Exempt Radio Amateur Aerials From Requiring Planning Permission.

Its worth a go! My neighbours wouldn't care but not everybody is that lucky.. Mine would probably bring beer and help...

 

Signed

 

i agree in principle , but not all antennas are the same . I think perhaps a wieght limit , should be used as a defining factor ....a simple end fed half wave vertical should be avalable to all without hassle , while a tower with a multiband hf beam is a different matter. The idea is a kin to drone law. Which i feel is a more practical approch than asking for permission to put up anything at all ( We all know the answer to that one) . Let me throw in this as a starter ... lets say an antenna system in excess of 30kgs should be subject to planning permission

https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/uk-drone-laws-2018-3146402
Furthermore, from 30 November 2019, all owners drones that weigh at least 250g will have to register with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and take an online safety test. Anyone who fails to register or sit the competency tests could face fines of up to £1,000.

The CAA and airports will have the power to make exceptions to these restrictions in “specific circumstances”, the DfT says.

 

Hopefully your radio organizations will not so be as inept as our ARRL. Your idea seems to strive to prevent preemption at the national level. That's the ticket.

 

I agree and consider it signed. However the engineering would need to be checked case by case.

 

Signed it to help the lads back in the UK

G3SEA/KH6

 

I have spent over 20 years fighting the planning deptments over my antennas and planning requests. I had 650 signatures to support my application back in the 1990s, and it was laughed at during the planning meeting. The whole system is corrupt, just as all the govenment bodies are, and your neighbours will "blaintly lie" constantly, to stop your application be- coming a success. I was even accused of "killing children" in the local school, with gamma rays and ex-rays from my equipment. This was written in a letter and put on the" net" before local authority removed and rewrote it themselves. We are dealing with ignorance, biased, and corrupt people who know and understand "jack" about the hobby. There is also a complete lack or reasonable support given to radio hams from" ofcom or the rsgb". Its a "take your money" world we live in and they do exactly that!! Incouraging new people into this great hobby, just to further there financial profits. Test fee's, club fee's new radio equipment sold, planning applications. its all added costs to the "new ham" to find he cannot even erect an antenna!
THIS PETITION IS WELL OVERDUE !!!

PS: I only have wire antennas up now, thanks to the "4 year rule". but it still has not stopped local authority harrasing me about them. "WHY" ! becuase they are to incompetent to check their files before sending me threatening letters, from inforcement officers, (JACKED UP.)

 

Good idea its about time.
G6EKG

 

There is a problem with the petition wording, and grammatical mistakes. It doesn't bother me a great deal, or perhaps worry the rest of us, but it would lose credibility with the learned scholars who represent us (*cough*) in the House of Commons. They would possibly think that this hadn't been properly thought through, or been written by an individual without any special expertise in the matter. The rest of us know different.

Also, including CB operators, leads it to a dead-end I feel. They could benefit from this legislation off the back of this without including them in the petition at the onset.

The argument for allowing relaxation of planning consent should be based on the fact that each and every radio amateur is subject to licencing, they have undergone training and examination with respect of safety and radio interference, and are restricted to a strict band plan of frequencies on power as deemed by OFCOM.

Yes, I agree with the sentiment, and the drive for this. The problem is that if we support the petition *AS IT STANDS* it runs a very likely risk of it not having credibility which could then jeopardize further similar motions for this issue in parliament.

Also, as a side note, should it not be the RSGB, or a representative of them putting this petition forward?

The other question is this, is it a Government issue or a Local Government issue? I thought (I may be wrong), but I though that all planning issues came from the Local Council?

I'm sorry if my post sounds negative, but I'm trying to be constructive to get something like this through.

May your aerials all stand proud and free!

All the best,
Trystan

 

Your post does not sound negative, I agree with everything you say.

I made this point in the other thread on the same subject, the petition calls for the removal of planning permission altogether. That is it, no restrictions whatsoever. Chuck up what you want, 100ft tower with a huge beam on top. Naive in the extreme, poorly worded, and no chance of getting past first base, excuse the pun but it is amateurish.

The argument that any petition is better than no petition which was also put to me I also disagree with for the same reasons as you around credibility, you are spot on.

 

you both expressed the problems with this petition more eloquently than me .

 

John Q. Public moves into a cookie cutter community because he wants conformity. John likes the fact that there are articulated rules concerning the aesthetics of his neighborhood. No cars on blocks. No boats in the driveway. Keep the lawn tidy. No wacky house paint colors and so on. A tower in a residential area is unsightly to him. He's not "ignorant." He simply wants what he paid for.

We all know that towers aren't required for "Experimentation" or "Emergency Communications." Those excuses are completely disingenuous and the public knows it.

 

Never underestimate the power of a Good Hard Cash Bribe.

 

I'll likely ruffle feathers here, but I really don't buy into the argument that hams offer viable alternative emergency communications and are therefore entitled to exemption from antenna regulations. EMCOMM is either done in the field where big towers are not available, are it is done via a bit of relay. But EMCOMM is very rarely even done by hams anymore. The governments, military, and emergency services in 1st world countries all have much better communications abilities than hams. We are out dated with old school technology. They simply no longer need our help, nor do they want it. What little help hams provide is done by being in the field with portable radios and setups, not by using big towers, big amplifiers, and sitting in your Lazy Boy recliner. Personally, yes I would like to put up whatever antenna I desire, but do I want the neighbors to do the same without consulting me first? Heck no! Hams are not privileged above other people and should not expect total exemption from antenna regulations. They should just accept the fact that they might want to put up a butt ugly eyesore of an antenna but the neighbors might object, which is their right to object to eyesores in their neighborhood. What ham wouldn't object to his/her neighbors having rusting old cars up on blocks sitting in their front yards, or weeds three feet tall, or any other eyesore that is regulated by cities. If you really want to build a huge antenna farm, then do your research, buy a rural plot of land with little or no restrictions, and go for it. But thinking you are special and entitled as a ham to put up eyesores in a residential neighborhood is just ridiculous. As for as HOAs, don't buy a home in one if you don't want to put up with their restrictions. No one twisted your arm and made you buy a home governed by a HOA, you did that to yourself. So go stand in front of a mirror in a sound proof room and yell it yourself. We are tired of hearing all the yelling from people who put themselves into a bad situation. If you want to work ham bands, you will find a way in any location. There are plenty of antenna options that your neighbors would never notice.

 

W5TTW, W5JCK

This is the local governmental planning people, not an HOA. This is what in the USA would be referred to as the Local Zoning Commission or some similar term. There is no "opt out" by not buying or renting in these cases in the UK (Nota Bene: In the UK people often rent houses for 10 or 20 years rather than buy as that is their custom; my basis of knowledge is that my late ex-xyl was British.) In the UK the local planning authorities have free reign and no such think as PRB-1.

Before PRB-1 and even after in the USA many local zoning authorities still try to act the same way and prevent ANY amateur radio antennas in their area of governance so you don't get to pick and choose in those localities either. I just moved from a rural area that was under threat of annexation by such a city that thought it should also be the master HOA. If I had not moved (which was driven by family reason), I would most likely have had to fight them if they annexed the area because they would have ignored the normal grandfathering rules of annexation.