- 1. Using Rohn 65? (score: 1)
- Author: scotty@iquest.com (Scotty Neustadter)
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 19:48:42 -0500
- Is anyone out there using Rohn 65? The reason for asking is that we have a non-ham here in town who put up 190 ft. (Yes 190 ft) of this stuff on his large lot on the highest hill for miles around and
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-08/msg00121.html (7,691 bytes)
- 2. Using Rohn 65? (score: 1)
- Author: rolfe@ldp.com (Rolfe Tessem) (rolfe@ldp.com (Rolfe Tessem))
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 22:03:17 -0400
- I can certainly sympathize with your problem, but I sure wouldn't want to start setting precedents against using commercial-grade tower, or making the use of such tower some kind of litmus test. I ju
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-08/msg00122.html (8,578 bytes)
- 3. Using Rohn 65? (score: 1)
- Author: rbodine@cp.duluth.mn.us (Dick Bodine)
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:20:02 -0500
- ...snip If the gentleman desires to erect a 190 foot tower for ham radio use so be it. However, if that tower is ultimately used for a comercial purpose, as you alluded to, he may be in violation of
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-08/msg00130.html (7,923 bytes)
- 4. Using Rohn 65? (score: 1)
- Author: K8DO@aol.com (K8DO@aol.com)
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 17:20:33 -0400
- I suspect that a tower ordinance defining amateur use as being based upon the brand name , type, or strength of the tower erected will not stand up to legal challenge... It would seem to me that a si
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-08/msg00140.html (6,857 bytes)
- 5. Using Rohn 65? (score: 1)
- Author: kr2j@ix.netcom.com (Robert E. Naumann)
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 20:47:57 -0500
- be it. However, if that tower is ultimately used for a comercial purpose, as you alluded to, he may be in violation of the city zoning .....<< K2GL had several tall towers at his very visible mounta
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-08/msg00195.html (7,248 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu