On 7/8/19 11:29 AM, Richard Solomon wrote:
A tower may be a thing of beauty in
your eyes, but look at it from the
perspective of the guy next door.
I was invited to a co-workers house
for a 4th of July BBQ. This was a
typical suburb setting, houses on a
10K Sq Ft lot. Two doors down the
street were two towers, 100' and 80'.
They were loaded with antennas. Just
imagine yourself in this guys shoes,
looking up at that mass of steel and
Aluminum towering over everything.
And, yes, both towers had proper permits.
Being Law, common sense or common
decency, the rule of falling on your
property is, IMHO, a good rule and
should be followed.
73, Dick, W1KSZ
Sure, but I'd want some rationality in the regulation - A blanket "must
be height of tower from property line" would be impractical for many
structures (not just antennas).
OTOH, if you said "must more likely than not, fail entirely within the
property, subject to analysis" might be reasonable.
I would think that a 100% must fall within lot requirement might be
unreasonable - do you design for the 0.0001% or not?
But people grow 100 foot trees on a 50 foot lot, have them fall over,
and damage the neighbor's house and fences. There aren't many zoning
rules that cover "tall trees" or hazardous vegetation.
I personally find big bushy melaleuca trees growing in the 5 foot
setback in our neighborhood worrying, from a fire standpoint. But lots
of people planted them when the tract was new, because they grow fast
and don't require much water. After the last big windstorm, a lot of
them had branches that came down, and then, after the Woolsey fire came
through, a lot of people decided that maybe having a big notoriously
flammable tree in your yard wasn't such a great idea.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|