• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

City of Boulder going to 800 MHz?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,752
Location
Colorado
#2
That is an interesting shift from their original plans of a VHF simulcast. I guess someone must have talked them out of that wild idea.

I am curious if they are still planning on starting their own system, or if they have changed their minds about joining everyone else?
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
26
Location
Broomfield, CO
#4
They signed a contract with EF Johnson to put in a VHF P25 trunked system earlier this year. RFI last year was requesting a VHF P25 Phase 1 (upgradable to Phase II) Simulcast Multi-Site Trunking System that uses 4 Sites and 5 channels. Proposed sites are:

1) Existing Gunbarrel
2) Folsom Stadium (existing CU site)
3) Arapahoe Utilities (Believe this is the site everyone is up in arms about)
4) Booton Water Tank on Lee Hill
5) Existing Chautauqua Water Tank (want this to be failover site)
 

eyes00only

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
2,321
Location
Denver Colorado
#5
Pretty sure that will be the first VHF trunked system I've seen. Will be interesting to see how good the reception is inside buildings, etc.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
26
Location
Broomfield, CO
#6
Pretty sure that will be the first VHF trunked system I've seen. Will be interesting to see how good the reception is inside buildings, etc.
There are several VHF P25 systems out there. The state wide P25 systems in Wyoming, Missouri, Virginia, and sure there are others. Tennessee has a mixture of VHF and 700 MHz. Several smaller cities around the country are using VHF trunking as well with a mixture of DMR, NXDN and P25.

Sounds like it will be ISSI back to DTRS.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,752
Location
Colorado
#7
They signed a contract with EF Johnson to put in a VHF P25 trunked system earlier this year. RFI last year was requesting a VHF P25 Phase 1 (upgradable to Phase II) Simulcast Multi-Site Trunking System that uses 4 Sites and 5 channels.
Pretty sure that will be the first VHF trunked system I've seen. Will be interesting to see how good the reception is inside buildings, etc.
Boulder originally wanted was a VHF simulcast system, but it has been revealed in these latest land use docs related to these towers that they switched to 800 MHz for "better in-building signal penetration and coverage".

It is interesting to hear that they went with EF Johnson, which I believe will be the first time we will see an EF Johnson P25 system in the state.

Proposed sites are:

1) Existing Gunbarrel
2) Folsom Stadium (existing CU site)
3) Arapahoe Utilities (Believe this is the site everyone is up in arms about)
4) Booton Water Tank on Lee Hill
5) Existing Chautauqua Water Tank (want this to be failover site)
Along with the 800 MHz reveal, it appears that the Booton Water Tank site was dropped in favor of a "North Foothills" site because it was a poor choice for propagation. I'm curious on whether it was bad data from their consultant they used for their proposal or their switch from VHF to 800 MHz.

EDIT:
I'm not surprised. The tower will not be built at that location. No matter where they put the tower, there's going to be push-back from NIMBYs. Maybe it will never happen.

Commissioners punt vote on east Boulder communication tower following resident pushback - Boulder Daily Camera
There was no vote on the matter and has been tabled indefinitely. The tower might still be built at that location, but the City will need to do more work to prove that they have absolutely no alternatives out of three potential alternatives they had not fully vetted. This matter could return for a vote if the City is able gather the proof needed.
 
Last edited:

Steve2003

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
740
Location
Colorado
#8
For those wondering, CU Boulder will not be on the city’s new system. They will be migrating to DTRS for primary communications. Additionally there will be a new DTRS site atop Folsom Field.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,752
Location
Colorado
#9
For those wondering, CU Boulder will not be on the city’s new system. They will be migrating to DTRS for primary communications. Additionally there will be a new DTRS site atop Folsom Field.
Interesting as it sounds like CU Boulder will be up and running long before the City of Boulder with a new site is probably fully funded by the State.

I guess Boulder will just be Boulder and do their own thing. Nothing like sharing the same tower and equipment room as DTRS, duplicating coverage for the sake of saying that they own their own system. I wonder if they have realized that they have already signed up as a primary member of DTRS years ago and were given talkgroups that they can use?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top