>Now every new subdivision (even those with 5+ acre lots) have
>such CC&R's.
I just walked away from 3.5 acres in a rural part of Idaho where there were
CC&R's regarding towers. I pointed out that there were no concerns about
chickens, cows and horses running around in front yards which I personally
did not think appropriate for residential living. The response was "towers
are unsightly, ruin the view and depress property values. Animals in the
front yard are common in non-urban areas and in spite of the presence of
wells for water constitute no health hazard". The representatives of the
CC&R committee were adamant about this and stated "no towers of any height,
and no antennas of any kind except the small dish satellite antennas for
TV".
Clearly I have not been searching in a sufficiently rural area or I need to
buy a few hundred acres, select my part and then sell the rest to a
developer. Bonneville county has no restrictions on towers or any sort less
than 200 feet high and requires no building permits for amateur towers.
(Clearly an enlightened county). It is the folks who do the developing that
place the covenents on the land and the persons who buy the property see no
reason to change things since it does not affect them. C'est la vie!
de Tod, K0TO/7
-----Original Message-----
From: thompson@mindspring.com <thompson@mindspring.com>
To: Gerald D'Entremont <w5ba@csi.com>; towertalk@contesting.com
<towertalk@contesting.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] A Sad Precedent
>
>All excerpted from Houston Chronicle 2-23-99, copyrighted that publication.
>Emphasis mine.
>
> "In what is called the first decision of its kind, a jury Monday
ordered
>GTE Wireless to pay
>$1.2 MILLION to a city of Bunker Hill Village couple who claim a 100-foot
>cellular phone TOWER NEAR their home has lessened the value of their
>property and caused them MENTAL ANGUISH.
You can bet the cellular community will appeal or take the case to federal
court. Especially since the city approved the site through zoning. This
would mean the end of cellular towers in the USA and the courts and the
friends of the industry won't allow this. In the case of amateur radio
towers, properly approved and sited a local court has no jurisdiction as was
show in the N4NX case in Metro Atlanta. However, if a tower is proposed
and the local powers that be want to make it almost impossible to put up the
tower (as W5BA has found out) they can. We need to get the FCC to expand
PRB-1 to the subdivisions with CC&R's that don't allow towers of any type.
20 Years ago you had a choice of selecting a neighborhood without
restrictions. Now every new subdivision (even those with 5+ acre lots) have
such CC&R's.
Bet the same judge who is hearing the cellular case also has ruled many
times that the property owner has a right to make the most out of his or her
property in zoning cases whether the public wants it or not.
73 Dave K4JRB
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|