[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] CCR's -- Am I being too paranoid?

Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] CCR's -- Am I being too paranoid?
From: "Charles Mills" <>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:13:13 -0400
List-post: <">>
This is quite a timely question to say the least!

I just got done putting up my Aluma T-50 for the SECOND time.  After 8 1/2
years of a rooftop tower I decided to upgrade.  i tried to go under the
radar and not get a permit which technically, I didn't need.  One neighbor
complained and got people fired up about property vaules, RFI exposure, and
anything else you can think of and mob rule ensued.
They fought me at the township level and tried to make me take it down
because the ordinance required that communications towers be installed in a
"rear" yard (not typically unreasonable under PRB-1) but my corner lot had
no rear yard because of a sloppily written ordinance.  So I had to fight it
under the guise of the ordinance being exclusionary and not reasonable
accomodations under PRB-1.  The long and short of it is, they STILL tried to
make me take it down then they took too long toact on my permit application
which I did file which defaulted it to "approved" under Pennsylvania Law.
We (me and my attorney) had to threaten to sue anyone with a pulse down at
the zoning office and that got their attention but not in a good way.  We
came to a compromise of moving the tower to a different location on the
property and I was issued a building permit.  Ironically, I just took off my
shoes, changed my clothes and all my ham buddies left about 30 minutes ago
from moving said tower.

I purposely avoided moving into a CCR type of neighborhood so I could do
what I wanted on my property but you can still have neighbors fight you
tooth and nail.  We purposely did the work on Good Friday because zoning
officers are tucked snugly in their bed and unable to issue a stay of a
building permit.  They can still fight it and issue  a "stay" forcing me to
go in front of the Hearing Board but, the project is now done.

>From a psychological aspect, people in general feel that what ever they can
see is "theirs" and should only change on their terms.  Also, all change is
a loss and all loss must be mourned but then resolution sets in.  I have
some upset neighbors to say the least but I figure this will blow over in a
few months and the neighbors who were my friends will be my friends again
and the ones who weren't my friends will still not be my friends.

Chuck / W3YNI
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Eric - VE3GSI <> wrote:

> Robert,
> >
> > The key word here is unsightly objects. Are towers/antennas
> > considered to be unsightly objects?
> >
> Perhaps I am  biased, my comment and I am sure all on this reflector would
> reply with a responding NO! Like I said before, biased.
> I just completed a second tower at 72 feet, on my property with-in our
> town
> limits. I did ask 'the town' if I needed a permit, the answer was yes. It
> was easy enough to pay the 50 bucks and have the blessing of the town and
> as
> my sister-in-law (a clerk for another township) pointed out, "cheap
> insurance against any potential issues with the tower that may arise
> later."
> Here in Canada, RAC (our national answer to ARRL) tell us when putting up
> a
> tower (RAC also wants me to call it an antenna structure), you must asked
> your neighbours. I personally think asking neighbours is a crock of
> b****s***. It is my property, I pay the taxes on my property, not my
> neighbours. Personally I don't think neighbours need to be involved, nor
> can
> they tell you what you can erect on your land if the municipal government
> who takes your tax moneys says otherwise.
> Can you tell I am not a lawyer? Just a Ham who needs to vent and have a
> tower to enjoy a harmless hobby.  But, as others pointed out, perhaps a
> chat
> with a legal beagle might not be a bad idea.
> GL Eric - VE3GSI.
> P.S. I am a member of RAC.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Crews
> > Sent: March 21, 2008 10:08 AM
> > Subject: [TowerTalk] CCR's -- Am I being too paranoid?
> >
> >
> >
> > Last week I made an offer on an 11-acre property outside of
> > Kingman, AZ. It was accepted and yesterday the title company
> > sent me a copy of the property's CCR's to sign off. There is
> > no mention ANYWHERE within the CCR's about towers, antennae,
> > height limitations, or any communications equipment. However,
> > one item caught my attention:
> >
> > "(9) No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be
> > conducted upon any portion of said land, nor shall anything
> > be done thereon which may be or become an annoyance to the
> > neighborhood; and no refuse piles, junk piles, wrecked car
> > bodes, weeds or other unsightly objects shall be permitted to
> > be placed or to remain upon said land unless completely
> > hidden from view from any neighboring property or access
> > road, and in the event that any of such owners shall not
> > comply with the above provisions, then declarants, or their
> > successors and assigns, shall have the right to enter upon
> > said land and remove the offending objects at the expense of
> > such owner, who shall repay the same upon demand, and such
> > entry shall not be deemed as trespass."
> >
> > The key word here is unsightly objects. Are towers/antennas
> > considered to be unsightly objects?
> >
> > Some further facts about the area. The county building
> > inspector gave me a copy of communications towers rules --
> > Amateur Radio and CB are totally exempt -- no building permit
> > needed. Only setback rules need to be followed. One
> > neighboring property has a 40-foot windmill tower. Another
> > has a mobile home that has been gutted. There is NO
> > homeowners association. The area is very rural with 5- to
> > 10-acre parcels the norm.
> >
> > Am I being too paranoid or is this a red flag?
> >
> > Bob / K1VA
> _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list

Charles L. Mills

TowerTalk mailing list

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