PRB-1 is not a blank check. It means they have to engage in meaningful
negotiations and make reasonable accommodations and not do an outright
prohibition of towers. Using the word "reasonable" makes things very
subjective. I get into this argument a lot with other hams because they
think PRB-1 means they can't say "boo" to you as soon as you start pouring
concrete.
You may have little or no trouble but if you do they can make it
difficult. It took me almost 15 months to resolve my issues and then they
ran me into winter which meant I was "cooked" until spring to get my tower
project finishe. Also just because the zoning officer says you can do
something it doesn't mean a whole lot. If he's wrong, then its your
fault. The "onus" is on you to comply. If he gives you bad advice you
have little or no recourse except to comply and backtrack to make it legal.
I also agree that CC&R's are probably far more problematic to get a tower
erected than most zoning laws these days especially with all the well
settled PRB-1 case law at the Federal level and all the state level
adoption of same. Some of which is even more liberal that the Federal
PRB-1.
You may want to check out the "ham law" reflector too and see if there's a
ham lawyer in your vicinity who can take a look at things for you.
Chuck
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Drax Felton <draxfelton@gmail.com> wrote:
> You've got prb 1 conformance required. I'd be more concerned about
> finding a hidden CC&R recorded.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 6, 2011, at 9:52 AM, towertalk-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
> > Zoning question - Putnam County Florida
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|