Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael J. Coslo wrote:
Side note. I was doing a public service bike-hike ride support. part of it went on a township road through one of those neighborhoods. Suddenly a van pulls up and a guy hops out. "What are you doing here?" he says. The YL who was manning the station was a little concerned - it looked almost like an abduction. Anyhow, we explained the bike ride we were helping with. He wanted to know why, as the President of the local Homeowners association, he wasn't informed or asked permission to do this. Then he said he was doing to call the police. At that point, I took out my cell phone, and said Fine, I'll even help, Ken (yes I knew him). I'm going to call the Police, the Charity we're doing this for, the newspaper and the local radio stations. Still want to do this thing? He thought better of it, got back in the van, and left. Actually what you ran into was some officious idiot with no authority attempting to assert authority over you. Let me note that theoretically streets belong to the governmental entity in which said street is located or some entity which the governmental entity is part of (i.e you can have a state or county road in a small township, it might not belong to the township, but it sure does belong to some governmental entity) and as such, private individuals have no right or privilege of passing on who or what moves on a public street. 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 personally would love to see CCRs and home owner associations expire after some extended period of time like ten years, we thus would not end up with the banning of clothes drying or antennas. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() In article , 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? I just noodled around the ARRL website and couldn't find any statistics. Here in the Bay Area, anecdotal evidence is very strong that nothing besides federally protected pizza dishes are allowed. 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 :-) Which explains why the residents of Lake Wobegon just spent two weeks here, instead of their customary one-week visit to other cities... Patty |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve Bonine wrote:
Here in rural Minnesota such restrictions do not exist. Ranger TX. 2500 people. And NO building codes. No permits obviously. But not everyone yearns to live in rural Minnesota Nor do they in Ranger, for that I'm thankful. I don't think I'd like here as much if there were suddenly 25,000 people here. Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi -- “Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.” Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954 http://www.stay-connect.com |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 23, 10:17�am, Steve Bonine wrote:
I wonder if such information exists; is there some compilation of data that says that xx% of home sales included some kind of restriction? Good question! But what we need is even more specific, such as how many homes in a specific price range, etc. 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 I yearn to live in rural Minnesota. Or New York State, Maine, and many other places - any time of year. But for most of us, there has to be a suitable job. Or jobs, in manycases. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve Bonine wrote:
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? I used to do a lot of closings, most developments and housing tracts built after 1973 had either the original builder or the successor home owners' association include that as a deed restriction. The restriction is also provided in models for lawyers to draft such restrictions so they will stand up in court. I only only of a few locales in Illinois (a ham lawyer drafted models) where it's not boilerplate. I'll put it this way, if you want a boring day, go to your local county recorder's office and try to find a division that doesn't include them one way or another. Older locales and most big cities don't have said restrictions, of course, lots are smaller and there are likely to be offsetting problems like for example fear of children climbing your tower. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
George Csahanin wrote:
The pea brained real estate sales people somehow think they're [CCRs] good and preserve property value. From the perspective of a property owner, restrictions generally do preserve property values. From your perspective as a ham, they are horrible things that prevent you from exercising your rights and enjoying your hobby. Both contingents can mount persuasive arguments to support their opinion. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steve Bonine" wrote
From the perspective of a property owner, restrictions generally do preserve property values. From your perspective as a ham, they are horrible things that prevent you from exercising your rights and enjoying your hobby. Both contingents can mount persuasive arguments to support their opinion. Hams must be careful to realize that earning an amateur radio license and the ability to operate a radio station is a privilege, not a right. There are plenty of other examples in life that are analogous, such has having a driver license. There is, however, that famous clause in the Constitution regarding "the pursuit of happiness." But moving right along.... I was fortunate to be able to erect some kind of antenna in the two CCR developments I lived in in southern AZ over the course of 23 years, even though the "anti-antenna" statement was in the CCR books. No one ever said 'boo' about my antennas. But, then, my neighbors liked me. And, I never asked permission. And I always used my electric clothes dryer. Howard |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve Bonine writes:
George Csahanin wrote: The pea brained real estate sales people somehow think they're [CCRs] good and preserve property value. From the perspective of a property owner, restrictions generally do preserve property values. From your perspective as a ham, they are horrible things that prevent you from exercising your rights and enjoying your hobby. Both contingents can mount persuasive arguments to support their opinion. I saw the convenants and restrictions before signing the papers ( a law here in California), but had no choice given my geographical and financial needs. I'm not going to argue from a constitutional perspective. A contract is acontract. Nevertheless there are creative ways to erect an antenna and get on the air unobtrusively. One option is a portable antenna you can put up at night and take down during daylight hours. I leave it to you to decide how to implement this. Another option is an indoor antenna. When I put up my indoor 20 m dipole in 2008, it performed pretty poorly. Now that conditions have improved, I'm actually able to work some DX, and can work most of the stations I hear. As the cycle 24 progresses, I'm sure the indoor system will be more thanadequate. Another option is using a *dummy* satellite feedline as an endfed 1/2 wavee or random wire antenna. Or load up your rain gutters. LeeNY6P |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pictures of your antennas in the Antennas in the World directory | Antenna | |||
Using 2 antennas in car | Equipment | |||
WTB 80/40 Mor-gain or Antennas West PM Antennas | Antenna | |||
FM Antennas | Antenna | |||
FM Antennas | Antenna |