[UK-CONTEST] UK-Contest Digest, Vol 82, Issue 42
Jerry Scarr
jerryscarr at googlemail.com
Fri Oct 30 13:44:57 PDT 2009
Hi Nick
Asa past chairman of a southern Town Council let me say..
I suggest you now put up a G5RV antenna or a 264 ft long wire into the
house. When you get a contact from the Parish council or who ever point out
that it is a listening antenna.!!! a recieve antenna does not require
planning permission. It is up to them to prove if you are
transmitting.....................
Nest step would be to go for one tower then a year later a second tower..
Parish councillors have no teeth unlike a district who have the power to
approve or turn an application. The only way a Parish can really stop an
application is to stir up the locals. To stop that
1) Quietely Hire the village hall and put on a display showing your
application and have a petition handy for those in Favour.
2) advertise in local paper no more than 48 hours before the hall day
3) DO NOT CONTACT Parish Councillors let them find out via paper and then
they don't have time to organise people against you and if you can get alot
of support from the locals on the petition the Parish busy bodies lose out.
4) send petition into DC at least 2 weeks prior to planning meeting.
5) if the DC suspend standing orders so you can speak elect to do so last
of all, so you can then counter what's said befofre.
Best of luck
Jerry G6LBL
----
From: <uk-contest-request at contesting.com>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 7:00 PM
Subject: UK-Contest Digest, Vol 82, Issue 42
> Send UK-Contest mailing list submissions to
> uk-contest at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> uk-contest-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> uk-contest-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of UK-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: RX Performance (Ken Eastty)
> 2. G6PZ CQWW SSB 09 (Paul Beecham)
> 3. Planning Doomed to Failure in North Lincolnshire (Nick Totterdell)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:32:47 +0000
> From: Ken Eastty <ken.g3lvp at btinternet.com>
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RX Performance
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <4AEA180F.3090008 at btinternet.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>>
>> I don't think you missed it Ken, and I didn't mention it because I
>> assume it is a given.
>>
>>
>> However in case that's not the case for newer contesters, only use your
>> NB or any other add-on device of that ilk in when absolutely necessary
>> as the effect on IMD is likely to be dire.
>>
>>
> Very few (if any) high spec HF receivers that I've had the opportunity
> to play with were fitted with noise blankers,
> I suppose that they weren't generally expected to work in the noisy RF
> environments that the average amateur operates in.
>
> 73...
>
> Ken
>
> G3LVP
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:29:42 +0000
> From: Paul Beecham <paul at attenuate.org>
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] G6PZ CQWW SSB 09
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID:
> <c2c262850910291629r38af1f90keae3b96331b8f912 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Scores on the doors from Somerset.
> Good to see the higher bands open for a change.
>
> Call: G6PZ
> Operator(s): G6PZ 2E0SQL M0CLW M0DXR G4DBL G4MJS
> Station: G6PZ
>
> Class: M/S HP
> QTH: Somerset
> Operating Time (hrs): 47.5
>
> Summary:
> Band QSOs Zones Countries
> ------------------------------
> 160: 285 11 54
> 80: 626 18 87
> 40: 857 35 122
> 20: 1196 35 128
> 15: 1239 36 135
> 10: 171 19 76
> ------------------------------
> Total: 4374 154 602 Total Score = 6,730,668
>
> 73 Paul
> G6PZ
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:51:07 -0000
> From: "Nick Totterdell" <ntotterdell at riverauto.co.uk>
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] Planning Doomed to Failure in North Lincolnshire
> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:
> <72226CD42B67FC42883D3F343934ADA5869BED at Riverserver.Riverside.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> We went to the planning committee at East Lindsey DC yesterday; that is
> three of us from Sheffield ARC and four from the Eagle Radio Group at
> Mablethorpe.
>
> Firstly, the local woman who had stirred up the huge opposition, spoke
> for a couple of minutes, but didn't say anything new or interesting. I
> then had three minutes in which I explained that during the "trial
> period" with the 18m tower, there had been no further opposition but
> lots of additional support - and thanked the Eagle group particularly
> for their support.
>
> Next and I think rather unfairly, the parish council chair was given
> three minutes to speak against the application. This was the same woman
> who I had initially phoned before embarking on the application, and who
> had been quite positive with comments about trying to encourage
> year-round tourism, etc.
>
> The planner then introduced the application and showed photos of the
> site including a close-up of the 18m tower. He recommended rejection of
> the application on visual grounds but not on any of the other more
> bizarre grounds that were raised in objection. (Birds flying into wires,
> horses being upset by view of masts, additional load on the local power,
> etc.)
>
> The committee discussion was fairly prolonged. Three councillors spoke
> for the application, but the majority wanted to go with the parish
> council decision. The vote was 9 against and 3 for the application and
> it was rejected.
>
> I have now forwarded the planner's notes to Len Paget (RSGB planning
> guru) to see if he thinks an appeal is worth pursuing.
>
> In summary, what I have learned from this so far....
>
> 1. It is much easier to get permission to erect masts within the
> curtilage of a dwelling than on agricultural land where a change of use
> is required. So don't look for a house with a separate paddock - just a
> massive garden.
>
> 2. Having not bought the property, and not intending to live in it
> immediately, did not help the application, as I was seen as an outsider
> wanting to dump my aerials on a location that I don't live in.
>
> 3. Mobile towers can be used with the curtilage of a dwelling
> without planning permission, within reason, but on agricultural land,
> permission is required to site them for more than 28 days per calendar
> year. When I say within reason, I mean that if you had ten mobile towers
> in the garden then this could be deemed to be a change of use of the
> property from domestic dwelling to storage of towers - a bit like if you
> started a car maintenance business in the garden.
>
> 4. With the on-line (X-Factor Voting Style) portal system, support
> from other radio amateurs, even internationally, is acceptable and even
> expected given the nature of the hobby. I am very grateful for all the
> on-line support that I was given. We should now encourage others to ask
> fellow radio amateurs for support when huge opposition is encountered.
> There is a worry that too much early support can bring the opposition
> out of the woodwork, and to some extent, that happened in this case.
>
> 5. Having had so much support, this application has not muddied the
> water for others in East Lindsey who might apply for a single tower,
> say. And had I applied for just one tower, then this would probably have
> been approved.
>
> 6. Had I lived in the property, I would have adopted a much more
> softly-softly approach with the planned aerials but I didn't see the
> point in this as the main reason for buying the cottage with an acre
> paddock was to be able to put aerials on the paddock. This is probably a
> model that is always going to be bound to fail.
>
> 7. Finally, if you ask for initial advice from the local planning
> department and parish council, it may ultimately prove to be misleading,
> as one local activist with time on their hands, can whip up a huge
> amount of opposition very easily.
>
> Many thanks to everyone who supported the application - I am sure your
> comments will at least have helped future applicants in East Lindsey -
> whether my application goes any further remains to be seen.
>
> Nick G4FAL
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> End of UK-Contest Digest, Vol 82, Issue 42
> ******************************************
More information about the UK-Contest
mailing list