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
Moving thread to top again.


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

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
The only problem with ExpressVu HDTV is that they do not always show the CBS HDTV Feed. They switch between networks.


It would be nice for CBS and NBC to get on the air in Denver.


Onward for legislation in the Colorado General Assembly.


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

Hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
507 Posts
I think the work John has started with Tom Plant is terrific. While I'm not in favor in general of a "no-more-towers-on-El Dorado-period" type of bill (there are just too many variables to consider for each case), I do think that the opposition that is starting to the Colorado location just illustrates that no matter where you put DTV towers, someone isn't going to like it. That being the case, they should stay on Lookout where they have been for 50 years. And the LCG proposal would actually reduce the number of towers there.


A legislative approach makes perfect sense to me, because it is definitely not just a local land use issue.


We have a new representative, Bryan Jameson--I could send him an e-mail or letter, outlining the issue and asking him to discuss the issue with Tom Plant, if that makes sense.


Mark


Mark


 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,174 Posts
Mark


As you know, the Boulder Reps are going to be coming at this from the "keep it off Eldorado" position first, and let the towers go on Lookout second. I am trying to convince them that expiditing the tower build on Lookout accomplishes both our goals, Colorado gets HDTV and they get a clean Eldorado since there won't be anyone for Pinnacle to lease to. I think it would be great if everyone here contacted their reps in some form or fashion to let them know there are a lot of people tired of the issue not getting resolved. I think it makes the most sense to only have one 'visually polluted' mountain and that is Lookout in my mind, since we know Jeffco isn't going to pay to move all of the towers to another site. The real question will be how do you legislate such an issue. This is obviously a 'regional' land use issue, but it will take the lawyers to figure out how to attack this. I don't expect a quick solution, but I figure even if it took a year it will be faster than waiting for the endless court cases and appeals to get resolved. The only other solution is to make constant phone calls to the Jeffco commissioners, but unless you live in their voting district, they don't care what you think.


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

jm in Boulder
 
1 - 20 of 388 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top