| Posted by | Messages (sorted from oldest to newest) |
Thursday, June 14, 2007
leawillow
Parcela
I've made 1 posts
Send private message to leawillow
|
There is pressure from within our Community to install a WiFi Mast, located on the roof of our block and have sub - transmitters on the other blocks.
I have an objection against this installation because of the real (or perceived) emissions being of danger to my family. Also I believe it could have an adverse affect on the value of our apartment.
Is the community allowed to do this and what rights do I have available to stop this going ahead?
Spam post? If so please click here to report it
|
17 Jun 2007 5:08 PM
Karensun
Villa
I'm in Orihuela Costa
I've made 1358 posts
Send private message to Karensun
|
Hola, can you put in your profile so we know where you are please. Thanks.
_______________________
 ' Do unto others as you would be done by'
Don't give me grief, I can find it by myself 
Spam post? If so please click here to report it
|
17 Jun 2007 6:17 PM
Pitby
Villa
I'm in Dubai and Duquesa
I've made 1036 posts
Send private message to Pitby
|
Leawillow, have you researched the potential health hazards involved here? From what I've read, they are not proven at all. How large is your community and is this hotspot just to serve your community? A wi-fi mast for a small community is nothing like a mobile mast installed by a main telephone service provider - in fact, as far as I am aware, it needn't even be a "mast" for a small area. It may be a dish even.
For example, we have five computers in our home, linked to one connection wirelessly (except for my computer which is cable connected, the others link wirelessly) and that is from a tiny modem on my desk. And, if my network wasn't secure, I know households in the immediate vicinity could access our connection as well. We managed to piggy back numerous unsecured networks whilst on vacation last year on my husband's laptop, and I am sure those connections had the same sort of set up we have at home here. So scale it up and you are most definitely not talking about a massive mast emitting giga-watts of energy!! (or whatever the terminology is).
Personally, we have a community of about 700 apartments and there has been suggestion that we should look into installing a wi-fi hotspot - rather than each individual owner have to pay for adsl installation in their apartment. It could be an added value to the community, rather than a damaging aspect to your property values.
However, if this is something you feel strongly about, I'm sure Karensun will be able to advise of your rights in the community.
All the best,
_______________________
www.duquesavillage.net www.KeyDubai.com
Spam post? If so please click here to report it
|
17 Jun 2007 7:11 PM
Karensun
Villa
I'm in Orihuela Costa
I've made 1358 posts
Send private message to Karensun
|
Hi Leawillow, it's Karensun again !
Just so I understand...........................you do mean a WiFi system ? Or do you mean a mast that transfers a signal to another signal?
A WiFi would enable everyone to be connected on a wireless system but the other type of mast requires each person to be 'hard wired' to the mast in order to recieve broadband.
When a company approached our apartment block to install the latter type of mast, my husband, who is Preidente, and myself did loads of research about the effects of this mast and the conclusion was that there is no evidence of any danger to humans.
WiFi is now present in many areas in England and from lots of places you can get a free internet connection, ie, Norwich.
There has been a programme fairly recently, Trevor MacDonald ( again ) about this system mainly about it's use in schools. The programme was, as you would expect, heavily biased against WiFi. The chappy from the World Health Org. was only given about 5 seconds of coverage in the half hour programme.
During the programme, in a classroom environment, the effects of the WiFi was measured and the only time it came over what is supposedly the safe average was when the kids were downloading something.....................which as was pointed out.......they were not supposed to be doing anyway!.
From the point of view about your rights in the Community, the Presidente has the right to agree to anything which benifits the Community. Obviously any Presidente should take into consideration all points of view and ensure there is no danger to anyone.
We have the type of mast that sends a signal to another signal and has to be hard wired, the agent pays the Community 300euro each quarter for allowing them to put this mast on the roof, so it is a benifit to the Community.
Considering the amount of TV aereals and other objects ie pagodas etc that are already on the roof, the mast, although higher, makes very little aesthetic difference.
The contract from the agents also states there is no danger from this mast from emmission or radiation. It is a proven fact that there is probably more danger from your microwave.
Please understand that I write this not from trying to justify the fact that we have a mast on our roof, BUT from some extensive research.
Hope this helps.
_______________________
' Do unto others as you would be done by'
Don't give me grief, I can find it by myself
Spam post? If so please click here to report it
|