Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-de04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 9F726380000A4; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 04:31:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SNgZk-00075a-4A for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:30:48 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SNgZj-00075R-7a for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:30:47 +0100 Received: from vader.london.02.net ([82.132.130.150] helo=mail.o2.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SNgZg-0002Bn-Q3 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:30:46 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.64] (46.64.39.147) by mail.o2.co.uk (8.5.119.05) (authenticated as g3ldo@o2.co.uk) id 4F3CE3970A5CE1B8 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:18:29 +0100 Message-ID: <4F9A5935.7000108@o2.co.uk> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:30:45 +0100 From: Peter Dodd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/3.1.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <4F99A446.4080400@o2.co.uk> In-Reply-To: X-HELO-Warning: Remote host 82.132.130.150 (vader.london.02.net) used invalid HELO/EHLO mail.o2.co.uk - verification failed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Graham, This base and removability issue is a new on on me. The lower section of my 40ft mast is made of 4in steel tubing and is stepped in a length of 8in casing fixed in the ground with concrete. The space between the casing and the mast is packed with sand. If removability eases the planning application this might be a way to go. Planning rules seem to vary with location and time. You can get the local authority rules on the internet but I guess you have already done that [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [82.132.130.150 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 913d7a7c91a460d176c89ad756da16f9 Subject: Re: LF: UK Ae mast planning info Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020100050708090100040509" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:448545952:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40cc4f9a59732281 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020100050708090100040509 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Graham, This base and removability issue is a new on on me. The lower section of my 40ft mast is made of 4in steel tubing and is stepped in a length of 8in casing fixed in the ground with concrete. The space between the casing and the mast is packed with sand. If removability eases the planning application this might be a way to go. Planning rules seem to vary with location and time. You can get the local authority rules on the internet but I guess you have already done that 73 Peter > Those are the questions asked, the base and removability , > checking up. seems to be a 4 year rule and a 10 year rule , > I thought it was 7 years for no permission being required ? or > was that some time ago ? > Tnx -G.. > > *From:* Peter Dodd > *Sent:* Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:38 PM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Subject:* Re: LF: UK Ae mast planning info > > Hi Graham, > How the mast is fixed into the ground is irrelevant. The planning > permission is just for the mast. There is no distinction between > permanent and temporary in the planning laws to my knowledge, > > In the past some have tried to circumvent the planning restriction by > having a portable (mast on trailer) arrangement but I don't think that > works. > > I live in rather a stuffy private estate and I got permission on > appeal on the grounds that the mast was fold-over and I agreed to only > have it raised at night. Over the years the people who made all the > fuss about the antenna have since died and I put it up when I like. > Whether this is due to indifference or fear that the curse of the > radio mast will strike again is not known. > > > Peter, G3LDO > > > > On 26/04/2012 18:53, Graham wrote: >> Can anyone advise on the planning relevance / requirements to >> these questions , with regards to Ae pole at the bottom of the >> garden >> 1. Is the secure base moveable or is it concreted into the ground? >> 2. Can the mast be readily removed from the secure base? >> 3. If the mast is a permanent structure, has the refurbishment >> resulted in the erection of an entirely new mast, >> what is the relevance of the base being concreted into the ground ? >> I assume the question of detaching the pole from the base is >> one of permanent or temporary structure ? >> replacing like with like would not be classed as a new mast ? >> Tnx -G >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4959 - Release Date: 04/25/12 >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4960 - Release Date: 04/26/12 > --------------020100050708090100040509 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Graham,
This base and removability issue is a new on on me. The lower section of my 40ft mast is made of 4in steel tubing and is stepped in a length of 8in casing fixed in the ground with concrete. The space between the casing and the mast is packed with sand.
If removability eases the planning application this might be a way to go.
Planning rules seem to vary with location and time. You can get the local authority rules on the internet but I guess you have already done that

73

Peter
 
Those are the  questions  asked,  the  base and removability , checking  up. seems  to  be a  4  year  rule  and  a 10  year  rule , I  thought it  was  7 years  for  no permission  being  required ? or  was that  some time  ago ?
 
Tnx -G..

From: Peter Dodd
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: LF: UK Ae mast planning info

Hi Graham,
How the mast is fixed into the ground is irrelevant. The planning permission is just for the mast. There is no distinction between permanent and temporary in the planning laws to my knowledge,

In the past some have tried to circumvent the planning restriction by having a portable (mast on trailer) arrangement but I don't think that works.

I live in rather a stuffy private estate and I got permission on appeal on the grounds that the mast was fold-over and I agreed to only have it raised at night. Over the years the people who made all the fuss about the antenna have since died and I put it up when I like. Whether this is due to indifference or fear that the curse of the radio mast will strike again is not known.


Peter, G3LDO



On 26/04/2012 18:53, Graham wrote:
Can anyone  advise on the  planning  relevance  / requirements to  these  questions  , with  regards to  Ae pole  at the  bottom of the  garden
 
1. Is the secure base moveable or is it concreted into the ground?
2. Can the mast be readily removed from the secure base?
3. If the mast is a permanent structure, has the refurbishment resulted in the erection of an entirely new mast,
 
what  is the  relevance  of the  base  being concreted into the  ground ?
 
I assume the  question  of  detaching  the  pole from the  base  is  one  of  permanent  or temporary  structure ?
 
replacing  like with  like  would  not  be classed as  a  new mast ?
 
Tnx -G
 
 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4959 - Release Date: 04/25/12


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4960 - Release Date: 04/26/12


--------------020100050708090100040509--