The Wireless City 2.0

Planning a wireless network for your community

by Meryl K. Evans, Editor, Connected Digest

Complimentary White Paper Communities Step Up to Challenges with Wireless-based Technology Strategies The challenges communities face today — increasing productivity, lowering costs, bringing improved performance to business and government, and delivering greater citizen satisfaction — do not have simple solutions. “Going wireless” offers many potential benefits for communities, while being practical and cost-effective. Download

Naturally, these games are based on the real history of American cities. Yet, the definition of “progress” continues to change. Fifty years ago, many cities gleefully tore up their streetcar systems, thinking that freeways would solve all transportation problems. Some of these same cities are now rebuilding light-rail lines on the exact same streetcar routes to relieve congestion on overcrowded freeways.

The information superhighway is also being rebuilt across the U.S. To lure top employers and creative talent, many cities are now implementing wireless networks to provide an Internet connection across broad swaths of their cities. If your city is thinking about going wireless, what can you do to plan ahead and make the most out of this innovative investment?

More efficient public safety services

Steve Taylor, senior solutions architect with the Advanced Solutions Team at Intel^® Solution Services, thinks the first step communities should consider is the purpose the wireless network will serve. He distinguishes between two different goals.

“Communities that have deployed wireless networks usually do so for two reasons,” Taylor says. “The first is to improve public safety by giving wireless network access to emergency workers and government agencies.”

The goal of a public safety wireless network is to lower operating costs and increase efficiencies. “Think of a fire engine racing toward a big fire,” Taylor says. “Long before it reaches the fire, the chief can access building plans and create a better, safer plan to fight the fire.”

In a bigger emergency, the wireless network can be a backup means of communication. “For example, in a natural disaster, the wireless network could be used as a means to rapidly restore the communications network,” Taylor says. “It could be used to keep the city’s emergency response infrastructure operating on a limited basis.”

Law enforcement can also benefit from a well-planned wireless network. “Video surveillance is much easier to set up using a wireless network,” Taylor says. “Connect a video camera to a wireless transmitter, and you’re good to go.”

Police officers and emergency medical technicians can also access city data from their vehicles, allowing them to make better decisions in a crisis quickly. Wireless transmitters can also be used to better track city vehicles.

“When more government service providers have access to more data in more places,” Taylor says, “new efficiencies emerge almost immediately. If cities are willing to build new processes around their wireless capabilities, they can also measurably reduce costs.”

A boost for business

A more common image of a “wireless city” is that of people from all walks of life accessing the Internet from parks, sidewalk cafes and front porches. Cities may include public safety process improvements in their reasons for implementing a wireless network, but the “cutting edge” image creates the most buzz for going wireless.

“Many cities believe that implementing a city-wide wireless network will be an economic development stimulus,” Taylor says. “And it’s definitely a plus that attracts top-notch employers — and the well-paid people who work for them.”

Having a wireless network in place benefits both employers and employees. Taylor points out that many small businesses still don’t have access to broadband Internet access. And when they do, it is often too expensive.

“Wired broadband Internet service for businesses hasn’t followed the price points for residential broadband,” Taylor says. “Residential rates are going down while speeds increase. The same isn’t true for business service.”

For the people filling those jobs, a wireless network allows them the flexibility to work from almost anywhere. “Increasingly, knowledge workers are working from their home — or anywhere outside their office,” Taylor says. “Highly creative or highly technical workers demand flexibility in how they can work.”

A recent Washington Post story highlights this trend. The article demonstrates how more and more knowledge workers are leaving urban areas but are then frustrated when they can’t get cable or DSL Internet service in their homes.

Bob Kavula, senior solution architect with Intel Solution Services, explains why. “For cable or phone companies, the cost of wired broadband access limits where it can be deployed. In a new suburban or a former urban area with a sparse population, it’s not cost-effective to roll out wired cable or DSL access — the traditional, wired communications that are under heavy government regulation.

“Wireless communication isn’t under the same regulation,” Kavula says. “Broadband wireless access can fill the void if the demand is there.”

Planning a successful implementation

Public safety and economic development are really two paths to the same goal — a stronger, more economically sound city. To help reach that goal, planning a wireless implementation means thinking several steps ahead.

Kavula says, “I worked recently with a city that put in a pilot program for building inspectors and mobile field workers to update data on PDAs then load it onto the city’s network wirelessly.

“This pilot program worked so well that the city wanted to expand the pilot to hotspots in parks and on public transportation, opening up the wireless network to the general population.” 

Kavula continues, “Since there was no comprehensive strategy for the first pilot, expanding the service was that much more difficult. The city is now struggling to tie the two goals into one solution.”

The way to be better prepared is to collect requirements, ideas and big-picture goals from all the stakeholders who could later benefit from a wireless network. Limiting the scope of your project to just one narrow goal can be a costly mistake.

Get consensus and champion scalability

“Consensus and scalability are key,” Kavula says. “Get a consensus on what the goals of the original deployment will be, as well as any future goals. Define those goals — public safety, government access, economic development, digital inclusion or quality of life.”

Kavula also feels it’s important for cities to obtain bids from multiple vendors. “With a project this large that has the possibility to change how a city works, it’s vital for many vendors to present as many ideas as possible. See how different technologies could work together. Ask how vendors have helped cities create more efficient processes. Gather case studies of how small businesses have benefited from wireless broadband.”

No matter which vendor you choose, Kavula stresses the need for scalability. “Every vendor should be able to tell you how it will expand your program when the time comes. Vendors should seamlessly expand your network from the public safety realm to economic development and vice versa.”

Retain ownership of the network by the city

As with any major municipal project, implementing a wireless network isn’t the end of the story. Operating costs will continue to be an item on the city’s budget for as long as the network is active. As cities look deeper into developing a wireless network plan, they need to consider two key questions: Who will own the network? What is the subscription model?

Kavula feels strongly that the city should own the wireless network. “Simply put,” Kavula says, “having a private company or franchise own the network is not in a city’s best interest.”

Retaining ownership of the network is vital for the city to maintain control of the operating contract. Kavula feels that cities should contract with experienced vendors that can deploy a wireless network, but in the end, the city should own the network.

“What if down the road you are unhappy with this company?” Kavula asks. “If it owns your network, which is its proprietary technology, there’s not much you can do.

“A company that owns your network could also later decide that providing service to your city isn’t profitable,” Kavula says. “It could simply decide to shut down your network and leave town.”

Choose the best subscription model

The idea of “digital inclusion” is that everyone in the city has access to the Internet. Inclusion is quickly thwarted when city residents are faced with yet another fee for city services.

Kavula is emphatic on this point. “Access to the network should be provided free or at a very low cost.

“A monthly fee of even $10 has been shown to dramatically lower participation in other cities,” Kavula says. “Free access increases participation, which is the goal of a digital community.”

Some cities create limits on what “free” means. Access to the wireless network is free for everyone, but users can only access HTTP (Web sites) at a rate of 1 MB per second. Several cities also allow Internet ads at the free access level to help defray costs.

“If you set the right expectations for free service,” Kavula says, “people will realize the benefits and see past the slower speed (compared to their home or business connection) or the Internet ads.”

Set expectations for success

Both Kavula and Taylor feel that setting expectations for wireless service is critical to the success of the project. Common sense is a good place to start with those expectations.

“Many people raise concerns about security, especially when the wireless network is deployed across the city,” Taylor says. “The biggest problem a city will face is protecting most users from a small number of malicious users.”

Kavula says, “We can address many of these concerns through encryption and channelization of data. But the truth is, you can’t protect every good wireless user from every bad wireless user.”

He draws an analogy between cell phone users and home phone use. “When you talk on your cell phone, you realize that it is less secure than your home phone. You realize — and accept — the security risks of having a private conversation on a phone that transmits wirelessly.”

Expectations are also important for the range of service. “The idea that you can access a wireless network from every square inch of a city is really not plausible,” Taylor says, “no matter how great the vendor or how powerful the network.”

Outdoor space is the biggest obstacle, especially for cities with population spread over broad geographic areas. Cities with large areas of parkland or sparsely populated pockets also present unique problems.

“Completely blanketing these areas with a wireless signal may not always make economic sense,” Taylor says. “If you decide not to cover those areas, it’s important to make that decision well-known.”

Cities should communicate these expectations openly and honestly. “If you misrepresent what the network can do,” Taylor says, “you are bound to disappoint people.”

Kavula adds, “Create realistic expectations for coverage and speed of service. That way, more people will participate and create the digital community you want.”

Access to the future

Creating another avenue for communication in your city is not a small undertaking. How you plan, build and implement your digital network could affect the growth of your community for years to come.

“Wireless access opens the door to countless applications of technology,” Kavula says. “The opportunities for innovation and participation are endless.”

In order to make the most of this bold move, communities of all sizes should plan ahead — not just for the system they want now, but the system that the future could demand of them. The worst mistake in this real-life game of city planning is being short-sighted.

*Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others

Bob Kavula is a senior solution architect with Intel Solution Services, focusing on mobile/wireless infrastructures deployments and mobile work forces in the oil and gas industry and digital communities. He has a broad background working for both telecommunications equipment manufacturers and service providers. Bob’s background is in network and protocol design, equipment and systems design, and wireless technologies. His previous experience includes time at AT&T Bell Laboratories, Digital Switch Corporation, Alcatel Network Systems, MCI WorldCom and Qwest Communications.

Steve Taylor is a senior solution architect with Intel Solution Services, responsible for working with and developing wireless solutions for enterprise and government organizations. Steve has worked side-by-side with federal, state and local governments to help shape wireless security policy and architect wireless solutions for end-users.  He holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Virginia Tech and a master’s degree in Business Administration from George Mason University.