[TowerTalk] Amateur Radio Tower Ordinances

[Andy Brinkley]

Bob -  Good luck with the move!!

 

Hopefully Tennessee is accommodating as North Carolina is for “Antenna Support Structures”  - notice I did not use the word “Tower”, the word tower apparently has a different meaning to the AHJs.  

 

The building inspector’s office was great to deal with once they figured out it was not for commercial use, and issued a building permit for a structure – even though it was a HDX-555 tower. I had 3 inspections done footing (hole), final mechanical after it was completed and final electrical (grounding / bonding system).  The only requirements that I can remember were the same as for a normal structure  - 35 feet setback from the rear property line (since the structure was over “3” stories tall) and a 10 foot setback from the side property line.

 

Andy / NC4AB

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob K6ZZ
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 7:37 PM
To: Jack Brindle <jackbrindle at me.com>
Cc: TowerTalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Amateur Radio Tower Ordinances

 

Hi Jack,

 

I’m in the process of moving from CA to KY. I’m aware of PRB-1 and will certainly bring it up if needed.

 

I’ve got a meeting with the county building department director on Tuesday afternoon. My hope is that he’ll agree that their PCS tower ordinance does not apply to Amateur Radio. If so I should be good to go. If he insists that it applies to Ham Radio towers I’ll have some work to do. 

 

As I said earlier, I’m not going to do a thing if they tell me I’m good to go. Wouldn’t make sense.

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

Bob

 

Sent from my iPhone

 

> On Nov 22, 2023, at 6:53 PM, Jack Brindle < <mailto:jackbrindle at me.com> jackbrindle at me.com> wrote:

> You are in California. There is a state law that requires local governments to treat you quite reasonably. They cannot apply the PCS and commercial ordinances to ham radio antenna systems.

> It is easy to look up the CA law on the internet. You might want to bring a copy with you to meet with the planning people.

> 

> By the way, the City of Campbell, in the Bay area, has no ordinance covering ham towers. They are quite happy not to have one, in fact. We tend to be excellent citizens.

> 

> 73,

> Jack, W6FB

> Now in Louisiana, which also has a state version of the FCC PRB1 regulation.

> 

> 

>> On Nov 22, 2023, at 5:38 PM, Bob K6ZZ < <mailto:bob.selbrede at gmail.com> bob.selbrede at gmail.com> wrote:

>> 

>> I would only suggest a more reasonable ordinance if they insisted on applying the PCS ordinance to Ham Radio. If they tell me there are no applicable ordinances and give me a green light, I’m certainly not going to argue with that logic!

>> 

>> Bob

>> 

>> Sent from my iPhone

>> 

>>> On Nov 22, 2023, at 6:32 PM, Martin A. Flynn < <mailto:maflynn at theflynn.org> maflynn at theflynn.org> wrote:

>>> Actually it does - Do you want your 30 foot Rohn 25 tower bracketed to your house classified by the same rules as a cell / pcs  or Commercial two-way tower?

>>>> On 11/22/2023 6:22 PM, Ron WV4P wrote:

>>>> There are no rules for ham so you want them to create some ?

>>>> That makes zero sense.

>>>> Ron, WV4P

>>>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 5:00 PM Bob K6ZZ < <mailto:bob.selbrede at gmail.com> bob.selbrede at gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>> Are there any good examples out there that a municipality could 

>>>>> adopt/copy to create a reasonable ordnance for Ham Radio towers? 

>>>>> My new QTH doesn’t have anything specific for Ham Radio but they 

>>>>> do for commercial towers and Public Communications Services (PCS) 

>>>>> towers. PCS is something specific in FCC parlance and shouldn’t be 

>>>>> applied to Amateur Radio IMHO. I’m hoping to talk them into 

>>>>> creating a simple reasonable ordinance based on successful application elsewhere.

>>>>> Thanks, Bob K6ZZ

>>>>> Sent from my iPhone

>>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>>> TowerTalk mailing list

>>>>>  <mailto:TowerTalk at contesting.com> TowerTalk at contesting.com

>>>>>  <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> TowerTalk mailing list

>>>>  <mailto:TowerTalk at contesting.com> TowerTalk at contesting.com

>>>>  <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> TowerTalk mailing list

>>>  <mailto:TowerTalk at contesting.com> TowerTalk at contesting.com

>>>  <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

>> _______________________________________________

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> TowerTalk mailing list

>>  <mailto:TowerTalk at contesting.com> TowerTalk at contesting.com

>>  <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

_______________________________________________

 

 

 

_______________________________________________

TowerTalk mailing list

 <mailto:TowerTalk at contesting.com> TowerTalk at contesting.com

 <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk