Forwarded message:
> From: sellington@mail.ssec.wisc.edu (sellington)
> Subject: Florida Judge Bans Transmissions
> To: cq-contest@TGV.COM
>
> >From Usenet:
>
> Article 30766 (20 more) in rec.radio.amateur.misc:
> From: sharon@world.std.com (Sharon M Gartenberg)
> Subject: Update on FL hams ordered to remove tower, stop transmitting
> Message-ID: <C3uMnK.Jqq@world.std.com>
> Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
>
>
> There was a request for more information about the case of two Florida
> hams who were ordered by a county judge to take down their antenna tower.
>
> Here is the latest:
>
> David K. (WA4NST) and Sharon T. (N4XLF) Brower recently lost a two-year
> legal battle over their 68-foot antenna tower. In his final judgment for
> the plaintiffs (7 households), Judge Charles E. Smith of the 19th Judicial
> Circuit in and for Indian River county, FL, found the radio transmissions
> to be a noxious and offensive activity, and the appearance of the tower and
> antennas an annoyance and nuisance to the neighborhood. ``This large, tall
> tower and antenna sticks out like an eyesore to this subdivision and
> neighborhood.'' Smith also ruled that the tower is a ``building'' which
> exceeds the two-story building limit in the deed restrictions, although the
> deed restrictions are silent about antenna support structures.
>
> Pending appeal, the Browers have been enjoined from making ANY radio
> transmissions from their home!!!
>
Can this be real?! Is there something here that is not obvious? The potential
precedent here is frightening. To define an antenna tower as a building seems
to stretch the imagination a bit! Did it also violate requirements for indoor
plumbing, or would a half-moon attached to the bottom tower section take care
of that typical requirement of building codes?
Ron - W0OSK
|