You may want to try to research previous permit requests that have been
previously challenged in your area. I don't mean just for towers ... I
mean for anything that may have had objections from neighbors due to
perceived visual impact. This might include adding a garage, a fence, a
carport, a flagpole, or whatever. You may find that your zoning office
has declined to rule against permit requests based solely on visual
impact complaints. I've seen that happen in two different locations
here in Arizona. Visual criteria are just too subjective for the zoning
folks to want to get mired in unless there are written criteria to guide
them, especially since they can themselves be held liable for
inconsistent application of them. There may be some precedents that
would work in your favor.
HOAs are a different matter, of course. They can be (and typically are)
as arbitrary and/or inconsistent as they see fit to be.
Good luck,
Dave AB7E
Krishna Kanakasapapathi wrote:
> Folks,
> The antenna zoning book by K1VR has a lot of documentation as well as a study
> on this topic about property values.
>
> Apart from the above, based on postings from this list, i was able to
> compile data for several
> other states. This issue came up from one of my neighbors when i went to get
> their
> sign off. I said that, as a buyer, i would be armed with facts about other
> similar size
> homes in the other subdivisions around. So one cannot ask for more than what
> the market
> will support. That was very convincing and then i was told that another
> neighbors crapy
> yard hurts their property value much more than my proposed setup. :-)
>
> Well my proposal was for a stepper cranked behind the roof and raised/lowered
> when needed.
>
> Once i was able to dis-prove this fact about property value impact, i now
> have
> one neighbor oppose my antenna proposal because his wife does not want to
> see it.
> He claims that this is a "bedroom community". Heck, with 370 homes, i don't
> know
> what that means around this subdivision. Plus there is an under current
> where he
> got a couple of others support him based on the eye-sore issue. One fellow
> has the
> crappy yard that was pointed above. The other guy is behind me, past several
> tall trees , past
> a creek say over several hundred feet and never see his home, but i think he
> opposes to
> express solidarity with his buddy.
>
> Will need to see if i can drag these 3 guys to court to settle the dispute.
> Any inputs or similar
> experiences, please drop me a private email, since this posting is visibile
> via google. Damn
> attorneys that serve the HOAs will have access to it.
>
> Short of getting the FCC to do something along the lines of OTARD, i don't
> see any other
> way this is going to be a slam dunk for the future generation.
>
> One option is to custom build a home on a piece of land with no
> restrictions. However, when
> you put the following issues in perspective, the alternative is less
> attractive until one reaches their
> golden years.
>
> a) Other homes with Kids around, so your kids can run and play with.
> Very important for their overall development.
> b) Neighbors to help and be helped( there are some good ones everywhere).
> c) Near good schools.
> d) Short commute to work.(will compromise on this to an extent).
> e) Safe location.(theft, breakins are probably less in a subdivision IMHO).
> f) Marginally more expensive than other available homes of the same size.
> This is the $$ hit that one is willing to take to make the change.
>
> Krish
> w4vku
>
>
>
> Alan NV8A wrote:
>
>
>> On 06/30/07 03:36 pm Tom Osborne wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> But the sellers could still claim -- but cannot prove -- that their
>>>> homes would have sold at a higher price if it were not for your tower.
>>>>
>>>> There is no way of *proving* either assertion because it is impossible
>>>> to compare the results of selling the same property to the same
>>>> purchaser on the same day when your tower is there and when it isn't.
>>>>
>>> Where does it end???
>>>
>>> My neighbors house next door is for sale. Should I take my tower and
>>> antennas down so they could possiblty get more for it. Could my neighbors
>>> get more for their house if I maybe, painted MY house (even though it don't
>>> need it) and put on a new roof. Maybe re-sodded the lawn and planted a nice
>>> new one. Or, maybe I could put some flowers along the road. Also I could
>>> sell my RV so that there wouldn't be an 'unsightly' RV in my driveway. Or
>>> maybe tear down the shop I have behind my house??
>>>
>> But that's why "we" have Homeowners' Associations -- to prohibit such
>> nefarious activities as changing my car's wiper blades while it is
>> standing in the driveway, allowing the kids to use sidewalk chalk for
>> its intended purpose, painting one's house the same color as the
>> original when all the others have changed color due to fading, or flying
>> the US flag. I'm not making these up: these are all cases where
>> Homeowners' Associations have sought to take legal action against
>> "violators" --- and in some cases costing the "violators" a packet of money.
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Alan NV8A
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|