«

Mr Bond wrote:

> Just call them. I find none of the councils will respond to emails or
> voice messages particularily quickly, but if you are put through to
> the planning helpdesk they will tell you almost straight away. I
> don't like talking to real people either though!

You havent dealt with the North Shore council via email then - Very responsive IME

> I would have thought there would be some height in relation to
> boundary requirements as well, but what do I know.

From what I have being told, antennas are allowed to penetrate the height to
boundary without needing resource concent. I have 6m of pole on the roof and
noone has complained. If they do I will just take it down since its not actually
doing anything at the moment.

In article Dave - Dave.net.nz says...
> Here in dunedin it is somewhere near 16M(for freestanding)... as in one
> six metres...
>
> I'd imagine that like me, you're probably surprised.
>
So will Santa when he runs into one I seem to remember Wgtn having a
limit around the airport.

E. Scrooge wrote:
> Emails are a **** poor form of communication compared to a direct phone
> call.

and here I was thinking that I've been using email for the last 4 years
withough calling a call centre unless I absolutly needed to(they didn't
have email).

The Other Guy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know how high I can make an antenna either on the roof or a
> free-standing tower, before I need to obtain permission from the local
> council? I expect there is probably some regional variation, but I'm
> just looking for a rough guide.
>
> My intent is to use this for wireless networking.
>
> Thanks,
>
> The Other Guy
You might run foul of the NZRFS before you run foul of the local
council. I am not sure what you need as a private citizen when it comes
to radio data transmission covering a substantial area. I am sure there
will be limitations upon the range of an 802.11x network! and I suspect
that you will run foul of that before you exceed a height restriction!

Regards

John Fulton

John Fulton wrote:

> The Other Guy wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does anyone know how high I can make an antenna either on the roof or
>> a free-standing tower, before I need to obtain permission from the
>> local council? I expect there is probably some regional variation, but
>> I'm just looking for a rough guide.
>>
>> My intent is to use this for wireless networking.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> The Other Guy
>
> You might run foul of the NZRFS before you run foul of the local
> council. I am not sure what you need as a private citizen when it comes
> to radio data transmission covering a substantial area. I am sure there
> will be limitations upon the range of an 802.11x network! and I suspect
> that you will run foul of that before you exceed a height restriction!

The legal broadcast strength of "personal devices" got rased recently
didn't it?
I know it changed her in Dunedin, so maybe it was just a local council
limitation.

either way, 802.11b/g can be made to go long(over 27kms) distance
legally... and given the 500mw amp available from DSE, you could
probably go even further.

John Fulton wrote:

> You might run foul of the NZRFS before you run foul of the local
> council. I am not sure what you need as a private citizen when it comes
> to radio data transmission covering a substantial area. I am sure there
> will be limitations upon the range of an 802.11x network! and I suspect
> that you will run foul of that before you exceed a height restriction!

Your allowed up to 4 watts EIRP on the 2.4Ghz band which is the one most people
go for as the gear is cheap. You are allowed more on 5.8GHz - but the kit costs
a pretty penny so not many bother, 5.1GHz your not _supposed_ to use outside,
and 5.3GHz has a 250mw limit on it. There are other bands that are used in
europe and japan that have no GURL here at the moment, so your not supposed to
use them at all.

"Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote in message
news:...
> E. Scrooge wrote:
>> Emails are a **** poor form of communication compared to a direct phone
>> call.
>
> and here I was thinking that I've been using email for the last 4 years
> withough calling a call centre unless I absolutly needed to(they didn't
> have email).

When you were on the Helpdesk for Xtra the little phone in front of you was
the main part of the job. If managed to reply to a few emails out of the
hundreds of emails as well that Telecom get each day then well and good.


If I want action and answers then nothing beats the phone... apart from
face to face of course. If the person on the phone at the other end has any
questions or needs any info, it's taken care of right there and then.

People that email ihug seem to think they're the only customer that ihug
has, and haven't got a clue how many others are also trying to get there
emails answered.

If the 0800 number means a long wait, that's when I use the 0900 to then
bypass all the other idiots.

When it comes to businesses snail mail probably has a better chance of
getting through compared to hundreds of emails each day.

E. Scrooge

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:48:15 +1300, E. Scrooge wrote:

> Emails are a **** poor form of communication compared to a direct phone
> call.

Well, it depends. Nevertheless Scrooges idea that you have other weapons
in your amoury, go and get one as it might get the break thru you are
seeking.

E. Scrooge wrote:
>>>Emails are a **** poor form of communication compared to a direct phone
>>>call.

>>and here I was thinking that I've been using email for the last 4 years
>>withough calling a call centre unless I absolutly needed to(they didn't
>>have email).

> When you were on the Helpdesk for Xtra the little phone in front of you was
> the main part of the job. If managed to reply to a few emails out of the
> hundreds of emails as well that Telecom get each day then well and good.
>

I mostly did email support.

"Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote in message
news:...
> E. Scrooge wrote:
> >>>Emails are a **** poor form of communication compared to a direct phone
> >>>call.
>
> >>and here I was thinking that I've been using email for the last 4 years
> >>withough calling a call centre unless I absolutly needed to(they didn't
> >>have email).
>
> > When you were on the Helpdesk for Xtra the little phone in front of you
was
> > the main part of the job. If managed to reply to a few emails out of
the
> > hundreds of emails as well that Telecom get each day then well and good.
> >
>
> I mostly did email support.

Sure you did...
In between a lot of newsgroup activity.

E. Scrooge