[TowerTalk] One voice can make a difference!

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

I had a virtually identical experience with our local board.  They wound 
up putting me in touch with their consultant, and together we drafted a 
quite satisfactory tower section for their new proposed ordinance. 
Roger's point is right on - had I not spoken up, who knows?

Shortly thereafter, the entire new zoning ordinance in which it was 
incorporated was voted down by the citizenry.  As a result, we still 
have a1986 ordinance with *no* amateur tower restrictions; in fact, they 
are considered "Public Utilities" and are not restricted by zoning at 
all!  Such is life in West Virginia - sic semper montani!

73, Pete N4ZR
Download the new N1MM Logger+ at
<http://N1MM.hamdocs.com>. Check
out the Reverse Beacon Network at
<http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 12/9/2015 3:15 AM, Roger (K8RI) on TT wrote:
> A while back I found that our township was rewriting their zoning. I 
> found that they planned on addressing towers as a group and that they 
> were addressing tower heights along the approach paths to the local 
> airport (KIKW) which has at present "I believe" 5 or 6 instrument  
> approaches.
>
> I called the head of the zoning board and mentioned that the FAA 
> already had addressed the approach and structure heights.  There was 
> also the approach to towers, grouping amateur with commercial towers.  
> That ours is a volunteer service that during emergencies works with 
> the EOC.
>
> The next day, the person in charge of that part of the rewrite called 
> me. We had a nice talk for a good half hour or so.  In the end amateur 
> installations were removed from the zoning regulations entirely as 
> were the references to the airport.
>
> My point is that I was the only person who called with information 
> pertaining to amateur radio.  Had I (one person) not called, there 
> would have been some heavy restrictions on ham towers.
>