Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:51:53 -0600
From: Jon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower lawsuit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Is it at the back of the lot ?
Put a satellite dish or two on it...say it's to get a better signal.
## and provide your neighbor with free satellite for life too.
## VE6SH used to be the legal rep for RAC here in Canada. He had great
success in some cases, where
the amateur in question had bought a home in a new development...which had a
ton of restrictions on it.
Now contrary to what our friend Eddy may think, if you buy a home with
restrictions on it, here in
Canada, you have screwed yourself big time. Some near me will have all sorts
of restrictions on them,
like all driveways must be exposed aggregate, no clotheslines, no this, no
that, no bird feeder's, no
satellite dish's, no tv ants, no ham radio period. [as a sideline, some woman
north of me wanted to
save the environment, and put up a clothesline]. City hall said "no". A huge
legal battle ensued. I
think city hall won.]
The ham won....simply cause he could prove that his neighbors' had themselves
of the rules that were in place, and had done so for years.
The judge agreed, and allowed the install of the tower.
The rules on setbacks upsets me. To have a tower fall full length and still
remain on your
own property is pretty tough if a ham lived on a typ city lot..like 50' x 120'
Freestanding towers, like Trylons are designed to break at the 40' level..and
not at the base.
They will not fall full length. A UST crank up is the same deal, they break
3 x sections up.
Now if a 100' tall tree on my own property, falls down on my neighbors' house,
own house insurance covers the damage. If the neighbor does not have
insurance, he is outa
luck. My insurance does NOT cover my neighbors' home. Same deal with my tower.
later... Jim VE7RF
TowerTalk mailing list