Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hmmm don't know what all this has to do with the original post, but my
comments inserted "Brian Short" wrote in message ... I don't want to draw any fire, but there is a point to this - Not all that many licensed amateurs in the United States have the legal right to install an antenna on their property. Ah contraire -- There are thousands and thousands of hams that do have the right and have installed outdoor antennas. Just don't buy a home that has the restrictions. Ah but you say -- I want a nice upscale neighborhood where all houses are painted the same color and no one can park their car in the driveway, and you can only have two pets, and flag poles are forbidden, et al. Well ya can't have it all sez I. I live in a neighborhood built in 1969, so there is no deed restriction, but there is a city-wide restriction (Tempe, AZ) of 35 feet height. Move outta town! Get outta Dodge! But if ya gotta stay -- A vertical at 8 feet or 35 feet will do well --- as will a beam at 35 feet for the upper bands. Use a vertical at the lower bands -- most do anyway. Even so, my neighbors send the "neighborhood enhancement" (doesn't that sound ominous and sort of nazi-like?) out regularly for various imagined city code issues of which there has never been a single violation. Just ignore em. Ms Snoop or Ms Clipboard abounds in all endeavors. Basically, there is an ad hoc legal ban on amateur stations at residences built in the last 20 years, at least in suburban settings. Not against the "stations" just outdoor antennas. If it was "stations" then all the cell phone users are in violation. Hey Junior -- knock it off with that RC car model -- the HOA is monitoring (;-) Here in Calif, there are lots of homes (even in the million dollar category) with no restrictions. The reasoning seems to follow that since antennas are outlawed, only outlaws have antennas. ![]() Ah stealth antennas -- can't keep a Ham off the air huh ? Remember, radios don't transmit, antennas do! Indeed A final comment about HOA's -- Those that relinquish their essential rights for the sake of protection -- shall receive neither. -- Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 01/02/2005 8:41 AM, Brian Short wrote:
In article , (Derek Wills) wrote: In 1960 there were 399,000 Amateur stations world wide In 2000 there were 2,789,720 Amateur stations world wide How you interpret these numbers depends on how you define a station, in part. Does it weigh less than 1 lb or not? Station licenses are not the same as stations, anyway - I have a license but no station unless you count the halogen lamps at home. But nobody asked me whether I have a station. I don't want to draw any fire, but there is a point to this - Not all that many licensed amateurs in the United States have the legal right to install an antenna on their property. I live in a neighborhood built in 1969, so there is no deed restriction, but there is a city-wide restriction (Tempe, AZ) of 35 feet height. Even so, my neighbors send the "neighborhood enhancement" (doesn't that sound ominous and sort of nazi-like?) out regularly for various imagined city code issues of which there has never been a single violation. Basically, there is an ad hoc legal ban on amateur stations at residences built in the last 20 years, at least in suburban settings. The same sort of thing has been going on in Canada, as well. It is my understanding, though, that the federal government here has the sole right to regulate antenna structures within Canada; provinces and municipalities can create their own statutes and bylaws, but these have no real jurisdiction over the use of antenna installations in Canada. They can, however, institute laws and require permits to ensure that their local concerns are addressed. So, there may be permits and regulations and guidelines one must follow to erect such a structure. The notion is that an amateur is entitled to operate within the limits of that license anywhere within Canada, local statutes and bylaws notwithstanding (ah, that most Canadians of words.) Basically, Industry Canada encourages the local governments to "regulate" within their jurisdiction, but retain the last word on what is allowed, and can veto any such permit, bylaw or statute. The feds have actually lined up the process you can use to state your case, regardless of local government laws. The whole thing is rather ill-defined, and there are no deciding court cases to furnish us with a definitive answer. However, the notion is that an amateur is entitled to a "reasonable" use of their license, including being able to erect "reasonable" towers and antennas for that purpose. Often all it takes is notifying your neighbours, tweaking the design a bit to make it less offensive and ensuring it conforms to all the necessary federal and local safety guidelines. This last bit often requires a "permit" from the local government, but my understanding (IANAL, obviously) is that only the feds can tell you that you can't erect some sort of reasonable antenna installation, and they have to have a pretty good reason to do so. Basically, the law is set up to keep people from going crazy and setting up a 200kW antenna farm in their backyards, while being hard for any province or town to keep an amateur from erecting a simple, reasonably high structure that complies with their license and local building codes. -- clvrmnky Heat up and unmunge email to reply. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
197 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (23-NOV-04) | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004 | Policy | |||
209 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (04-APR-04) | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | Dx |