Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+Fwd\:\s+Last\s+Ditch\s+Effort\s+Needed\s+on\s+Tower\s+Bill\s+\-\s+June\s+28\,\s+2002\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] Fwd: Last Ditch Effort Needed on Tower Bill - June 28, 2002 (score: 1)
Author: w2xx@cloud9.net (J.P. Kleinhaus)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 02:14:01 -0400
Thanks Tom. It's about time someone actually read the document and spoke to its contents instead of the wild conjecture and half-assed reasoning I've seen from other people here in the last 2 days. J
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00023.html (10,454 bytes)

2. [Towertalk] Fwd: Last Ditch Effort Needed on Tower Bill - June 28, 2002 (score: 1)
Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 04:36:39 -0600
I especially do NOT like limitations on "antenna support structures". Literal interpretation of such laws can prevent one from putting up a push up pole to support dipoles or VHF antennas if a tower
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-07/msg00029.html (12,919 bytes)

3. [Towertalk] Fwd: Last Ditch Effort Needed on Tower Bill - June 28, 2002 (score: 1)
Author: n2mg@eham.net (Michael Gilmer)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 10:01:04 -0400
I live in NY (upstate, semi-rural) and although I had no problem getting two (140-foot and 120-foot) towers approved by my town, I dutifully wrote and called several NY state representatives last yea
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-06/msg00520.html (8,142 bytes)

4. [Towertalk] Fwd: Last Ditch Effort Needed on Tower Bill - June 28, 2002 (score: 1)
Author: alwilliams@olywa.net (Al Williams)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 10:54:12 -0700
-- Original Message -- two year. I live out west--please interpret ! be When I inquired at about 25 towns for what their tower height restrictions were, by far the most was 35 feet. It appears to be
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-06/msg00524.html (8,778 bytes)

5. [Towertalk] Fwd: Last Ditch Effort Needed on Tower Bill - June 28, 2002 (score: 1)
Author: ag0n@arrl.net (ag0n@arrl.net)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 12:17:11 -0600
There shouldn't be a specified limit. Each case should be considered on its own merit. Placing a 95 foot limit in one area and then having that copied in another doesn't judge each on its own. That w
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-06/msg00525.html (7,925 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu