[PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] Antenna advice

[Willie L. Baber]

Before I purchased a home in Northwest Greensboro in 1989 
[a nice neighborhood with underground power lines] I 
checked the deed to make sure antenna restrictions did not 
apply, and I had an attorney do this for me.

Then in 1991 I contacted the City.  The City required 
installation plans and expected these to be done according 
to specifications.

In effect, this boiled down to the size of the "hole," and 
preparing it properly.  I included a house bracket at the 
time because I was only going 48 feet, without guy wires, 
and I had engineering instructions that stated this was 
proper with a light load at the top of Rohn 25.

A City Engineer had to inspect the "hole" before I could 
put in the concrete [complete with rebar, starter section, 
and gravel].  He was impressed and said I made it bigger 
than it had to be [I didn't say I had future plans].

I'm now at 67 feet with one set of guys at the top 
(completed in 1995), but lightly loaded, just as before.  I 
also received engineering instructions on the use of 3 inch 
guy posts and the fittings needed (expensive, done in the 
way I was instructed).

I just wish I had used Rohn 45.  But at the time, 1991, I 
did well to invest in 50 feet of Rohn 25 and the concrete 
rather than doctor bills, dentist bills, and shoes for 
three harmonics.

A better plan is not to purchase in subdivision or a city 
in the first place.

...that was 13 years ago.  My youngest is now 23, and life 
is short...

73, Will, wj9b, dit dit



On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 20:37:35 -0500 Jim Jordan K4QPL 
<k4qpl@nc.rr.com> wrote:

> 
> As an attorney with a number of years experience in "dirt law," I can
> certainly confirm that it is a minefield for the ham who wants to put up an
> antenna in a conventional subdivision. Others who have had problems with
> covenants are RV owners, boat owners, and business owners, or employees, who
> drive a company truck or van with commercial signage. There ARE ways to live
> in a nice subdivision and still have a legal antenna. Tips from other hams,
> reading the covenants, and getting advice from real estate agents, builders
> and developers are all useful---and risky. Risky in two ways. First, you
> might think you can when you can't. Other times you can when you think you
> can't. Once you've done a preliminary screening of possible areas, get a
> good attorney who knows the field from both sides. Ask if he has litigated
> covenant cases representing homeowners. Hard to find. Most represent the
> "covenant police."  You may not want to fight your way in, but a good
> attorney will understand the complexities of the law. Example. The rules of
> construction for covenants are different than ordinary contracts. Poorly
> drafted covenants with ambiguous terms may not be enforceable since
> restrictions on use of land are to be construed against the restrictions and
> in favor of owners. Cases have been decided on the placing of a comma or
> semi-colon.
> 
> Permits. To paraphrase Shakespeare, "To apply, or not to apply, that is the
> question." Requirements are Incredibly vague, ambiguous and subject to
> overlapping code, local ordinances and exclusions. Planning officers and
> inspectors have huge leeway and often consider themselves the annointed
> custodians of all knowledge of construction law. Do not be misled. Go back
> to first paragraph.
> 
> Even for a general discussion, there's far too much for this kind of
> reflector posting. I'll try to do an article on the topic for the newsletter
> sometime soon if Pete is interested. Although perhaps appropriate, I won't
> get it in for April 1.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Jim, K4QPL
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> PVRC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc

----------------------
Willie L. Baber
wlbaber@uncg.edu