Steve Bonine wrote:

Art Clemons wrote:

The statement advising hams not to move into a development with either
home
associations or CCRs strikes me as poor advice. There are few locales
without one or the other left in the US, and most used boiler plate to
bar antennas.

I'm inclined to disagree with you, but I don't have any more factual or
statistical information than you do to make or refute such a statement.
I wonder if such information exists; is there some compilation of data
that says that xx% of home sales included some kind of restriction?

It also depends on where you are geographically. Here in rural
Minnesota such restrictions do not exist. But not everyone yearns to
live in rural Minnesota . . . especially at this time of the year grin

73, Steve KB9X
After having been the architectural control committee where I live, and
researching CC&R's extensively I hate to tell you that these things are
almost everywhere now. The pea brained real estate sales people somehow
think they're good and preserve property value. But after some point in the
early 80's almost any land subdivision included restrictions, and pretty
universally included language regarding antennas. Before that the language
may have been directed toward "structures" not antennas. It also seems to be
more prevalent regionally. That could have something to do with when a
particular area experienced rapid growth. (like here near Austin, TX)

So the amateur is faced with no operation or bending the rules. Jeff may be
in a nice situation there, but I see it as less than black and white issue.
I also balance it in a way that causes no issues. I have a HF6V in the
backyard, and a 440 vertical back there too. The 440 antenna is somewhat
visible from teh street, the HF6 isn't, obstructed by a tree. The neighbor
can see it, but they know that the moment they say anything is when I go
after them for their barking yip-dogs, which I see as a worse issue than
antennas.

GeorgeC
W2DB