"Dave Shrader" wrote:

I've also yet to have someone post information
that can be validated that a neighbor received
a tax abatement [loss of property value] because
a ham had an tower/antenna installation in the
neighborhood.


Amen to that, Deacon Dave. The "lost of property value" is the most touted
reason for opposition to antennas, but absolutely no evidence is ever
presented to support that claim. In the end, I personally think all this is
the result of cable companies pushing for the removal of television antennas
in exchange for reduced rates on the installation of cable wiring in new
housing developments. Since developers couldn't really justify a restriction
on television antennas if radio antennas were installed in the area, they
adopted rules to eliminate all antennas instead.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article ,
says...
Hello All!

I live in San Diego and have been a PBS supporter for many years. An
article in this months "On Air" PBS magazine has made my day! The
article is on page #3. It is written by the General Manager of the tv
station. I have not read the document in question, but it does sound too
good to be true. How curious are you? If you live in San Diego, you
might find a copy in your local library.

In essence he says that the:

"...[Federal] government will defend your right to crawl up on the roof
and put up a BIG, HONKING antenna, despite the protests of nosy
neighbors, community planners, rental management companies, local
governemnt bureaucrats and other meddlesome busybodies."

Want to know how? Here is the URL:

www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

Now you may have to prove to "the opposition" that the antenna you have
erected can indeed receive "local" television stations, but that should
not be that difficult to do...

Apparently you didn't read the page to which you referred in your
message. OTARD covers video receiving antennas, like those from DirecTV
or Dish Network. It does NOT cover "big, honking" antennas such as
those for amateur radio. To quote from the FCC's website:

-=-=-

The rule applies to the following types of video antennas:

(1) A "dish" antenna that is one meter (39.37") or less in diameter (or
any size dish if located in Alaska) and is designed to receive direct
broadcast satellite service, including direct-to-home satellite service,
or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals via satellite.

(2) An antenna that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal
measurement and is designed to receive video programming services via
MMDS (wireless cable) or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals
other than via satellite.

(3) An antenna that is designed to receive local television broadcast
signals. Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be subject to
local permitting requirements.

In addition, antennas covered by the rule may be mounted on "masts" to
reach the height needed to receive or transmit an acceptable quality
signal (e.g. maintain line-of-sight contact with the transmitter or view
the satellite). Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be
subject to local permitting requirements for safety purposes. Further,
masts that extend beyond an exclusive use area may not be covered by
this rule.

-=-=-

For that, you have to look to PRB-1, but the FCC says that does not
apply to deed restrictions (CC&Rs). There is legislation before
Congress at present to extend PRB-1's authority to CC&Rs as well as
local governments, but it has yet to be passed by Congress and be signed
into law by the President.

I doubt very seriously that you can convince any HOA that your tri-
bander beam is needed for receiving TV signals. A better, and more
honest, approach would be to explain to them how actively involved you
are with your local ARES or RACES group -- you ARE, aren't you? -- and
how vital a resource you can be if you have the necessary capabilities
to provide communications in the event of an emergency. Also:

- make your request reasonable
- offer to show them your station at home
- enlighten them as to what it is that ham radio is all about
- ensure they understand the difference between ham radio and CB
- assure them that they won't be opening up the neighborhood to
complaints about interference
- don't plan on running a kilowatt linear, as you will be
guaranteed to cause at least some interference with that much
wattage (with buildings as close to one another as you have in
most condo associations, you'll find that anything more than
250 watts is going to guarantee some complaints)

You know, the usual stuff. Right now I have a very agreeable
relationship with my HOA at home. I live in a condo in Fountain Valley,
CA. Our CC&Rs allow for an antenna mast attached to the chimney, not
more than eight feet above the highest point of the house. I can use
that to support the center of my G5RV when I can get up there to remount
it, plus I will be putting a discone atop that mast for VHF/UHF
communications and to feed signals to my scanner. I've had a shorty
G5RV up at home for the past couple of years, not mounted in the optimum
configuration but it does a fair job -- and I've never had a TVI/RFI
complaint in all that time. Using QRP power levels helps, of course,
but even with 100 watts I didn't have any problems.

--

-- //Steve//

Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS
Fountain Valley, CA
Email:
Web: http://home.earthlink.net/~kb6ojs_steve

what i dont understand is if you guys dont like the deed restrictions
you are legally free not to sign the deed and move to another area
why should the federal government step in and tell some city or housing
community that the CONTRACT you knowingly and willing signed is worthless
you guys and your wives all want the nice classy neighborhoods and gated
communities with the fine trimmed lawns and lexus in every driveway but
you think your special cause you want to have an outside antenna
well how would you feel if your next door neighbor paintes his house the
most aful shade of slime yellow you ever saw? you would be down to the
community meeting griping your heads off so either live with the
contract your signed or move

Dennis Kaylor wrote:

what i dont understand is if you guys dont like the deed restrictions
you are legally free not to sign the deed and move to another area
why should the federal government step in and tell some city or housing
community that the CONTRACT you knowingly and willing signed is worthless
you guys and your wives all want the nice classy neighborhoods and gated
communities with the fine trimmed lawns and lexus in every driveway but
you think your special cause you want to have an outside antenna
well how would you feel if your next door neighbor paintes his house the
most aful shade of slime yellow you ever saw? you would be down to the
community meeting griping your heads off so either live with the
contract your signed or move

Dear HOA's COPS,

NO, it's not time to move. It's time to get sneaky and stealthy with
your antennas, find me if you can. But there isn't a darn thing you can
do about it as long as it's not in the public's eye. By the way, my Dish
Networks dish is going up. Thank you FCC for making them LEGAL. But is
was going up regardless, just like the others have in this housing plan
with such antenna restrictions. HOA's that restricted antennas made
cable the only way your could receive any tv stations. That was illegal
from the start.

As I have said, I am moving into such a housing plan. "WE" don't own a
lexus or similar vehicle and I haven't seen one in the plan. The
majority of people there seem to be down to earth everyday nice people,
until you get to the HOA Cops, which every housing plan with HOA
restrictions of any kind has.

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..

By the way, I haven't signed any such agreement when I bought the house.
I do know that such HOA "BS" does exist just to please the people
residing there that doesn't trust their neighbors. They are the ones
that should move. "TRUST" is the word. I did some checking and the first
house sold in the plan was to a nice family (mechanic) with two
children. He/they have an immaculate looking yard and house. He is a
scanner enthusiast and has his antennas located in his attic, aside from
his dish which is located on the back of roof.

Where there's a will there is a way.

"God Bless America" for the freedoms we still have.

Have a positive day.

wrote in message ...
What Ed is saying is: If you enjoy a hobby that requires an antenna or
anything outside your home forget it, buckle down to raising fish and
sell the radio hobby stuff.

That will be the day I turn my home over the HOA Cops, agreement or not.
If homeowners keep buckling down to these people next thing you will be
paying their mortgage and taxes.

Go Bless America for the freedoms our proud veterans fought for.


A very good example of the viewpoint of a rogue who tries to cloak her
improprieties in the blood of patriots and the silk of religion.

The fundamental civility of our society is based on our ability to enter
into contracts. We promise something and the other party promises something.
A contract is simply a permanent record of the defined promises. You are
expected to uphold your promises.

What I am saying is quite simple; if you don't like the terms of a contract,
then don't enter into it.

Ed
WB6WSN

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Ed Price" wrote:

Read the rest of the ruling. It defines that the
antenna may be located only in your private
area (patio, balcony), not in the public or
mutually owned areas (roof, outside wall).
This makes it none too helpful for apartment
and condo dwellers. Accept it; there are
some hobbies that are incompatible with
high-density dwellings.


How does that chance anything I said, Ed? I said nothing about apartment
and condo dwellers, and nothing about antenna location.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/




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.

Ed
WB6WSN

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.

That is right .... put up the bigest antenna as high as you can get it.
If it stays up more than 6 months then it was not big or high enough!

Willee


"Ralph Mowery" wrote in message
...
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 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???

"Dennis Kaylor" wrote:

what i dont understand is if you guys
dont like the deed restrictions you are
legally free not to sign the deed and
move to another area why should the
federal government step in and tell
some city or housing community that
the CONTRACT you knowingly
and willing signed is worthless (snip)


Dennis, either you don't live in a town like this or CC&Rs simply haven't
reached your community yet. The major industry in this town is tourism.
Because of that, any house built within the last twenty years has a CC&R
antenna restriction. Even worse, real estate agencies, hoping to cash in on
the tourist trade, have purchased most of the older properties, adding CC&Rs
antenna restrictions to those. At this point, unless one is willing to move
twenty to thirty miles outside the area, CC&Rs antenna restrictions have
become an almost inescapable fact of life. Perhaps you consider that
acceptable. However, I don't happen to think people should have to move
miles away from work, schools, or shopping, just to have an antenna. And,
indeed, many people are not going to do so - which means they will simply
have to give up radio as a hobby or recreation instead.


you guys and your wives all want the
nice classy neighborhoods and gated
communities with the fine trimmed lawns
and lexus in every driveway but you
think your special cause you want to
have an outside antenna (snip)


Obviously CC&R antenna restrictions haven't reached your community yet.
We're not just talking about gated communities or luxury properties. In this
area, these restrictions can be found on even the cheapest properties.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/