[BC] Short AM Tower

[Tom]

Not really - the FCC Rules trump all local ordinances in that regard.  
The locals can throw OTHER stuff up, like fencing, electrical codes, 
zoning, etc., but the transmitting antenna (and its supporting 
structure) are the sole province of the FCC.  It may be an expensive 
legal fight, but ultimately winnable.

Lessee...

FCC figure 7; 47 CFR part 73.190

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/04mar20050800/www.access.gpo.gov/ecfr/graphics/pdfs/ec01mr91.078.pdf

Gives the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE HEIGHT as 45 meters ~148 feet  - for 1230 kHz.

This is just under a quarter - wave; there might be room for compromise 
on the extra 50 feet (add a couple of feet foe the base pier and 
insulator, right?) required to meet FCC minimums. 

For that tower, and 18" (500 mm) face, NEC-2 says it should be about 
15.5 -j73.6 ohms.

Choose your weapons.  Go forth and slay the local bureaucrats!  
Personally, I'd go for the 190 foot stick (192' AGL)... but that's me. 

More interspersed...

Cowboy wrote:

SNIP
>  Yeah, actually they can !
>  It depends on the jurisdiction. The New Hampshire case applies
>  in New Hampshire, but not necessarily any where else. 
>   
That link again is:

http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2002/0212/koor152.htm

And ANY case anywhere in the country can be cited as case law during the 
argument, or whatever the legal term is for giving your side of the 
case.  Falls under the Full Faith and Credence rules.  You'll want to 
back that up with the pertinent sections of 47 CFR as well as the 
underlying sections of 47 USC (AKA the Communications Act, as amended).

Tom S.