[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] towers as real estate

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] towers as real estate
From: kz5qdx@COMMUNIQUE.NET (Douglas Bradford)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 20:27:59 -0500

warren munro wrote:

> Hi guys.  I do think everyone ought to check a little real estate law
> before making pronouncements !!  When you got your building permit (you did
> get one, didn't you if it is required in your area ??), you got permission
> to build an "appurtenant structure".  Even without a permit, you have still
> clearly erected a permanent structure.  Yes you may take it away with you
> later, but for the time being it is definitely attached to the ground and
> clearly real estate, therefore subject to property taxes as an
> "improvement".  and any capital investment into an improvement is done to
> add value (to at least the owner, and probably to many more), which means
> an increased assessed value.
> Not liking the idea should be separated from not analyzing the logic and
> the rules of real estate law.
> The analogy to mobile home law is probably not valid as there is no
> vehicular aspect to tower installations.
> Good luck on your appeal, Bob, but you'll only win on the numbers being
> wrong, not on the principle...
> 73, Warren KH6WM

Warren, If you are correct then many other things are being overlooked.
The Basketball Goal, Maybe you've installed a backstop for batting practice,
and by all means, the satellite system would be considered real estate. A
tower is not considered a perment structure, nor the sastellite system, etc.
I am sure we could look around and see other things that might fit.

74  Brad  KZ5Q

I sure am glad I moved to the country 40 years ago.

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>