BE VERY CAREFUL HERE - SPECIFYING WHAT IS AND ISN'T OK CAN COME BACK TO BITE
YOU AND OTHERS....
RECOMMEND YOU WORK WITH THE ARRL ON THIS - YOU MIGHT TRY THE ANTENNA LAW
REFLECTOR, TOO...
Like I say this can get messy - with the best interests you can
inadvertantly do more harm than good....note that the FAA reg is 200 foot
for towers....hence reason for using it as a reference...no "specialized"
height was introduced for ham radio and as such blanket acceptance of a
certain height as being ok so far has been avoided...
I have climber 199 foot towers....and known guys who wish they were allowed
to be just a little higher for stacking lf yagis - but - 200 foot will fit a
lot of the ham populations requirements!
GL - careful!
73,
Jim, K4OJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph D. Orsak" <jorsak@mindspring.com>
To: "TowerTalk" <Towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:17 AM
Subject: [Towertalk] Ham friendly CC&Rs?
>
> I've been talking with a land developer who would like to incorporate
> some language into the covenants for a subdivision that would allow for
> amateur radio towers and antennas while restricting any commercial
> applications or any "unreasonable" installations. From our discussions I
> gather that unreasonable would mean anything over 175 feet or too close
> to property boundaries. I've seen plenty of CC&Rs with tower and antenna
> restrictions, does anyone know where I might find an example of a "ham
> friendly" covenant?
>
> 73,
>
> Joe W4WN
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Towertalk mailing list
> Towertalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|