Re[4]: [TowerTalk] Anyone have experience challenging restrictive CC&R's ?

[R. Otto]

Hello John,

You raise some good points.  I got the agreement as part of the
contract, signed by the "development" board, made up of the bank, the
original estate owner, and others.  I see your point, but I couldn't
risk not getting agreement, buying the property and building a very
expensive house, and then having a fight with nothing going for me.
The C&R's did say no structure without authorization, so erecting it
without any agreement would be like sticking my head in a cannon.  No
matter what you do there are risks.............Guess I picked the one
I thought would give me the most "defendable position".

73's from.......

R. Otto
N8NGA@one.net
Cincinnati, Ohio

**********************************************
DXCC 10M         ** DX is !! **        WAS 10M
       There is a very fine line between
         "HOBBY" and "MENTAL ILLNESS"
**********************************************
When trouble arises and things look really bad,
there is always one individual who perceives a
solution and is willing to take command.
      VERY OFTEN THAT PERSON IS CRAZY!
**********************************************
Saturday, September 02, 2000, 1:02:57 PM, you wrote:

JL> That only works when the developer is still functioning as the ACC, but not
JL> if the Home Owner's Association busybodies have already taken over the ACC.
JL> Also, we have one case in town where the HOA, after taking over from the
JL> developer, unilaterally attempted to rescind previous exemptions granted by
JL> the developer.  Many months of hassle, legal fees, and unpleasantness were
JL> required to convince them they couldn't do it.

JL>  Be very careful relying on the sale agreement - it is false security.  I
JL> know of several cases where the seller and real estate agent made such
JL> representation, then punted after the sale, saying they never had the
JL> authority to act for the HOA, and that the HOA restrictions were outside of
JL> the sale contract.  They were also "judgment proof" and even if they were
JL> not, it was very hard to put a number on the money damage from not getting
JL> to put up a ham tower, and it is not very likely that the ham will ever get
JL> to put one up.  If he does, without permission, the daily fines are well
JL> defined.

JL> My rule is, if you are asking somebody for permission you are screwed, or
JL> soon will be.

JL> 73 John N5CQ


JL> -----Original Message-----
JL> From: R. Otto [mailto:N8NGA@one.net]
JL> Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2000 9:31 AM
JL> To: John Langdon
JL> Subject: Re[2]: [TowerTalk] Anyone have experience challenging restrictive
JL> CC&R's ?

JL> Hello John,

JL> Another approach to use when you're thinking of buying property in an
JL> area with C&R's is to put in your purchase contract a clause stating
JL> your intent to erect a HAM radio tower and antennas, with a height of
JL> XX.  I bought property in a very exclusive area of Cincinnati, and
JL> expected quit a fight were I to try to erect the tower after buying
JL> the property.  Rather than buy and build at risk, I put my intent as a
JL> requirement of the purchase contract.  They had several meetings to
JL> discuss it, and in the beginning we were told the "never would grant
JL> such a wish".  In the end.....the cash on the table worked I guess
JL> <G>.   They came as a group and looked at the tower at my current
JL> residence..........and approved the sale.  Now there can be no
JL> discussion........it's in the sale agreement.

JL> 73's from.......

JL> R. Otto
JL> N8NGA@one.net
JL> Cincinnati, Ohio

JL> **********************************************
JL> DXCC 10M         ** DX is !! **        WAS 10M
JL>        There is a very fine line between
JL>          "HOBBY" and "MENTAL ILLNESS"
JL> **********************************************
JL> When trouble arises and things look really bad,
JL> there is always one individual who perceives a
JL> solution and is willing to take command.
JL>       VERY OFTEN THAT PERSON IS CRAZY!
JL> **********************************************
JL> Saturday, September 02, 2000, 6:53:39 AM, you wrote:


JL>> FCC has ruled against enforcing restrictions against: satellite
JL> receiving
JL>> dishes less than 1 meter in diameter, broadcast TV antennas in areas
JL> where
JL>> antennas mounted inside the attic would not provide a useable signal,
JL> and
JL>> "MMDS" or "microwave cable" antennas mounted less than 12' above the
JL>> roofline. These are the only specific antenna related things I know of.
JL>> Most Homeowner's Associations still either don't know or refuse to
JL>> acknowledge this.  They will say something like "restrictive covenants
JL> are
JL>> contracts between individuals that the government cannot interfere
JL> with".

JL> J



--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com