|
"Ed Price" wrote:
It doesn't change anything you said. I posted my comments to amplify and clarify your (and earlier poster's) comments, not as a refutation. Try not to view everything as a challenge. Perhaps I did respond defensively, but your "read the rest of the ruling" comment suggested there was something in the rest of the ruling which should have my attention (a conflict with what I wrote, perhaps). But, as stated, I saw no conflict (or anything else that would specifically modify what I wrote). Regardless, no big deal - a simple misunderstanding. It happens. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Ralph Mowery wrote: Normal people who reside in a nice house isn't going to paint their house some weird color, park junk vehicles, let their grass turn to weed or put up gigantic towers and antennas, etc.. Hams are not normal people, they want gigantic towers and antennas. Ralph, just what is your ham call??? KU4PT and I have been a ham for over 30 years. I don't have a gigantic tower beacuse I am on a small lot and also don't have the money to put up one like I would like to have. I do have a 40 foot tower and also a shorter ,maybe about 12 ot 15 feet, with my OSCAR antennas on them. I just installed two more 20 feet towers with a 10 foot pipe on them about 140 feet apart to hold up an 80 meter dipole. No trees so to speak of in the yard. |
Anytime I hear that statement I just right of the person saying it as an
idiot. I haven't been wrong on that one yet. "WilleeCue" wrote in message .. . The great American spoof is "home ownership". If you ever think you really "own" your home just stop paying money for it and see what happens! |
Looking at his Austin, Texas newsgroup header, he's probably making a point
about the extremely high property taxes they have there. They don't have a state income tax in Texas, but they really sock it to property owners. Even when your mortgage is paid off, those taxes will continue (and probably increase). -- Stinger "CW" wrote in message news:lhcxb.237017$ao4.847118@attbi_s51... Anytime I hear that statement I just right of the person saying it as an idiot. I haven't been wrong on that one yet. "WilleeCue" wrote in message .. . The great American spoof is "home ownership". If you ever think you really "own" your home just stop paying money for it and see what happens! |
wrote in message ... Thank you.... ....... I am moving into a housing plan with such antenna restrictions. But what housing plan doesn't have them. There is always someone trying to tell some else how to live their lives, or knows what's best for you. You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the neighborhood. The whole reason for the rules are to keep everything in check. Something tells me that neither of you would wants someone putting up some rusted out, 1970s RV and using it as a shed if the rules made that 'illegal' |
"WilleeCue" wrote in message .. . The great American spoof is "home ownership". If you ever think you really "own" your home just stop paying money for it and see what happens! Plenty of homes are affordable, but like someone here said something like: "Why should people have to live miles from shopping, schools, etc." I have a cousin who is married and a best friend who is married. Both paid $140K for their homes. One group purchased a home in the 'elite' northside of Indy, the others on the eastside. Both live in the burb counties. Both have great public schools. The eastside doesn't have the restaurants, shopping, etc. You have to drive 20 miles to get to that. The difference: One has a very small yard and lives in a vinyl village. The other has almost an acre and all brick. One lives 5 miles from work, the other lives 10 and 20 (wife and husband distances). One pays less property tax. It's all about choices. If you just have to live where the stores, restaurants, super rich, etc live and you buy a home that has a mortgage that makes you live pay check to pay check...yea, you won't have much. If you make due with a home built in 1950 or earlier that is in good shape (oh the horror of not having a 'new' home that some of my friends would fear), you won't be hurting. I plan on getting a home in 2-3 months. I have seen some decent homes for $85-$90K. They are 4-6 miles from half million dollar homes. 2 miles from schools and shopping. Their downside: They are 40 some years old and in good shape. Now in places like California---get out before the great burn off starts. |
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... I can understand where people have a right to not want someone storing a dozen rusty cars on their front lawn, or allowing their grass to get 3' tall.. but as far as antennas, etc.. they have no business telling a homeowner what to do. It's not right that they should be telling people what color they can paint their house, what kind of plants or animals they can or cannot have, etc.. Then why the hell is it 'right' that they tell your neighbor they can't have 12 rusty cars in their yard? If you want to live without rules, get an older farm house or something. Don't move into a neighborhood and then complain about the rules you disagree with. |
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message ... My brother and I practically rebuilt his 64 T-Bird right in the driveway. If I was bothering anybody, nobody spoke up. But if you were selling your home and I had a 1980 rusted Honda on blocks plus a used beer keg as a 'bird bath', do you honestly think that everyone that looked at your home wouldn't mind me as your neighbor? That is the whole point of covenants. Something that protects me when I want to sell. I could careless about my property value going up, as long as I could break even it would be better than renting. However, even if your price is low...having the wrong neighbor could mean 3 people that would have bought will change their mind. Now I am running out of time, dipping into my cash reserve, etc. trying to keep my old home and pay for a 6 month lease in my new city where I work. I personally will not live with covenants. City ordinances are bad enough!!! My goal is to live in the city I work and get a home for $90K. Save, save, and save some more until I can get a home not in a neighborhood that won't be annexed for a while. If it's annexed, I think it will be time to move even further north. I would rather have to buy Hondas that will last 200K miles if it means living free. |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message gy.com... That is not the purpose of eminent domain laws. If the law has been abused in such a manner, then the citizens affected should be filing a class action suit. "Filing a class action"? Give me a break. More like locking and loading!!!!! Just kidding ;) |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:40:16 GMT, "Midwest Kid"
wrote: wrote in message ... Thank you.... ....... I am moving into a housing plan with such antenna restrictions. But what housing plan doesn't have them. There is always someone trying to tell some else how to live their lives, or knows what's best for you. You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the neighborhood. The whole reason for the rules are to keep everything in check. Something tells me that neither of you would wants someone putting up some rusted out, 1970s RV and using it as a shed if the rules made that 'illegal' As has been pointed out almost innumerable times already. Did you just discover this thread? grin Oh well, I haven't put my 2 cents in yet, so I might as well do it now. While I kind of agree with the "...if you dont think you like it, then don't sign it" philosophy, I think the restrictions are often carried beyond the realm of common sense. A fairly inconspicous rooftop antenna, a window in your grage, or an untattered flag on your porch is a far cry from putting a rusted out RV on your front lawn for storage shed, allowing your lawn to grow high enough to hide in, or painting your house "Shocking Pink with Turquoise Trim." g Of course, I said a fairly inconspicous rooftop antenna, *not* a 50' backyard tower with an monster multiband Yagi... Then again, it's not the actual restrictive covenants themselves that I'm against. The fascist attitudes of many HOA board members alone makes me refuse to even consider buying a property in such a community. Not to mention the the "stuck-up" antisocial mentality of many of the homeowners who would be my neighbors. I don't need restrictive covenants to keep neighbors from becoming nuisances, either. There are nearly always local laws and ordinances dealing with noise, nuisance and safety and health, and agencies that do enforce them. You are perfectly welcome to closed-communities, HOA's and restrictions on what you can do with what you own. I'm satisfied with democracy and the spirit of *responsible freedom* that makes America great. Just keep your HOA's out of my *free* neighborhood. 73 jack -- Spam email harvestbot foiler tactics in use! Email replies to: n2hqc (AT) earthlink (DOT) net |
wrote in message ... Some of us are licensed ham and enjoy our hobby as you do. Just because we move into a new home in a new area why should we give up the hobby we so enjoy? We shouldn't have too. I collect junk Hondas (to sell parts and repair them at a garage) and need my yard to store them on. I shouldn't have to give that up just because I move into a new home in a new area. Why should I have to give up the hobby I so enjoy? I souldn't have too!!!!!! |
"WilleeCue" wrote in message ... I would be looking at a rual area where there is lots of trees to hang wire from and lots of ground to plant towers. How dare anyone be forced to have to drive 20 miles to Wal-mart or nice restaurants to eat!! |
"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message ... I recommend more hams doing this if thier home owner gods become assholes as well. So punish your friendly neighbors because some panel of 5 or so people are dicks? When you come to my door after causing your interference to borrow a tool, you'll get a big "**** OFF COCK SUCKER!!" Being an asshole to people who didn't have anything to do with some busy body two streets over shouldn't get treated like this. Anyone who does this to me will just mean constant complaints to the FCC. The immediate cessation of my kids being able to even look at your kids. Not helping you in any way shape or form. The list goes on and on. If anyone here has a ham who acts like this, form a "**** you!" circle of like neighbors (those of us who didn't complain, etc about the tower) and treat the ham like the ass he/she is. Then in 10 years when the for sale sign goes up, remember to kindly give the finger to anyone stopping by to look at the house. Also it might be time to start the junk car collection. Keep proof that the home owners association allows for rules to be bent. Then pool money for a lawyer saying that since they allow for x, y, and z they damn sure are going to allow for a, b, and c. |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:18:09 GMT, "CW"
wrote: Anytime I hear that statement I just right of the person saying it as an idiot. I haven't been wrong on that one yet. Hehehe... You never truly own a home. Even when the mortgage is finally paid off, all you've done is paid off the bank. Now that you officially "own" your home, just try not paying the taxes, insurance or garbage pickup / snowplowing fees. See how long you own it for... g BTW, I just love those artificial municipal fees... I was forced to pay $150 per year for snow plowing fees in a community where it snowed maybe once or twice a year and usually not more than an inch at most! Most years they never plowed a single road. My particular street NEVER saw a snow plow in the 20 years my family lived there. At least there wasn't an HOA or covenants to deal with. I could have a rooftop antenna. In fact even after several neighbors put up antennas (total: 2 CB'ers, several houses with vhf/uhf TV antennas, and myself with a several vhf/uhf Yagi's and a SWL random-wire running the length of the roof), our assessments continued to rise, not go down. My chain-link fence actually made my home more valuable when I sold it a decade ago, though that was probably just a quirk of the buyer. g -jack- "WilleeCue" wrote in message . .. The great American spoof is "home ownership". If you ever think you really "own" your home just stop paying money for it and see what happens! -- Spam email harvestbot foiler tactics in use! Email replies to: n2hqc (AT) earthlink (DOT) net |
"Jack" wrote in message ... You are perfectly welcome to closed-communities, HOA's and restrictions on what you can do with what you own. I agree with your assessment of HOAs. They are usually worse that the government with all their rules and regulations. However, I also find it sickening that grown adults will enter into a contract and then whine about not being able to violate the contract. With covenants, the rules are not weighted. They are all equal. If someone put up an antenna and I or someone else complained and they made an 'exception', then I would quit cutting my grass and get a lawyer (if I had too) for my exception. I think many of these problems come from areas where housing costs to damn much. I live in the Indy area. Rural homes can be had for $100K for decent to $140K and you can get a lot of that. The only thing is that you will have to drive 10 miles to a mall and restaurants. That is why a lot of people complain because they want to have their cake and eat it too. If every addition in the yuppie suburban county near 'x' city has covenants....DO NOT LIVE THERE!! If ham and short-wave is that important in your life, get a Honda and just put up with the extra 10 miles you have to drive to work. I have been living semi-rural for all my life. This area is getting more and more homes in. In my addition, an antenna would look stupid. I would put cars on bricks just to get back at some idiot who did that (though I might wait until the for sale sign goes up!!!). However, 1/4 mile away on some of the older farm homes...antennas would be bad at all. |
In my unincorporated suburban community, I can put up anything I want on my 50w
x 75d lot. Common sense, though, tells me I should take into consideration the funny winds we sometimes have and the 7700 volt lines running past the front rear of my lot. A 65-foot-long inverted vee (which I have for 40M) is near the practical limit. Oh, and I could put up a 33-foot vertical that's safe. Bill, K5BY |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 03:22:55 GMT, "Midwest Kid"
wrote: snip I have been living semi-rural for all my life. This area is getting more and more homes in. In my addition, an antenna would look stupid. I would put cars on bricks just to get back at some idiot who did that (though I might wait until the for sale sign goes up!!!). I take it that you don't have anti-antenna covenants in your neighborhood. Why don't you simply move to a closed-gate community where the antennas you don't like are restricted instead of being an a total jerkazoid? You want *other* people to abide by rules set by their communities but you don't seem to be able to live even with your own rules. Damn hypocrite, I say! -jack- |
"Jack" wrote in message ... You want *other* people to abide by rules set by their communities but you don't seem to be able to live even with your own rules. Damn hypocrite, I say! There are no rules. If someone puts up a huge antenna in our neighborhood....fine. I will then put up something that looks just as stupid. Many of the people in my area who have huge antennas usually live more rural and don't live in an addition. I am also only talking about these super high antennas. A very small antenna wouldn't bother me too much. Thing is that if I decided to make my yard an antenna field and put about 3-4 high antennas on my roof to cover everything, then ham wouldn't care. However, something tells me that if he/she had to sell their home they would take down their antenna first and ask me to do the same if a realtor said my antennas were driving potential buyers away. That's the hypocrisy I don't like. |
"Midwest Kid" wrote:
And why should people who don't want antennas surround their house have to move miles away? (snip) Never met such a person. Why should people who want to sit 3 cars on blocks have to move miles away? City ordanances often cover that situation - no CC&R or Homeowners Association required. (snip) That way I can see just how tall some wild weeds can grow in my front yard. (snip) City ordanances often cover that situation - no CC&R or Homeowners Association required. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Stephen M.H. Lawrence" wrote:
I work as a Title Examiner, so this is right up my alley. Many, many homeowners take ownership of a property in "fee simple, subject to reservations, easements, and covenants of record, if any," and don't inform themselves about what those reservations (read: Restrictive Covenants) really are. They're just words on a piece of paper, and these contracturally obligating encumbrances are effectuated by conveyance, in other words, they have the power of the law, even though they don't appear on the deed. In other words, you have two pieces of paper: The deed, which makes a glancing reference to restrictions "if any," and the actual restrictions, which are filed with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. More people than you can imagine are getting hoodwinked, Dennis. (snip) You've got that right. A friend was even show a list of restrictions when he purchased a house, only to be handed another list as he was moving in (from the Homeowners Association). Most of the restrictions were the same, but several more had been added. When he talked to his lawyer, he was told the wording of the sale made those restrictions enforceable. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"WilleeCue" wrote:
If that is the case then you sir are not doing your job representing the public. If you know there is someing shady going on you are obgliated to speak out in defense of the public or let someone else that will have the job. As far as I know, it's not his job to review the overall business transaction. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Jack" wrote:
BTW, I just love those artificial municipal fees... I was forced to pay $150 per year for snow plowing fees in a community where it snowed maybe once or twice a year and usually not more than an inch at most! Most years they never plowed a single road. My particular street NEVER saw a snow plow in the 20 years my family lived there. On a side note, something similar could be said about related city or town taxes. Many years ago, the city here started collecting taxes to subsidize curb-side garbage pick-up. Those taxes were raised many times over the years. A few years ago, the city decided to end that service, requiring residents who want garbage pick-up to pay for it themselves. Of course, as you can guess, the taxes supporting that were never stopped. We're still paying those same taxes today, but the money is simply being used for something else. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message link.net... City ordanances often cover that situation - no CC&R or Homeowners Association required. Many additions in my area are not in the city. The only county requirement is to cut your yard one time a year. No county rule about having junk cars in your driveway either. CC&R is what keeps the new neighborhoods have nice yards. We have one trashy family that lived in our addition that would never cut their grass and had junk cars just sitting. That is just as worse as those people who put up their ugly antennas. If I move into a neighborhood where antennas are banned and my neighbor uses a new law to put one up, mine will go up as soon as he takes his down and his 4-sale sign goes up. Hope it doesn't cause some possible buyer to reconsider due to the stupid looking antenna towering above in the neighbors yard. Funny thing is that if a few people said why they didn't buy, I wonder if this die hard ham would have the balls to actually ask me to take it down until he sold the home. I think such a person would...they usually are only out for themselves. |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 11:33:22 GMT, "Midwest Kid"
wrote: "Jack" wrote in message .. . You want *other* people to abide by rules set by their communities but you don't seem to be able to live even with your own rules. Damn hypocrite, I say! There are no rules. If someone puts up a huge antenna in our neighborhood....fine. I will then put up something that looks just as stupid. Many of the people in my area who have huge antennas usually live more rural and don't live in an addition. I am also only talking about these super high antennas. A very small antenna wouldn't bother me too much. Thing is that if I decided to make my yard an antenna field and put about 3-4 high antennas on my roof to cover everything, then ham wouldn't I shot this from my neighbor's back yard on the 13th of this month (Nov 2003) http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower30.htm I had to get a building permit for a tower this size and it had to conform to the proper engineering standards. (the guy anchors weigh 17,000# each. The lower guys are 4,000# working strength and the top set are over 6,000). I'm the only ham in the subdivision and within one and a half to two miles that has a tower up. I've never received an RFI complaint with the exception of one neighbor having a foot ball party in their garage and the TV set had rabbit ears. I gave them a spare antenna for the set in their garage. It's a good neighborhood except for one guy (5 houses away) who has one of those big mercury vapor lights on the face of a small shed that serves as a reflector and shines right into out back yard. So much for the Amateur Astronomy. care. However, something tells me that if he/she had to sell their home they would take down their antenna first and ask me to do the same if a realtor said my antennas were driving potential buyers away. That's the hypocrisy I don't like. It's not likely to happen around here. People are far more worried about the county wanting to build a *big* jail about 300 yards to the south. One neighbor directly south of me and east of the spot where I shot the photo had their property appraised to refinance. The realtor dropped their appraised value by $10,000 and specifically stated it was due to the *likely hood* of the jail across the road. So much for the county telling us it won't affect out property values. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com |
"Roger Halstead" wrote in message ... I shot this from my neighbor's back yard on the 13th of this month (Nov 2003) http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower30.htm I had to get a building permit for a tower this size and it had to conform to the proper engineering standards. (the guy anchors weigh 17,000# each. The lower guys are 4,000# working strength and the top set are over 6,000). Exactly how tall is this big one? I'm green with envy. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 19:23:59 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Roger Halstead" wrote in message .. . I shot this from my neighbor's back yard on the 13th of this month (Nov 2003) http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower30.htm I had to get a building permit for a tower this size and it had to conform to the proper engineering standards. (the guy anchors weigh 17,000# each. The lower guys are 4,000# working strength and the top set are over 6,000). Exactly how tall is this big one? I'm green with envy. Thanks! :-)) Twas all put up by hand too:-)) Which is why it took me nigh onto two years to finish. Well, it'll never be finished as long as it's up, but ... The Tower is a 97 foot ROHN 45G. The antennas are mounted on steel tubing which runs through thrust bearings at the top and about 12 feet below the top of the tower to a BogBoy Rotor. The TH-5 tri-bander is at 100 feet, the 7 element C3i 6-meter beam (with 28'10" boom) is at 115 feet. The 144 and 440 vertically polarized arrays are on a cross boom at 130 feet. If you change that link to tower.htm ( http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower.htm ) it should link to the whole story or just go to my home page, table of contents, and click on "My Tower Project". There are also some shots of the "office" end as well. There is one photo of installing the TH-5 that will give a good idea as to the scale of the antennas. Note a lot of that antenna work was done in the winter with some pretty low wind chills. "Doing it myself" was an educational and fun project, plus it saved a whale of a lot of money. I have some fears if the county puts a jail within 300 yards we won't be able to coexist and that'd mean moving. I'd pretty much have to resort to having a professional crew come in, take the tower down and then reinstall it where ever we moved which would cost a small fortune which I'm not sure I could afford. This is a nice quiet, rural subdivision with lots of Deer, Wild Turkeys, and other critters that come right up in the yard. BTW, IF you have a fast connection there is a panoramic view from the top of the tower at http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/towerview.htm It's a huge file of roughly 19 Megs so it'd be a lost cause with dial-up. It's not a great image as the images didn't match perfectly and created some artifacts where they are stitched together. (I was standing on the tower top plate with the wind gusting 20 MPH or so when I shot the photos hand held) I'm going to build a bracket and attach the camera to the mast. Then shoot an image about every 15 degrees as the antennas are turned. Unfortunately the landscape is now much less colorful. 73 Roger (K8RI) You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:40:16 GMT, "Midwest Kid"
wrote: wrote in message ... Thank you.... ....... I am moving into a housing plan with such antenna restrictions. But what housing plan doesn't have them. There is always someone trying to tell some else how to live their lives, or knows what's best for you. You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the neighborhood. The whole reason for the rules are to keep everything in check. Something tells me that neither of you would wants someone putting up some rusted out, 1970s RV and using it as a shed if the rules made that 'illegal' The point: Many times it's not possible to purchase a home any where near work, or schools, or convenient shopping without finding restrictive CC&Rs. For instance in California you quite conceivably might find it necessary to move a 100 miles to find such an area. It's my understanding that there are a great many restrictions on antennas in Florida. Here? These are ordinances, not CC&Rs, I have to keep my grass mowed, I can not keep cars up on blocks. I can not park a mobile home along side the house for more than a couple months. I can not leave a motor home parked in the driveway, or along side the house for more than a couple of months, but I can build a garage big enough to park it inside. I can not build a separate garage or shop larger than my home. Virtually any major repair requires a building permit. There are restrictions on outside antennas *except* for hams. "In recognition for the service provided to the community" there are no restrictions on ham antennas, but there are safety regulations. I have to abide by the "set back" rules the same as anyone else and towers taller than 80 feet require a building permit and must be properly engineered. Using the engineering data in the ROHN catalog is permitted. We (hams) have a very good working relationship with the county. When they built their new Law Enforcement Center the Emergency Operations Center in it included a ham station. The mobile EOC van also has a ham station built in. These are not just 2-meter FM mobiles either. In addition, we are working on small, limited range portable repeaters for voice, data, and video in conjunction with the EOC. Some years back I served as the communications for one of the evacuation centers when a train with some really nasty stuff, derailed quite some distance away. That operation took a lot of hams as the evacuation area was quite large. We were fortunate that the wind pretty much favored us, but it changed enough that the shelter where I was located had to be moved *in a hurry*. (I now carry a gas mask in my kit) Moving a whole bunch of people who have just been awakened at 2 AM, through a cloud of *stuff* that makes it difficult to breathe and very limited visibility is an experience. Where is here? Homer Township, Midland County Michigan. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com |
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 02:07:32 GMT, "Midwest Kid"
wrote: "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... I can understand where people have a right to not want someone storing a dozen rusty cars on their front lawn, or allowing their grass to get 3' tall.. but as far as antennas, etc.. they have no business telling a homeowner what to do. It's not right that they should be telling people what color they can paint their house, what kind of plants or animals they can or cannot have, etc.. Then why the hell is it 'right' that they tell your neighbor they can't have 12 rusty cars in their yard? If you want to live without rules, get an older farm house or something. Don't move into a neighborhood and then complain about the rules you disagree with. And that would solve what LOL The majority of the land around here is zoned although the zoning varies from township to township and county to county. Here, even if you own the biggest farm in the region you still can't have a pile of rusty cars in your yard. Now you could get your area rezoned commercial and then get a license and then create a junk yard, but it's more difficult to get farm land rezoned than to put a junk yard near a residential area. You'd probably stand a better chance of trying for the center of main street down town. I attended a township meeting in another county and high on their list was going after some guy who kept hauling junk into his yard against zoning. (they figured most of it was stolen but old iron pipe and tanks are difficult to trace).Another was some one with a bunch of old tires laying out back. Besides being unsightly they are a health hazard (mosquitoes and West Nile Virus) along with being a fire hazard. One pile in a neighboring county caught fire. Now there was a fire. There were over a million tires in that pile and it was a legal storage. Zoning tends to be along the lines of common sense. Safety for one thing. CC&Rs OTOH are what some one wants to see, or not see, done or not done, conformity. The ham tower serves a function whether of the greatest aesthetic appeal or not. The rusty cars benefit no one except possibly the owner. So to when it comes to CC&Rs Vs ordinances. CC&Rs are open to interpretation by the HOAs and they can change those interpretations. Say you move into a nice subdivision and like many the CC&Rs are so vague you need to get a legal opinion. Not satisfied you have the head of the HOA give you his/her opinion. As far as they are concerned you can put up that 100 foot tower on your 4 acre million dollar lot with the two million dollar home. You purchase, move in, put up the tower and get a visit from the members of the HOA who tell you the tower must come down. You point out the discussion with the head of the HOA and they simply state they must work in unison and he/she does not speak for the entire HOA. Say you had the foresight to get the contract in writing. The same as above applies. Or they can downright change their minds as to the interpretation. Now with a lengthy legal battle and I assume any one owning a house and lot worth three million could afford to do that, there is no guarantee you'd win. Also due to being the outsider you would open yourself up for harassment which you might have a difficult time proving. So back up to the zoning and regulations. Say you don't have to worry about CC&Rs, but discover the township has a prohibition against any structure over 25 feet. Typically, with a tactful approach pointing out that they are superseding a federal law when it comes to amateur radio towers might get you that variance. We had just such a case in a township north of Midland. Several hams had tried for years to put up towers, but to no avail. A new guy moved in and several months later had a 60 foot tower. He took the proper approach and was prepared. OTOH if the township is immovable, you most likely will win a court battle and lawsuit, but it takes money to do that. Most often a *lot* of money. Normally a lot more than you'd get back. Vindictive township officials can be a royal pain, but nothing like vindictive HOAs. OTOH you might discover there are no homes available without overly restrictive CC&Rs within 50 miles of your new job that pays $50,000 a year. What HOA are you going to fight on that much?. Having said all that, I fully expect to see passage of a bill that will void any CC&R restriction on ham antennas deemed unreasonable within the next decade IF government continues in its current direction of recognizing the amateur service as an asset. Particularly in the light of Homeland Security. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com |
"Roger Halstead" wrote in message ... We (hams) have a very good working relationship with the county. When they built their new Law Enforcement Center the Emergency Operations Center in it included a ham station. The mobile EOC van also has a ham station built in. These are not just 2-meter FM mobiles either. In addition, we are working on small, limited range portable repeaters for voice, data, and video in conjunction with the EOC. Some years back I served as the communications for one of the evacuation centers when a train with some really nasty stuff, derailed quite some distance away. That operation took a lot of hams as the evacuation area was quite large. We were fortunate that the wind pretty much favored us, but it changed enough that the shelter where I was located had to be moved *in a hurry*. (I now carry a gas mask in my kit) Moving a whole bunch of people who have just been awakened at 2 AM, through a cloud of *stuff* that makes it difficult to breathe and very limited visibility is an experience. And therein lies the major difference. Whereas it is not a 'mandate' in the true sense of the word, it has long been a standing relationship between amateur radio ops and the local, state and federal authorities that hams perform essential communications and other assistance during times of emergency. (this is why, among other things, ham plates are not considered vanity plates in most, if not all, states). And these towers and arrays are important to the facilitation of those emergency communications. |
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:31:45 -0500, Dave Holford
wrote: Frank Dresser wrote: "A.Pismo Clam" wrote in message ... Hello All! snip The thought occurs to me that in the "good old days" aircraft used to have wire antennas, either strung around the airframe or trailing below and behind. Some still do Modern, high speed, aircraft can't do this so they have various solutions including HF probes and conformal antennas (I have seen unpainted panels on some large military aircraft which were identified as HF antennas) and it is not difficult to receive their signals over distances of several thousand miles. I wonder why no one has, at least as far as I am aware, attempted to adapt these solutions to Ham Radio? The aircraft has a height above Terrain (HAT) advantage that few homes are ever going to obtain. :-)) I have personal experience, some 40 years ago, with an HF antenna which consisted of the top half of the tail (about a 15 to 20 foot square metal surface) which was tuned by a remote ATU (Collins CU-351 ISTR) and performed at least as well as a fixed wire over the range of 2.5 to 30 MHz. I had considered at one time covering one end of the house with foil and trying the idea against ground, but for some reason I encountered some opposition from another member of my household. I think she figured 15 antennas was enough! Then there is the problem of electrical wiring on the inside of the wall too. :-)) The plane I'm building (335 MPH hot rod) is all advanced composite. The plans call for the antennas to all be inside. Unfortunately the VOR antenna is supposed to be in the horizontal stabilizer. They changed the material so the horizontal stab is all carbon fiber. Wellll...maybe it'd be good for deicing. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com Dave VE3HLU |
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:27:04 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Stinger" wrote in message ... Homeowners associations are a good thing! They are basically an agreement that you and your neighbors will follow some clearly defined rules for the specific purpose of maintining optimum property values for everyone. In other words, you won't have to worry about buying an expensive house and having your next-door neighbor decide to use his yard to store a dozen wrecked automobiles while he builds a hot-rod or runs a car-repair business. Common sense should tell anyone that their rights end when they start to infringe on anyone else's, but sometimes you need it in writing. ;^) Don't need a homeowner's association to prevent those kinds of violations. Cities have ordinances against them. If someone violates the ordinance you can file a complaint. Receiving antennas are easily concealed. If you can find mine from the street, you were born on Krypton. I think this is an overly-hyped problem. And as Dee says, these are the kinds of installations that are more likely to cause interference. Broadcasting antennas are another animal, though. For instance, nobody wants to live next to some clown running a bunch of linear amps through a CB "base station." It will literally be "seen" on well-shielded cable television connections, and is a nuisance. I think that's a lot of what That is a fault of the cable or someone using the cable even if the amps are illegal and covered by some rather strict laws. .. All it takes is one poorly shielded device hooked to the cable near a transmitter. The device can create harmonics and mixing products that will wipe out a channel, or even the entier service to an area. A good example would be an attic antenna next door to some one who hooked their rabbit ears to their TV set with the cable still connected. The lower antenna is closer to the set and more likely to cause interference. It is also more likely to couple RF into the house electrical wiring causing all sorts of problems due to RF in radios, TVs, stereos, CD players and computers. I once took out an entier city's cable system with a 2-meter HT as a demonstration. (a very brief demonstration at the cable office). Two days later you couldn't find a leak in the system any where in town. the "external antenna" rules are meant to curb. -- Stinger Again such CB operation is illegal and they can be just as big or bigger a nuisance with a mobile operation. Some of these guys have multikilowatt amps in their vehicles. Such association rules force the LEGALLY LICENSED operator to use low height indoor and hidden antennas. Theses types of antennas are far more prone to generate interference than something well up on a tower. And it exposes the user to RF fields far greater than normal. There is a reason I have my 2-meter antennas at 130 feet. Even there I am limited to 380 watts into the antennas due to exposure limits. At 30 feet I'd not even be able to stay with in limits using my 50 watt mobile on those antennas. Considering there is 228 feet of coax from the rig to the antennas I could probably run a KW output and not exceed the limits. Actually...when it comes to exposure limits: My TH-5 is at 100 feet. With 1500 watts into the antenna the RF limits for controlled access are 6 feet above the ground at the base of the tower. I guess I should paint a red strip around the tower at 6 feet. As that is slant distance the height goes up rapidly as you move away from the base of the tower You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Midwest Kid" wrote:
But if you were selling your home and I had a 1980 rusted Honda on blocks plus a used beer keg as a 'bird bath', do you honestly think that everyone that looked at your home wouldn't mind me as your neighbor? Ah yes, the "but if he paints his house orange and puts a giant unicorn on the front lawn, the resale value of the properties in the area will drop!" nonsense. Let us suppose this would in fact occur. The neighbours gang together and nail an invoice to his door, and this is the "right" thing to do. What about the converse? Suppose someone instead made their property into a gorgeous work of art that _raised_ the value of the neighbouring properties? Surely this means he can issue invoices to all the neighbours he has "helped", right? That is the whole point of covenants. Something that protects me when I want to sell. _YOU_ protect your own property. It is why it is yours and not someone elses. These HOA's and similar entities are the analog of labour unions for property owners. Complete idiocy, with _ALL_ of the hideous bad effects of such things. Why have two bosses when one is bad enough? The protection you refer to is as illusory as the thousands of unionized workers who lose their jobs every year: "It's in the contract. So sorry." |
Oops!
If you change that link to tower.htm ( http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower.htm ) it should link I should type what I say... http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/tower.htm Roger (K8RI) You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com |
WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check"
or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with ours. Your starting to sound like your on the board of some HOA who enjoys telling their neighbors what they can and cannot do on THEIR property. People that purchase a nice house for let's say 200,000+ are not going to have some junk vehicle sitting in their yard, paint the house bright pink, etc.. Most HOA's require you to hook up to (how is getting the kick back)cable, they don't want even the 18" dishes. Well they finally have lost out on that one. That's only the start. Trespassers will be dealt with according to the law. That includes HOA COPS. Midwest Kid wrote: wrote in message ... Thank you.... ....... I am moving into a housing plan with such antenna restrictions. But what housing plan doesn't have them. There is always someone trying to tell some else how to live their lives, or knows what's best for you. You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the neighborhood. The whole reason for the rules are to keep everything in check. Something tells me that neither of you would wants someone putting up some rusted out, 1970s RV and using it as a shed if the rules made that 'illegal' |
wrote in message ... WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check" or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with ours. **** that. If I move into an CC&R addition, I expect people to follow the rules. I would hope my neighbors would be smart enough to read important real estate documents. I don't care if my home is $300K. If some ham puts up a huge antenna and they make an exception, I will be documenting everything. As soon as that ham puts up a 4-sale sign, my huge ugly tower will go up. You wouldn't be against _my_ right to do this, right? If the ham had the balls to even say something about it I would laugh. In other words the ham would want his tower when it suits _him_, however if he takes it down to sell the home and a neighbor puts one up...that's just not right. |
wrote:
Midwest Kid wrote: You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the neighborhood. The reason for the rules are to keep everything in check. (snip) WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check" or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with ours. Your starting to sound like your on the board of some HOA who enjoys telling their neighbors what they can and cannot do on THEIR property. (snip) It does amaze me, Pappy, how many are so willing to accept, and even defend, additional restrictions on people's lives and property in this supposedly free country of ours. These homeowners associations, which are, in effect, a new layer of government, don't act in a democratic manner and neither respect, nor even clearly recognize, people's rights. Instead, these homeowners associations remind me of the communist party committees found in neighborhoods throughout the former Soviet Union before it's collapse. Like these homeowners associations, those committees made neighborhood rules and insured area residents complied with those rules. The Soviet people gained freedoms after the fall of the Soviet Union and it's many committees. The American people are losing freedoms as these homeowners associations, and their CC&Rs, spread. Some here have advocated just avoiding these homeowners associations, and their CC&Rs, by moving elsewhere. While that may be a temporary fix (serves their own self-interests at the moment), I'm sure many in the Soviet Union thought the same when they first saw the spread of those communist party committees. But, without open resistence by all, there was no place left to avoid those committees within just a few years. I sincerely hope the same cannot be said by young people about these homeowners associations in the not so distant future. However, everything I've seen suggests that is a clear possibility. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
wrote in message ... WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check" or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with ours. **** that. If I move into an CC&R addition, I expect people to follow the rules. I would hope my neighbors would be smart enough to read important real estate documents. I don't care if my home is $300K. If some ham puts up a huge antenna and they make an exception, I will be documenting everything. As soon as that ham puts up a 4-sale sign, my huge ugly tower will go up. You wouldn't be against _my_ right to do this, right? If the ham had the balls to even say something about it I would laugh. In other words the ham would want his tower when it suits _him_, however if he takes it down to sell the home and a neighbor puts one up...that's just not right. |
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklins retort to the PHOA Philadelphia HomeOwners Ass They told old Ben to go fly a kite !! From The Antenna In The Wilderness |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message hlink.net... It does amaze me, Pappy, how many are so willing to accept, and even defend, additional restrictions on people's lives and property in this supposedly free country of ours. These homeowners associations, which are, in effect, a new layer of government, don't act in a democratic manner and neither respect, nor even clearly recognize, people's rights. [snip] If respecting people's rights was entirely consistant with human nature, nobody would have considered writing a few of them down in the various governmental Constitutions. So, have many Homeowner's Associations dissolved themselves and handed their responsibilities to a municipal government? Frank Dresser |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com