(MDJ Photo/Laura Moon)
Amateur radio operator Ritner Nesbitt, a grandfather of 10 who lives down the road from Dominion Christian Schools, said he expected commissioners to rule against him.
“Politics is politics, and I had predicted that this day would come,” Nesbitt said. “So, they’ve had their day in court, we’ll have our day in court.”
Nesbitt’s attorney, Christopher Balch, said he will likely file suit in federal court, arguing that the county’s ordinance governing radio towers is pre-empted by federal law.
“That’s why he didn’t apply for the permits to begin with,” Balch said. “He tried to get a building permit. They wouldn’t give him one because he didn’t have the (special land use permit), but we don’t believe a SLUP is necessary. We did this in order to create the administrative record and have the U.S. District Court ultimately decide whether our position is right or the county’s position is right.”
Nesbitt said he moved to the five-acre wooded slope across the street from the Burnt Hickory Farms subdivision 20 years ago because it was the ideal spot to pursue his amateur radio hobby. He built three radio towers on the slope behind his home in the 1990s: two that crank up to 35 feet and one that is 70 feet in height. A few years ago, he built a 140-foot tower. The higher the antenna, the easier to communicate with other radio operators around the world, he said.
In March, the county received a complaint about the tower and issued Nesbitt a notice of violation. Nesbitt responded by arguing that ham radio operators are licensed by the Federal Communications Commission and therefore are exempt from local ordinances. But just to be safe, he applied for a special land permit for the 140-foot tower, which the county’s Planning Commission denied on Oct. 2.
Jodi Siciliano, who moved just south of Nesbitt on Burnt Hickory Road in 2006, was the only one to speak against the radio tower during the public comment part of the meeting, pointing to the list of names from neighbors who signed a petition in support of Nesbitt’s tower.
“I wanted to speak to the petition that they had showing that everyone is perfectly fine with them having this,” Siciliano said to commissioners. “As you saw in the shots of the house, it is wooded, and most of those people have no idea that these towers are up there. The two neighbors that do face the towers, we do object to them. They are unsightly.”
Goreham said the county’s code allows Nesbitt only one tower, not four.
“Code allows for one tower on the property under 70 feet that doesn’t have to go through the land use permit process,” Goreham said. “There’s a code out there that requires certain rules to be followed, and if they are followed you can coexist within the community.”
Commissioners supported Goreham’s recommendation in a 5-0 vote.
In other business, commissioners approved a proposed $41 million development off Macland Road by Bankstone Drive, approving a zoning request by Toronto-based Ballantry Homes. The developer intends to build 123 homes on a 65-acre tract ranging in size from 2,200 square feet to 4,000 square feet. Prices will begin in the high $200,000 and range up to the $400,000s.
“They’re expecting to start late spring to start development,” said Ballantry’s attorney, Kevin Moore. “With 123 homes, that will be a two- to three-year build out.”
Follow us on Twitter!
With all due respect, I would disagree with your rant, and recall a statement of "you don't know what you don't know"
And I would follow with, you seem to be completely ignorant in the matter.
What a response, just chock full of substance and details.
Nice make believe scenario, but unfortunately, the real world does not work that way. RFI rules have been brought up to date, with more updates coming. And there are no federal laws covering RFI, but there are rules and regulations which have the effect of law, as interpreted by a FCC administrative judge. Either way, if I were the one advising Nesbitt, I would encourage him to start keeping a very low profile. Yeah, I know, I am not the one giving him advice, so I am just going to sit back and be entertained by all this fuss that could have been so easily avoided. har har har. 10-4 y'all.
They will proclaim that they are the savior of humanity when our cellphones, Internet and AM/FM radios fail, but they cannot cite one real example in the last 30 years where this has actually happened and a ham actually used his radio to pass a meaningful exchange that resulted in the saving of human life. Not one audio recording or eyewitness account, not from all these claims that during Katrina and Sandy- these hams were supposedly busy at work sending their "Radiograms" round the world saving little children from being swept away.
Because there simply aren't any. It didn't happen and won't. Commercial communication systems are more advanced and robust than ham radio operators like Nesbitt with thier ancient collection of vacuum tubes and four giant phallic symbols of an antenna.
I'm still waiting for some real evidence of ham radio saving human life with the eyewitness accounts, video, audio in the last 30 years. It just isn't there. Lots of "hot air" claims from rotund hams donning vests that call themselves "EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS". Yeah right. Most of these clowns would have a coronary if they ever fielded an actual 911 call, let alone responded to one.
what "hams" do in Cobb county? nothing. a few guys hang around the Marietta square on the 4th of July doing nothing. Nothing because the city of Marietta has better more advanced radios than most hams with their little toy radios can do. Not like these "hams" have any real training to do anything but jockey a radio. All they can do is call 911 from their toy radios, oh wait, my 9 y/o niece can do that with her Boost mobile phone.
So why do all these "hams" who are never actually there make these claims that their putting up a huge array of towers serve the citizens of cobb county? last I checked, Mr. Nesbitt uses his equipment for his personal enjoyment, which is jawjacking with other hams. Which is what hams do most these days: serving themselves talking about nothing. Ever listened to these guys on 20 meters?
What's the difference between them and CB operators? Not much, just more expensive radios, bigger egos, and more watts. But in the end, like their laughable claims of "community service" it's all HOT AIR.
Ham radio is just a hobby. It's nothing more. It's a hobby of self serving individuals who think the world spins and revolves around them. When the rest of the world has moved onto more advanced communication devices like iPhones and tablets, these portly clowns insist on donning orange vests and calling themselves "EMERGENCY SERVICES" when most of these guys are so close to a heart attack it isn't even funny. They have no training in anything but running their mouths.
Then they put up these towers insisting that they are some vital 911 linkup when "all else fails" which is, to put it bluntly, a bunch of nonsense. They droan on and on about how valuable they are.
Yet nothing could be further from the truth.
What makes this hilarious is that it is absolutely true. The best humor has its roots in the truth. Hot air and pumped up self importance are classic traits ham operators.
If he like's it...I LUV it.
Actually, the only liberal I have seen comment here is "I'm a Ham Too." He played the race card, like liberals always will.
If I had the space, you bet I would have at least 4 towers.
Yup, classic ham radio mentality, all for self.
However, these are not CB antennas, they are Amateur Radio (HAM) antennas and there is no regulated maximum antenna height assuming you are not near an airport.
Give me an exact quote and source of the law, rule, or ordinance that permits an unlimited height for ANY radio antenna, much less for an amateur radio antenna. Save yourself effort. No such law exists. It is yet another urban myth that hams mistakenly believe, because they heard it from another ham.
The original post referenced FCC regulations, not any state or local ordinances. JLM II was responding to that aspect.
From the FCC:
"§97.15Station antenna structures.
(a) Owners of certain antenna structures more than 60.96 meters (200 feet)above ground level at the site or located near or at a public use airport must notify the Federal Aviation Administration and register with the Commission as required by part 17 of this chapter.
(b) Except as otherwise provided herein, a station antenna structure may be erected at heights and dimensions sufficient to accommodate amateur service communications. (State and local regulation of a station antenna structure must not preclude amateur service communications.
Rather, it must reasonably accommodate such communications and must constitute the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the state or
local authority’s legitimate purpose. See PRB–1, 101 FCC 2d 952 (1985) for details.)"
It could be argued exactly what height would be "sufficient to accommodate amateur service communications", but, there's clearly no exact maximum height specified.
Title 47: Telecommunication
CHAPTER I: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (CONTINUED)
SUBCHAPTER D: SAFETY AND SPECIAL RADIO SERVICES
PART 97: AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE
Subpart A: General Provisions
97.15 - Station antenna structures.
(a) Owners of certain antenna structures more than 60.96 meters (200 feet) above ground level at the site or located near or at a public use airport must notify the Federal Aviation Administration and register with the Commission as required by part 17 of this chapter.
(b) Except as otherwise provided herein, a station antenna structure may be erected at heights and dimensions sufficient to accommodate amateur service communications. (State and local regulation of a station antenna structure must not preclude amateur service communications. Rather, it must reasonably accommodate such communications and must constitute the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the state or local authority's legitimate purpose. See PRB-1, 101 FCC 2d 952 (1985) for details.)
Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal - Cobb commission orders man to remove his amateur radio towers
"And while he is minding his own business, he is infringing on the rights of his neighbors."
Tell me, what rights is he infringing upon? I know of nothing that guarantees someone the right NOT to see something unsightly. I know of nothing that guarantees someone the right NOT to be offended.
I didn't perceive any of this from the article. In my 16 years of being a ham I don't think I've ever heard of another ham not supporting a fellow ham in something like this. He should be able to put up what he wants to put up on his own property.
I wonder if all of you "non-supporting" hams would have a different opinion on this matter if this gentleman had not posted his picture with the article.
When you live in a neighborhood, you are part of a community. The county where Mr. Nesbitt moved to has (and had in 1992 when he moved here) very liberal and generous county code allowing for up to 70 feet without requiring an SLUP. A building permit is still required, no different than any other structure you might have on your property- a new deck, an outbuilding, etc. A simple form describing what you are doing and a small filing fee. And you're done.
Nesbitt chose to ignore the law. He also chose to put at risk the great work of a handful of hard working hams including one attorney who paved the way here and other metro Atlanta counties to educate them on PRB-1 and make those reasonable changes needed to make our county code more "ham" friendly. Sorry, he is what he is: an arrogant scofflaw.
and his picture has nothing to do with this, I know where you are going- what a cop out and wimp out because you have no factual argument to put up. The man is wrong, plain and simple. And he is going to waste more of his money finding this out. His choice. But please leave the rest of the ham community out of it. He's done enough damage already.
The typical pantywaists who complain about things like this wouldn't know which end of a gun is which, so that wouldn't likely happen.
A shooting range is a little bit different from a radio tower . Most people dont reach for a radio tower as their weapon of choice, and I suspect the fatality rate from falling radio towers is a little less than from gunshot wounds. How far from the property line is this tower, anyway? If it's more than 140 feet, then the bozos next door really have nothing to worry about. Of course that wouldnt shut them up, though.