Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Is the FCC sharp? Is ARRL counsel swift?

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Is the FCC sharp? Is ARRL counsel swift?
From: dan@anwireless.com (Dan Simmonds)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:57:24 -0500
George brings up some very good points here,

One of the real killers to us is the fact that the whole 'RF Radiation' idea
has been blown way out of proportion, becuase the term 'radiation' is taken
far out of context. People associate radiation only as something that comes
out of a microwave oven, and there isn't enough understanding about this
where there should be. So many people are in decision making capacities
where they just don't know enough facts to make a reasonable decision -
probably why ham radio is considered 'illegal' or other silly terms in some
cases.

With the advent of wireless ISP's spreading like wildfire right now though
the country, more pressure will be put onto decision makers, becuase more
money will be at stake in their final decision on what to allow. Co-location
can only go so far with these services until all the current towers are
loaded to their max. I know it's easier said than done, but if more hams
could be township supervisors, much of this could be dealt with so much more
reasonably. The amusing part of it is to think how much people depend now on
cell phones, and they don't think about the tower that's there allowing them
to work.

73, Dan KK3AN






> Rick,
>
>   I live in Wisconsin and the latest trend is to impose county-wide
> ordinances limiting antenna towers.  It doesn't matter how far you live
from
> town, or if you own a section (640 acres), you still need to go to the
> variance committee if you want to build a tower taller than the allowable
> height (I can't remember what it is in our county).
>
>   I went to the county meeting when they were drawing up the draft
proposal
> (there were about 10 other hams that went also).  The committee said the
> main purpose is to limit the number of cell towers and their location but
> that they were only excluding amateur towers less than 50 or 60 feet (I
just
> don't remember the height that was agreed upon).
>
>   I talked to the head of the zoning department after the meeting and he
> mentioned that the ordinance doesn't apply to me since I live in the city
> limits.  The city has no antenna/tower ordinance and I am exempt from the
> county one.  I can build a taller tower (without a variance hearing) on my
> city lot than my brother-in-law can on his farm a mile away.


AN Wireless Self Supporting Towers are now available!  Windloading tables,
foundation diagrams and charts, along with full details are now at the
AN Wireless Web site:  http://www.ANWireless.com

-----
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>