Why this location? What exactly is being built? And what infrastructure is being developed here?
In recent weeks, the proposed microwave link mast on Falkensteinerweg in Brunn am Gebirge has sparked considerable public debate.
Some media reports and posts on the OpenPetition platform refer to a ‘42-metre lattice mast’, a ‘transmitter mast’ or a ‘mobile phone mast’.
In fact, this is an infrastructure project that requires a much more specific technical assessment.
In this article, we therefore want to explain clearly how the site came to be chosen, what infrastructure lies behind it, why the height is necessary and what functions the installation is intended to serve.
We want to make it clear that our intention is not to criticise local residents personally for having different interests.
The aim is to establish a shared factual basis for the discussion.
1. What exactly is being built?
The proposal is for a lattice mast approximately 45 metres high on a plot of land on Falkensteinerweg.
The public debate sometimes refers to a height of 42 metres. The current OpenPetition petition also uses this figure. However, media coverage and the project documentation refer to a height of approximately 45 metres. (openPetition)
Naturally, the submitted planning documents are the definitive reference when assessing this particular project.
The mast forms part of a communications infrastructure and is intended primarily for directional radio links.
This is therefore not simply a matter of erecting an isolated mast with no existing infrastructure.
The site is part of a technical infrastructure that has developed over many years.
2. Is this a ‘mobile phone mast’?
This term is repeatedly used in the public debate.
However, it creates a particular impression: a conventional mobile network site built primarily to provide coverage for mobile phones.
That is not an accurate technical description of the project proposed here.
The primary purpose of the proposed site is to provide microwave links between specified locations.
Microwave links transmit data over highly focused radio links between specific endpoints.
The mast therefore serves as a technical component of a communications network.
Although the term ‘transmitter mast’ broadly describes a structure fitted with radio antennas, it tells us nothing about the radio technology used or the function of the infrastructure behind it.
3. Why does the mast need to be approximately 45 metres high?
The height has not been chosen on the principle of ‘the higher, the better’.
Microwave links have to meet specific technical requirements.
These include:
- the location of the other endpoints,
- the necessary line of sight,
- terrain and buildings,
- the so-called Fresnel zone,
- the position and height of the antennas,
- frequency and technical characteristics of the radio path,
- and the required availability of the connection.
A microwave link therefore cannot simply be compared with any other wireless connection.
The mast's height is determined by the antenna positions required for the planned wireless links.
4. A distinctive feature: microwave antennas transmit highly focused beams
Another important point has received little explanation in the public debate so far.
Microwave antennas are not omnidirectional.
The antennas used focus radio energy specifically towards the corresponding remote station.
The planned microwave antennas have a main beam width of only about 1 degree.
This means:
The antenna is not intended to provide coverage for the immediate area around the mast.
It is intended to reach a specific remote station in the distance.
This is another reason why the mast's height matters.
The higher the antenna is mounted, the greater the vertical separation between the main beam and the area directly beneath or around the mast.
Put simply:
The mast is not tall so that as much radio energy as possible is radiated into the residential area. The antenna is mounted high so that the desired radio path works technically.
The actual exposure levels naturally depend on the frequency, transmission power, antenna type, antenna gain, alignment and technical operating parameters.
Any specific assessment must therefore be based on the relevant technical calculations, expert reports and, where necessary, measurements.
5. Why was this location chosen in the first place?
Biricon did not simply choose the current location unilaterally.
During the initial planning, the specific location was discussed with the neighbour directly affected.
In fact, we had proposed a different location.
We would originally have preferred to position the mast closer to our own building.
The neighbour, however, wanted a specific different position.
We took this request into account and had plans drawn up showing the requested position.
The resulting plan for submission to the authorities was then signed by the neighbour and his wife.
The project planning continued on this basis, and the approval process was subsequently initiated.
At that point we had no reason to assume that the jointly planned location would later be fundamentally opposed.
6. What happened next?
The situation only changed later on.
An explicit objection to the project was raised after the mast structure had already been delivered and work had begun to prepare the foundation site and verify the ground conditions in accordance with the ground investigation report.
Among the concerns raised was the fear of a substantial reduction in the value of the adjoining property.
A local campaign group opposing the project was subsequently formed, and the current public debate began.
We are not documenting this sequence of events to pass judgement on the neighbour personally.
It is relevant because parts of the current debate give the impression that we chose the location without first consulting those directly affected.
That does not reflect the history of the project as documented by us.
7. How has the project been presented to the public?
In the public debate, the project is often described simply as a “42-metre lattice mast” or a “45-metre transmission mast”.
The local campaign group describes the project as, among other things, an additional lattice mast on private land in a residential area. This description has also been adopted in the political debate. (openPetition)
The problem with this simplified description is not that the mast's height is incorrect or that it is not a structure fitted with radio antennas.
The problem is that it gives very little indication of the infrastructure's actual technical function.
The mast itself is simply the visible structure.
What matters is the infrastructure operated on it and the purpose it serves.
8. The underlying infrastructure has been in place for many years
The history of this infrastructure goes back much further than the current mast project.
Biricon has supported the development and operation of FunkFeuer infrastructure in the region since 2006.
According to our records, a fibre connection via the ASFINAG infrastructure to the Vienna Internet eXchange has been in place since 2015.
Since 2017 the fire brigade tower has been used as an important distribution site for Funkfeuer. An experimental network that provides free internet to all participants/citizens
Biricon provides the fire service with free internet access via this infrastructure.
In 2025, the backbone connection was expanded further with a 10 Gbit/s dark fibre connection to the E-Shelter/NTT data centre.
Connectivity is distributed via redundant paths through the existing infrastructure.
The planned mast therefore does not mark the start of an entirely new network.
It is part of the ongoing development of infrastructure built up over many years.
9. What role does FunkFeuer play?
FunkFeuer is an open community network.
Biricon has supported this infrastructure for many years, providing technical infrastructure and sites, among other things.
The planned mast infrastructure is therefore also linked to the further development of this open communications infrastructure.
The project is thus not solely about serving individual commercial customers.
10. What does this have to do with preparing for blackouts?
Communication is essential if businesses, organisations and local authorities are to remain operational during prolonged outages.
Biricon's premises therefore already have various systems in place to maximise resilience.
These include:
- Solar PV
- Battery storage with a capacity of around 400 kWh
- Diesel backup power supply
- redundant network connections
- dark fibre connection
- our own servers and infrastructure components
- backup and disaster recovery systems
These measures are intended to keep the technical infrastructure running for as long as possible, even during prolonged outages.
The planned mast forms part of this wider infrastructure concept.
It is, of course, not a complete civil protection system in itself.
However, robust communications infrastructure can provide an important technical foundation during a crisis or blackout.
11. What about potential health effects?
We take this question seriously too.
Radio installations must comply with the applicable legal and technical requirements.
For a microwave installation, the specific radiation pattern is also crucial.
The directional antennas used focus radio energy tightly towards the corresponding remote station. The planned antennas have a main beam width of about 1 degree.
The main beam therefore does not point vertically down towards the property; it is specifically aligned with the corresponding remote station.
This is another reason why the mast's height is technically relevant.
The fact that a mast is 45 metres tall therefore does not mean that radiofrequency exposure beneath it is correspondingly high.
However, any specific assessment must always consider the antennas, frequencies, transmission powers and alignments actually used, along with the relevant calculations or measurements.
We therefore wish neither to dismiss health concerns outright nor to make unsubstantiated claims about health effects.
The technical facts are what matter.
12. What about the appearance of the town?
The appearance of the town is a legitimate part of the debate.
A 45-metre lattice mast is visible. We do not dispute that.
However, any assessment of the visual impact should also take account of what the site's surroundings will actually look like in future.
A noise barrier approximately 14 metres high is planned directly behind the proposed mast as part of works associated with the A21. Under the current plans, construction is due to begin in 2027 or 2028.
The site's immediate surroundings will therefore change considerably in any event.
The noise barrier itself will be a long structure around 14 metres high, making it considerably more dominant in terms of the area it occupies in the view.
In our view, it therefore makes sense to assess the visual impact in the context of the entire future surroundings, rather than by looking at the mast in isolation.
The mast is not situated in an unchanged landscape.
It is located very close to existing motorway infrastructure and in front of a planned large-scale noise barrier.
A realistic visualisation should therefore show not only the mast today, but also the surroundings planned for the future.
13. “Why not simply choose another location?”
This is an understandable question.
An alternative location is not automatically technically suitable simply because it is outside a residential area.
For a microwave link to work, the following requirements must be met, among others:
- adequate radio line of sight
- suitable height
- a suitable remote station
- adequate Fresnel zone clearance
- appropriate frequency planning
- power supply
- network or fibre connection
- resilience
- feasibility of providing the necessary technical infrastructure
- eligibility for approval
A location may therefore look attractive on a map and still be technically unsuitable.
In addition, an alternative site would need to be equipped with all the necessary infrastructure from scratch.
The existing infrastructure at the planned site already meets key requirements for high-availability operation.
The OpenPetition itself lists the substantial additional infrastructure costs of an alternative location as an argument in favour of the project. (openPetition)
14. “But there is already internet access and mobile coverage”
Yes.
But the question is not whether Brunn am Gebirge has internet access and mobile coverage in general.
The question is:
Which communications links are available in this particular case, how much redundancy do they provide, and which additional wireless links are needed for the existing or future infrastructure?
An existing mobile network, for example, does not automatically replace a dedicated microwave link between two specific sites.
Similarly, a single fibre connection does not automatically replace a redundant wireless link.
Different technologies serve different purposes.
15. What about the claim that this is purely a commercial project?
Biricon is a company and of course provides commercial communication services.
At the same time, the existing infrastructure serves a range of other purposes.
These include:
- Support for FunkFeuer
- Internet access for the fire station
- redundant communications links
- Infrastructure for customers
- planned connections to additional sites
- Resilience and backup power
Commercial and infrastructure functions are therefore not mutually exclusive.
16. What do the petition figures actually tell us?
The current OpenPetition shows 309 signatures.
Of these, 219 are attributed to Brunn am Gebirge, 65 come from other regions and 25 are listed as private. The statistics also assign 201 signatures directly to Brunn am Gebirge; others come from places including Perchtoldsdorf, Liesing, Maria Enzersdorf and Mödling. (openPetition)
These figures show that the issue attracts interest beyond the immediate vicinity of the site.
However, they tell us nothing about whether individual supporters fully understand the project's technical function or what personally motivated them to sign.
This is another reason why we believe it is useful to provide factual information about the project.
17. We take local residents' concerns seriously
We do not expect every local resident to welcome a 45-metre mast in their neighbourhood.
A structure like this changes its immediate surroundings.
Concerns about the appearance of the town are also legitimate.
What we would like, however, is a discussion that takes all the essential information into account.
That includes more than just the mast's height.
It also includes:
- its actual technical function,
- the history of how the location was chosen,
- the infrastructure already in place,
- the requirements of the microwave links,
- resilience,
- the future surroundings,
- the planned noise barrier,
- and the question of which alternatives would actually work technically.
18. Our aim
We do not want to persuade anyone to set aside their personal concerns.
However, we want to prevent complex technical infrastructure from being judged solely on the image of a “45-metre mobile phone mast in a garden”.
The planned mast is a visible part of a much larger infrastructure project.
The infrastructure behind it has developed over many years.
FunkFeuer, fibre, microwave links, redundancy, backup power and the potential for more resilient communications in a crisis are all part of this wider picture.
At the same time, we accept that questions will be raised about the appearance of the town, the immediate neighbourhood and the specific design.
These questions should be answered on the basis of planning documents, technical data and expert reports – rather than assumptions.
Transparency rather than slogans
The public debate has shown how quickly a complex technical project can be reduced to a handful of terms.
“42-metre mast.”
“45-metre transmission mast.”
“Mobile phone mast.”
“Residential area.”
Each of these terms describes only a small part of the overall picture.
We therefore want to share the full history and technical background openly.
This article is to be supplemented on an ongoing basis as new verifiable information becomes available.
Questions about the project are very welcome.
Our aim is a factual discussion based on the actual technical and planning circumstances.
Biricon IT Services GmbH
Brunn am Gebirge