[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Got a tower/antenna in a CC&R subdivision?

To: "Rick Kourey (K4KL)" <>,"W4LDE-Ron" <>, "Krish" <>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Got a tower/antenna in a CC&R subdivision?
From: "Mark Robinson" <>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 18:30:00 -0400
List-post: <>
My goodness for that amount of money why didn't you just buy yourself some 
farm land and build a house on it.

Mark N1UK

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rick Kourey (K4KL)" <>
To: "W4LDE-Ron" <>; "Krish" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 May, 2007 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Got a tower/antenna in a CC&R subdivision?

> Krish,
> I bought the same type of property (3.5 acres) you describe in a $1 to $5
> million dollar gated subdivision Marvin/Charlotte, NC and thought if I 
> could
> get the Developer to sign and record a simple document permitting a 
> crank-up
> tower before the sale, I would be fine.  This was to be the last great 
> house
> that my wife wanted before our ultimate retirement with the best crank-up
> tower and antenna I ever had place situated in between tall trees.
> The Developer controlled the HOA initially until it was handed over to the
> citizens of the gated subdivision.  Boy did my problems begin when the HOA
> took issue with the Developer's waiver and I am caught in the middle.  I 
> am
> still going through all of this 18 months later, with the Developer on my
> side, fighting an angry HOA President who is  inflexible, has an axe to
> grind with the Developer, and does not want to recognize any previous
> recorded agreement.  I have spent over $7,000 in legal fees so far not to
> mention the planting of three 18 foot tall evergreen trees to help screen
> the tower for a cost of $7,300 more.  And I will probably have to plant 
> more
> trees to help settle this.  While I think the law is on my side, it is 
> very
> expensive to hire attorneys to research my rights and respond to letters
> from the HOA attorneys.
> While I relied on a local real estate attorney to bless this transaction
> initially, I find most attorneys do not really understand ham radio and 
> some
> of the laws that could affect an antenna or what I was trying to 
> accomplish.
> I ended up retaining Fred Hopengarten, Antenna Zoning author and attorney,
> to help me and my local counsel deal with these issues.  He is reasonably
> priced and worth his weight in gold as both a strategist and lawyer.  He
> understands the issues you must maneuver through and has dealt with
> countless tower issues and solutions a ham will encounter.  Even though he
> is located in Massachusetts, he is a call or email away and I wish I had
> involved him with this real estate transaction at the very beginning of 
> the
> land sale.
> I would recommend to every ham contemplating a purchase in a subdivision
> where the Developer is going to give you a recorded waiver to put up your
> tower to contact Fred or an expert like him.  What appears to be a simple
> waiver transaction can be fraught with problems down the road as I found
> out.
> Rick Kourey (K4KL)
> Marvin -- Charlotte,  NC
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "W4LDE-Ron" <>
> To: "Krish" <>
> Cc: "Dan Zimmerman N3OX" <>; <>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 5:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Got a tower/antenna in a CC&R subdivision?
>> Well like many Hams that have non-ham wives it's very hard to tell the
>> XYL she can't have that house she's dreamed of because we can't put up
>> an antenna, at least not this OM's XYL.
>> I am in the stage of looking at property  south-west of Atlanta, most if
>> not all of the new sub-divisions have some verbage or wording that
>> restricts any kind of antenna, however, after several interesting
>> discussions with builders I found that most of the HOA's and
>> Architectural committees are under control of the developers until the
>> sub-division is completed, thats how the developers protect themselves
>> from Owner controlled HOA's and changes that would cost them (Developer
>> and Builder) money.  That's the magic word.
>> I started talking to one specific builder about six months ago before
>> the current slow down in the homes market and was flat told "No
>> antennas"  about 1-month ago after being persistent I was told we will
>> need to check if the Developer will allow it and amend the CCR's or
>> provide a change via the architectural committee.  Two weeks ago I got a
>> call from the builder stating that I can get the variance to erect a
>> tower on the back of a specific lot (heavily Treed lot that is) and use
>> what I had originally suggested which is a crank up US tower
>> (needle-pole style)  Since most of the trees are from 20 to 40ft   I
>> submitted a 22ft  to 55ft cranked up with a SteppIR on top and a double
>> extended 80 meter zepp on an acre of heavily wooded lot.
>> The builder wants to include the tower base in the cost of the home with
>> conduits for antenna cables and power from the house to the base as part
>> of the permit drawings, thus avoiding trouble down the road from the
>> local municipality.  All of this will be done under the scrutiny of a
>> real estate lawyer.
>> I can attest that it is very difficult to find a new home, I am not a
>> wealthy individual but was willing to spend more to get the right kind
>> of property where antennas would not become a legal issue.  It's been a
>> real hassle and several real estate agents have given up trying to find
>> that new home for me.  One has stayed the course and you bet she will
>> get my business.
>> Right now in my opinion the market is right to get what we need if it is
>> a new home, with existing HOA's and firm CCR's then I would stay very
>> clear of them.  I was looking at a great home with 2-acres and big trees
>> in all of the right places and for the right price where home owners
>> could have horses on there property but I found way down in the fine
>> print "No antennas except for satellite dishes of 18" or smaller"  What
>> a disappointment.   I currently live just outside of Orlando in a
>> restricted HOA but where antennas are not out-lawed.  Amazing, there's
>> lots of hams in the community.
>> Unfortunately this issue is not going away unless the Fed's do it for
>> us, developers have the money to protect what they perceive as a
>> possible treat to their success, most by being uniformed, the only
>> reason for this restriction in the location I am looking at is "Hams
>> cause TV interference".  . Bottom line,  be persistent with positive
>> aspects of the need for an antenna as recommended by others, get to now
>> the builder and the developer, understand the home market and support
>> any bill with respect to HOA's-CCR-Deed restriction of antenna's.
>> Krish wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>  Let me give some more information on the situation.
>>>  The covenant goes  like this
>>>  "All antenna requests will need to be approved by the Architectural
>>> review committee".
>>>  If there is a request that comes along and is something that does not
>>> fit the bill, the Arch committe
>>>  will deny the request and send it to the board to make a consideration.
>>>  My original proposal had a stepper at the top of the crankup and a TV
>>> antenna at the bottom of
>>>  the crankup. I sent in a copy of the 1996 OTARD ruling as well. The
>>> stepper was hand drawn
>>>  in the proposal along with a copy of the aluma tower brochure. The Arch
>>> committee has never
>>>  seen a setup like this, so was unable to perceive and they just denied
>>> it. Well, they did not even
>>>  take up on my request to present it to the committee. In my 
>>> subdivision,
>>> the arch committee is a
>>>  inclusive group unknown to the public for fear of retribution. Hence my
>>> gripe that there was no
>>>  fair consideration.
>>>  Now the board is looking into the merits. In the meanwhile, i had
>>> someone measure the offset
>>>  from the roof to the tower when the antenna is installed. We found that
>>> it will be entirely below
>>>  the roof when down, and blend well with the trees behind the tower when
>>> cranked up.
>>>  I ran around and got about 70% of the neighbors sign off. Some in 
>>> person
>>> by knocking the door,
>>>  but a few others by sending in mail with return postage. About 3 out of
>>> 5 that i mailed never
>>>  returned it. Perhaps procrastination or they have opinions. No one
>>> objected except one guy who
>>>  does not see the tower and is a next door neighbor. He is located at 
>>> the
>>> other side of the tower.
>>>  When i ran the idea by him, he wanted the tower to be placed not near
>>> his property , but the
>>>  other side. I complied and changed the proposal after getting the other
>>> owners permission. In
>>>  Dec, this guy did not voice out any concern, but in April, he says he
>>> has concerns. I have over
>>>  70% approval from those directly impacted, so i have pushed it to the
>>> board. The board wants
>>>  to do their due diligence and talk to the neighbors to see what they
>>> feel. However, this is a gray
>>>  area. I don't know what they talk. I am sure they won't be talking 
>>> about
>>> Otard and TV antennas.
>>>  Hence i am doing everything right to keep a positive attitude after
>>> waiting for 3 months now. I am
>>>  a solid contributor on the board. The board knows it and the people 
>>> know
>>> it. Where the
>>>  Arch committee falters, with trying to impose fines for compliance, i 
>>> am
>>> out there working with
>>>  people the friendly way and working out the differences to achieve
>>> compliance. I hate this
>>>  anonymous Arch committee crap. But they say that people won't volunteer
>>> after the several
>>>  lawsuits they have had over the years.
>>> 73's
>>> Krish
>>> w4vku
>>> Dan Zimmerman N3OX wrote:
>>>> WB2WIK says:
>>>>> however none of them had any CC&Rs or HOAs involved
>>>> Steve, thanks for chiming in... I hadn't thought about that, though it
>>>> seems that Krish's HOA is considering allowing this installation even
>>>> though they could likely outvote him and reject it out of hand.
>>>> W6WRT says, regarding promises of money:
>>>>> A person's or business's "word" is backed up my money all the time.
>>>> It's how our
>>>>> civil justice system works, like it or not.
>>>> Absolutely, but the suggestion to put in writing that you'll make up
>>>> the difference in property values is essentially settling a number of
>>>> lawsuits that haven't yet been brought against you, and that seems a
>>>> little much to me!
>>>> I agree with you, and with Steve, and you can be sure that the YL and
>>>> I are staying faaaaaar away from HOA-encumbered properties when it's
>>>> time to buy.  That said, it sounds like Krish has a shot at convincing
>>>> the board  to allow a reasonable installation within the regulatory
>>>> framework of his HOA, which is something that absolutely should be
>>>> encouraged.
>>>> When the HOA says "No, you cannot put up a tower, period," that's when
>>>> the suggestion to just move is appropriate.
>>>> Dan
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TowerTalk mailing list
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> _______________________________________________
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list


TowerTalk mailing list

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