[SCCC] [TowerTalk] Anyone know the CURRENT Los Angeles CountyZoning Rule...

[Radiodan-W7RF]

I have to pipe in on Mike's comment about "neighbors .... Mentally filter".

I put up my LM-470 in West LA on my 55 x 110 foot lot in October 1984 with
much gnashing of teeth and grief from many neighbors. 
Unfortunately for them, I secured a permit for my tower when it was quite a
bit easier and there was no concern over masts or antennas, they only cared
about the tower at Building and Safety.
I went to the local WLA BS department and they gave me a 2 sheet "gotta do"
list to get my permit. I thought much of what they asked was useless stuff
to deter me, so I went downtown to the main BS office and came back with 3/4
of one page of stuff to do, none of that was on the original 2 sheet list
from the WLA office!
Sounds like the IRS, call 20 times, get 20 different answers.

So, after working with whatever neighbors I could on interference and
telling those who didn't like the aesthetics or who would insist I must
solve interference issues at my house to go stuff it, I operated as I wanted
for the entire duration of my stay in California, until 2007 when I left
that wonderful state for Fort Collins, CO. 
What a mistake! Now, I'm limited to actually having a tower that must fall
entirely on my property. 
Oh no, the tower must be no more than 150 feet! Damn! 

The point of my story is that with all the initial grief, when I did take my
tower down just before my exit from California, I had neighbors upset with
it's removal!
I had people coming from blocks around saying that I had removed a
"landmark".
>From eyesore to landmark! Ha, only took 23 years and my insistence that if
you want to tell me how to live you better be making my house payment!

Three main points to remember with tower installation. My suggestions may be
less conventional than what you have heard, but are just as valid if not
more so.
1) Always deal from a position of power. Get permits! (if not possible, see
item #2)
2) Everyone is dirty, find out how with those neighbors who are stubborn
about your tower. They WILL see the light! Can you say "Gary Hart" sailing
on "Monkey Business"?
3) NEVER, EVER get off the air when a neighbor complains about interference,
always encourage a meeting on Monday (after the contest) or some other day.
If you get off the air when a neighbor complains, THAT will be the only
solution ever sought!

Go forth and construct your tower, but be prepared to do whatever it takes
to get the job done.


Looking forward to seeing everyone in Visalia!


Regards, Dan Magro W7RF
Multiple power ranges from ONE Bird element, ask me how!
HENRY, BIRD, TOHTSU, SAMLEX, RFI chokes, PALSTAR
www.radiodan.com RFpower at radiodan.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Tope [mailto:W4EF at dellroy.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 9:01 PM
To: Marty Woll
Cc: W6ph at aol.com; sccc at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [SCCC] [TowerTalk] Anyone know the CURRENT Los Angeles
CountyZoning Rule...

Marty,

My suspicion is that the part of the ordinance which specifies that the
tower be retracted when "not in operation" came about as part of a
compromise to get the maximum height to 75'. In most cases, once a tower is
in place and neighbors start to mentally filter it (like they do with
telephone poles), I'll bet nobody would say anything or even notice if it is
not retracted on a regular basis (the neighbors would have to have read the
ordinance to even be aware of that rule).  Also, one could probably stretch
the spirit of  the "retract when not in operation" 
clause by installing an APRS antenna on top the tower. In that case, the
tower would be "in operation" all the time.

Your points about the rigid transmission  line and the number of
telescope/retract cycles are well taken. Especially the latter point which I
had never considered before. I agree that having the option for a 75' fixed
guyed or freestanding tower would be better than having no choice other than
the crank-up. Hopefully the folks who negotiated the ordinance only gave up
on the fixed tower option because the felt they had to to get the maximum
height to 75'.

73, Mike W4EF............




 

Marty Woll wrote:

>Good point, Kurt, and one worth pressing.  Not only can there a substantial
difference in cost between a crank-up and a fixed tower, but a tower that
must be lowered cannot accommodate semi-rigid transmission line (e.g.,
Andrew LDF series) often used for VHF and UHF operation.
>
>Further, most telescoping towers were not designed to be run up and down
regularly; doing so would cause premature wear on pulleys, cables, etc. and
could actually increase risk of mechanical failure.  The telescoping feature
is generally employed to facilitate installation of the tower itself and
antenna installation, maintenance and adjustment.
>
>73,
>
>Marty N6VI
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>
>  It also looks like US Towers and Tri-Ex may have had something to do with
it.
>  Rohn obviously wasn't invited to the ordinance writing party.
>   
>           Kurt, W6PH  (40 feet of Rohn 25G not in LA County) 
>_______________________________________________
>SCCC mailing list
>SCCC at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sccc
>
>
>  
>


_______________________________________________
SCCC mailing list
SCCC at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sccc