Perhaps this will help your case, Rohn letter stating that tower failure is
1/2 to 1/3 height. see Rohn Letter on Fall Radius of a Guyed Tower at
http://www.antennazoning.com/_mgxroot/page_10748.html
Also see Gunnar Olsen Study <http://www.championradio.com/Gunnar-Olsen.pdf>
http://www.championradio.com/technotes.html
73' Bill N1HWC
<http://www.championradio.com/Gunnar-Olsen.pdf>On 9/1/07, W7CE <
w7ce@curtiss.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > When they wrote the tower regs for our township we had two hams on the
> > planning committee.
> > The population density is pretty heavy out here so the only concerns
> were
> > safety and they made a specific distinction between ham and comercial
> > towers. Our only limitations are "stet back limits" meaning if it goes
> > over
> > it has to land on your property, unless you can get a wavier from that
> > neighbor. The other was anything over 80' needs to be engineered and
> they
> > are quite willing to accept the ROHN catalog specs.
> >
>
> I've been wondering about the property line setback requirements for
> towers
> recently. Why do most areas have set back requirements for towers based
> on
> height but nothing similar for buildings? Is there an automatic
> assumption
> that standard engineering practice is questionable with tower designs and
> that they are likely to fall down? Nobody makes that assumption with 100'
> plus high commercial buildings.
>
> 73,
> Clay W7CE
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|