View Full Version : What are CC&Rs ?
What are CC&Rs and where did they come from?
A CC&R is the governing laws that apply to what is called a subdivision. These are common laws that apply equally to all. These laws define architecture and structure appearance of the subdivision as well as provide the ability to govern, make change, and collect fees to provide maintenance for common property. It also provides limited judicial authority to sue, fine or attach leans to force compliance. In short these laws define the governing authority of the subdivision. CC&Rs are basically subdivision-zoning laws, which evolved from county and or city zoning requirements.
One must first understand some basic concepts. A law is defined as being made up of conditions and restrictions (C&Rs). The purpose of a law is to provide control and to regulate. Laws, which are created or changed by the majority representatives or population, are common laws. Common laws apply equally to all. A common law is not a private agreement. A private agreement can only be changed by consent of the original signers or by court action.
The CC&R didn’t just pop into existence it evolved over time. CC&Rs if required are part of the developers building plan. Zoning boards require an approved building plan before a home can be constructed. Developers use the building plan to have property zoned or buy property that is already zoned for that purpose. Once the plan is approved by the board construction can commence. Contractors had little need for C&Rs when subdivisions didn’t exist. As the requirement for homes grew, developers submitted plans to the zoning board that included multipliable builders. Conditions and Restrictions (C&Rs) were created as part of the plan and approved by the zoning board. The purpose of the C&R was to restrict multiple builders to a common approved plan, design and appearance of the development. As the size and complexity of the developments grew, the developers wanted subdivision pools and tennis courts to attract prospective buyers. Some developments required drainage ponds and roadside maintenance. These subdivisions needed to posses the ability to be self-reliant as well as comply with zoning codes. This created a requirement for a governing body to take care of the community needs. This governing body, called a homeowners association, created by the C&R has the authority to collect money to maintain the parks, swimming pools, tennis courts and common areas once the development reached a specified parameter.
The developer needs to retain the power of government until which time the homeowners associations has reached the agreed parameter to take control. This transfer of power is made possible by the covenant. The covenant is the promise, agreement and means by which a developer, at a certain percentage of home sales or time period, passes the responsibility and control of government to the homeowners association. The Covenant added to the C&R became what today is known as the CC&R. The CC&R fulfills the zoning board building plan requirement and enables the subdivision to govern, make change, and collect money to maintain facilities. As CC&Rs were part of the original building plan, many zoning boards required a statement from the developer that they researched and no known laws had been violated in the making of the CC&R. This requirement is very seldom practiced today.
There is no commonality between operating structures of zoning boards across the United States. Requirements vary from county to county and from state to state. With most of the early day planners no longer in office, there is confusion as to what level of involvement the zoning board should have. Part of this is the result of the county and city governments not having the resources to maintain control over the CC&R due to budget and personnel restraints. When CC&Rs were first created, a Real Estate Attorney researched laws and wrote the CC&R. Today real-estate brokers and laypersons write these documents. This new practice has permitted writers of the CC&Rs to be influenced by outside sources. Such things as eliminating outside antennas and poles were influenced by underground utilities that provided kickbacks to the writers and developers. This provided a captive audience for TV and Internet service. These utilities became members of various league of municipalities. They provide money to protect their interest with lobbyist at the state and national level. Boilerplate CC&Rs were written by the league and were provided as guidelines for developers to follow. These boilerplate documents plus the whims of the writer have corrupted the original intent and purpose of the CC&R. One example of this is an instance where the association has the right to search and seize undesirable home accessories at the homeowner’s expense.
CC&R abuse doesn’t stop here. The maintenance contracts of common areas have become quite lucrative. By controlling the maintenance contracts and the collection of fees, some developers have found themselves with a profitable venture. To maintain control of these properties, they have replaced the percent of population with a time compliance requirement for transfer of government. Many of these time compliance requirements have an automatic renewal clause. If the transfer of government isn’t filed on a certain day, the governing authority automatically reverts back to the developer.
When the CC&R was first conceived, its intended use was to assure that all homes in a common development had similar construction and appearance. When dealing with residential property, improvements are either Primary or Secondary. Primary improvements are main structures such as homes and garages. Secondary improvements are considered be normal accessories. Such edifices as fencing, swimming pools, tennis courts, antenna/towers and tool sheds are considered to be normal accessory structures on residential property. The CC&R was never intended to place a restriction on any improvement other than Primary. Secondary improvements are considered personal rights and had always been left up to the individual homeowner to possess or not.
As long as the C&R or CC&R deals only with primary structures the seller has no requirement to give notice to the buyer as no personal rights are involved. But when restrictions are placed on secondary improvements, then the buyer must be made aware. At the time the deed is signed, a statement is attached which states that a CC&R may exist. This is to make the buyer aware that there are additional zoning laws other than the county or city that govern the property which is being sold. This is not an agreement but a notice. Like any law, you may not agree, but there may be penalties for non-compliance. The only recourse for the homeowner who loses his or her personal rights is to either sell or comply. The court cost associated with any legal action would bankrupt the average homeowner. Those who write CC&Rs that limit personal rights and freedoms do so knowing that there is little recourse for the homeowner. There are still many good developers out there today. One must read the CC&R in order to pick and choose.
W0ON (whiskey zero oscar november)
Very clear and to the point.
Be careful of what you buy and sign for. It is like joining a club, you are being controlled.
# # # # # # # # #Item worth saving for the future.
# # # # # # # # # # # #--------------
call me an anarchist, but I will not buy a house where a neighborhood committee has control over what I want to do with my property with the laws set by the state or county.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ Sep. 23 2003,16:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">call me an anarchist, but I will not buy a house where a neighborhood committee has control over what I want to do with my property with the laws set by the state or county.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Here, here. Absolutely!!
Then you get the posts here from hams that bought into this type of deal and whine about it later. Oh? What do you mean I can't put an antenna up?
Read the CC&R's. BTW, I blame it mostly on women pushing their men to buy and men who are not wearing the pants in the family and not buying the house unless the CC&R's are changed to his satisfaction. So, blame it on women.
You may think this is nuts or I am nuts. But think about it.
K2WH
KA3RFE
09-24-2003, 11:19 PM
CC&Rs have nothing to do with zoning laws. They are private contracts and have nothing to do with common law. If you buy into a community with these issues, you're signing a contract that you will abide by them. Basically you sign away your rights to do what you wish with your property that other citizens of the area can do.
My residential property is not in a CC&R area and I can put as many antennas as I wish on my roof or in my back yard. I can park my vehicles anyplace. I can paint my house whatever color I want, I can put a basketball hoop up, I can put firewood outside my house, and many more things. But there are communities around here that you are not able to do ANY of these things. So it's not a matter of common law or zoning. The common law would be "a man's home is his castle." The zoning would be "x number of houses per acre with open space of 'X' acres with street width of X with all underground utilities and building permits must be approved in advance."
Or at least that's my take on those things.
I inherited a building lot in a very nice water-privileged community with CC&Rs that I will never build on just because of those things. It's not very restrictive but outside antennas are not allowed. This association mostly just administers the common community beaches and clubhouse and piers and they (we) have a special taxing district to pay for full time police services.
73, Pete KA3RFE
For the most part I agree with the fellow ham who said he will not buy a home where a homeowner's association has control over what he may do with his property, but as a former president (for 11 years) of a homeowner's association I know that there are circumstances where the community has a right to demand some things of a neighbor. For example, in my old community there was a homeowner who refused to paint his house, or even maintain the outside (and he was more than capable of doing so, both in strenght and in assets). This individual didn't even mow his lawn or pick up trash. This hurt the value of homes that were on the market, and it created an eyesore. So in a case like that I think CC&R's are ok. HOWEVER, covenants and restrictions which prevent an outside antenna, or a backyard fence, or a swimming pool not visible from the street, or siding, etc are totally wrong.
BTW, some states don't require disclosure of CC&Rs until closing and if the buyer backs out at that point over the CC&Rs, the seller can either sue to enforce the contract or can sue the reluctant buyer for damages. Now that is really wrong.
Charles Wackerman
KI4BWW
N7XCF
09-25-2003, 12:01 AM
I saw a post a week or so ago about the Coast Guard siting a tower and apparently they told the local zoning board that the USA Patriot Act pre-empted local zoning for anything related to homeland security. I wonder if that's true and if we could get it applied to amatuer antennas?
Eric
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KI4BWW @ Sep. 23 2003,17:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For the most part I agree with the fellow ham who said he will not buy a home where a homeowner's association has control over what he may do with his property, but as a former president (for 11 years) of a homeowner's association I know that there are circumstances where the community has a right to demand some things of a neighbor. #For example, in my old community there was a homeowner who refused to paint his house, or even maintain the outside (and he was more than capable of doing so, both in strenght and in assets). #This individual didn't even mow his lawn or pick up trash. #This hurt the value of homes that were on the market, and it created an eyesore. #So in a case like that I think CC&R's are ok. #HOWEVER, covenants and restrictions which prevent an outside antenna, or a backyard fence, or a swimming pool not visible from the street, or siding, etc are totally wrong.
BTW, some states don't require disclosure of CC&Rs until closing and if the buyer backs out at that point over the CC&Rs, the seller can either sue to enforce the contract or can sue the reluctant buyer for damages. #Now that is really wrong.
Charles Wackerman
KI4BWW[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Charlie,
We have a fellow around the corner, not subject to any HOA, that has not been in that house in over a year. His grass grew, the weeds over flowed the back yard fence... but a quick 5 min call to the county board of health had the owner cutting the weeds, removing the old water heater that was placed near the garage door, all within 24 hours of the first call to the BoH....
The reason they work quickly.... West Nile.
You DO NOT NEED a home owners association or a herd of old women watching where the dog poops, to have county/township laws enforced.
AE6IP
09-25-2003, 01:25 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N7XCF @ Sep. 24 2003,17:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I saw a post a week or so ago about the Coast Guard siting a tower and apparently they told the local zoning board that the USA Patriot Act pre-empted local zoning for anything related to homeland security. I wonder if that's true and if we could get it applied to amatuer antennas?
Eric[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
no and no. It's not true and just because the ARRL has an MoU with Citizen Corp, don't expect any special "homland security goodies."
AE6IP
09-25-2003, 01:30 AM
The original poster has his facts confused. "covenants, conditions, and restrictions" are not law; they are contract clauses.
Part of the confusion comes from the wide range of variation in zoning ordinances. Local zoning ordinances, which are administrative law, can vary from none to very specific (down to what color and material the exterior of the house can have.)
If you are in a situation where you need to tell the difference, get professional advice from a realtor or lawyer familiar with your local situation.
a quick rule of thumb is: if you can go the zoning commission and attempt to ask for a variance, then it's a zoning law; if it's in the contract for the house, it's probably a CC&R.
kc2lsu
09-25-2003, 01:41 AM
I moved into my current QTH a good year before I got the radio bug, and the subsquent license. Unless I get divorced I am stuck here since the XYL loves the place and the distance to her job. The clause in my CC&R about antennas never bothered me until I passed the Technician test. #
I actually liked the rest of the clauses that kept my neighbors in check; especially the ones who wanted to paint their houses the wrong colors. The only huge issue's in this devlopment are the homeowners who went bankrupt and included the association in their bankruptcy; nearly a third of the units have stopped paying their fees, yet still get their common property lawns mowed. (Guess who's left, paying for that)
The most interesting thing in the homeowner agreement was the trailer exclusion, no trailer, nor trailer parts can be stored in a backyard, or in the basement of any unit. Oh and no BOATS either -- especially if their on a trailer in the backyard, or in the basement.
When I bought my last three houses, I had a clause inserted the offers to purchase (contracts) stating there were to be no CC&Rs or local ordinances restricting antennas or the contracts were null and void (may or may not be binding). This puts some of the legwork on the realtor and seller to research, but I also checked to be sure. My last purchase is zoned agricultural and I checked the county ordinances on-line before purchasing so just about anything goes out here. I now have two towers up!! But I can only have one driveway. Hi HI
Cary
K4HV :)
The same with my property.
My #purchase of this 1 1/4 acre land is zoned agricultural and I had 9 vertical antennas for all 9 bands plus a 65 foot tower.
The only complaint came from me as the xyl only allowed me half acre.
There are good deals somewhere. Read before you buy.
K2WH is correct as my xyl did the buying, I had no choice, shape up or ship out.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # -------------
kg6jse
09-25-2003, 03:40 AM
In Lodi, California CC&R's maintained by an oppressive homeowners association are being used to discriminate against families with children.
Now, didn't the taliban get there start as a homeowners association?
Bottom line: if a neighbor comes out of their house and takes a photograph of you parked in YOUR driveway, you might have a problem putting up an antenna.
KA8FFM
09-25-2003, 10:10 AM
This country is really going to blazes, and in a nice neat handbasket. Too many lawyers, period...KA8FFM
Like the old saying "Once the horse is out it is too late to close the gate"
Zoning laws have evolved over many years. #I was a member of the Planning Commission that is charged with the zoning laws. #We hired an outside advisor and what he did was present us with copies of other communities zoning laws. #It is not just so many houses in so much space. #It takes in to account anything having to do with property. #It tells you how much space can be used in for parking in the front yard, where and how antennas can be placed, #the placing of scrubs etc. #Just about anything that you can think of. #Our Planning Commision is appointed with no prior training or knowledge required.
The sad thing is that these boards usually do not have enough members because nobody wants to take the time to serve.
The procedure is to put the zoning law together and then have two public hearings. #While I was serving it was not unusual not to have anyone show up for these public hearings. #In effect, you could just about write anything and have it go through. #It is then passed on to the City Council for a hearing and a vote. #Again nobody showed up interested in the new zoning law. #If I was a non ham and you, a ham, lived next door and I had TVI, I could in anger write a law not allowing anntenas. #This would go through as the agenda is not published anywhere. #
Due to the fact that nobody cares until it effects them many of these laws are being written. #I realize that this is not a developement and the developers write their own laws but this is what has set alot of these restrictions in motion.
AG8A
WB2WIK
09-25-2003, 04:44 PM
CC&Rs will continue to spread like a cancer unless and until people simply refuse to buy properties having any deed restrictions -- period.
There is not a single place in all the U.S. where homes are not available for sale without CC&Rs. I've made a study of this for the past seven years (will be eight next March), and am compiling data to publish a book on this subject in 2005. Name the location, I can provide you with a listing of homes for sale without CC&Rs -- without exception. I just did exactly this for a ham in Denver who make a long posting about no housing being available there without CC&Rs....within two weeks, I had a list of 20 homes free of covenants and restrictions all within a 30 minute drive of Denver's airport, and over a very wide price and feature range.
The problem is, most people home shopping don't start out with the basic premise that CC&Rs are simply not acceptable. If they do, and work with a title company to perform rapid searches for restrictions, they'll be starting down the right, rather than the wrong, path.
If every ham in America simply refuses to buy deed-restricted property, and can convince his close friends and relatives to do the same, within about five years there will be an awful lot of homes for sale with no buyers. When that occurs, the CC&Rs will vanish. If people continue buying them, eventually there won't be any non-restricted properties available for sale, because those of us who were smart enough to buy non-restricted properties now will own them all.
WB2WIK/6
Most amateur radio operators consider CC&Rs to negative. However, most buyers of expensive homes consider them to be positive.
Like it or not, most people do not want an antenna farm next door. Whether out of ignorance or because of astitic reasons, they don't want to be our neighbors.
So what is the answer?
Every amateur radio operator when buying a house need to make sure there are no CC&Rs attached.
I so hate CC&Rs and restrictive zoning that I get upset every time I watch "This Old House" and they have to get premission from some neighborhood commision on design changes. If you watch the show, you know that most of the issues are petty. Yet, when I complain to friends they usually disagree with me and they like the CC&Rs.
n8ary
09-25-2003, 08:20 PM
One of the best things we can do in the future to prevent negative feelings or rules against antennas is:
1. Make your antenna farm simple and neat. Don't make it look like something out of "junkyard Wars." If you can't afford a nice-looking beam, put up a simple dipole or G5RV. They work fine.
2. Use the minimum power required to make a reasonable contact. Don't use 1500 watts unless you have to.
3. Place your antennas where they aren't too prominent, if possible. The best way to get along with your neighbors is to not give them anything to bitch about. My favorite is a pair of mobile antennas in a dipole configuration. You can hide that baby about anywhere.
4. If there are any complaints, listen and act on them if you can. Try to solve the problem and be helpful. Either that or say you haven't used the equipment for months because it's been broken http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
WB2WIK
09-25-2003, 09:23 PM
N8ARY is part of the problem, I'm afraid.
"Place antennas where they aren't too prominent?" That may satisfy one particular operating style (called very low-profile), but it won't satisfy many -- and the "not too prominent" antennas are what create the "not too prominent" signals on the bands, that we all struggle to hear just over the noise.
When I call CQ on HF and hear half a dozen replies (as there usually are), I honestly try to dig down and hear the weaker ones. Then, my first (compound) question to the weak station is, "What's your name, and what kind of antenna are you using?"
Nine times out of then, the weak station is using a "not too prominent" antenna. And the guy who's 20/S9 is using a far more "prominent" antenna. It's not power, it's not location, it's not operator prowess. It's the antennas that make the contacts.
Last night was a perfect example. On 17m SSB at ~0000 UTC, I was in QSO with a station in southwestern CT who was using an FT1000MPMkV (200W) to an 8 element LPDA beam at 55 feet. John was consistently S9+ for a long time, nice ragchew. A "breaker" came to visit us from northern NJ, only about 50 miles from my original contact. Larry (the new station) was using a G5RV at 40 feet, and FT1000D (200W). He was S4. We chatted for half an hour.
Let's see: S9+, vs. S4. Both stations same distance from me (2500 miles +/- 50 miles), same direction. One several "S" units stronger, and could be copied for hours, after the weaker station faded into the dust.
Maybe John had a "not too prominent" antenna, but I doubt it.
When I hear somebody really weak calling me (almost daily), I almost ask them, "Are you using a G5RV antenna?" As funny as that sounds, it's pretty accurate -- the answer is typically "yes."
Not everyone takes ham radio so seriously or has the desire to work the bands longer as they fade into the solar duldrums...but for those of us who enjoy this, "not too prominent" antennas won't get it done, and neither will abiding by CC&Rs.
WB2WIK/6
W1LKE
09-25-2003, 10:41 PM
I have the benefit of commercial zoning behind me, with a day care on part of the lot. I am considering buying the lot directly behind me and making an offer to a tower company they can't refuse on a property lease.
Listen to what happened to me concerning CC&Rs and a Homeowner's Association:
When I bought my house, it said in the contract that there were no CC&Rs on the property. On the backside of my subdivision a new subdivision was being built. They extended the main street from my S/D into theirs, as it gave direct access to the main road in the area.
After being in my house for 2-3 years, I was sent a bill for the Homeowner's Association. This was a first. When I saw the address I was to return the payment ot, I trashed the bill. It was from the other neighborhood. After that, I trashed everything without opening it that came from that address. You should have heard the mortgage company scream when, unknown to me, a lien application was filed on my house for not paying my HA fees.
It took a while to get that cleared up, and apparently over 50% of my neighborhood paid up blindly, the rest joined me in my boat.
Well, that got straightened out, but you should have heard the complaints from the people in that other S/D when all the people that paid their fees (not refunded) from my neighborhood showed up to use the community pool.
Their houses are valued at twice ours.
Be careful what you buy into.
w7eet
09-25-2003, 11:10 PM
One got to be careful with Real Estate Agents. They like to hide the facts about CCR's and Assoc's Fees. This is another way for someone to scam on others. I caught someone lying to others trying to start a association and billing people on their property while this indiviual was driving around in his fancy vehicle. He was tell them that he was maintaning the roads and do the process of the developing. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
KD5YIL
09-26-2003, 12:29 AM
There is legislation in Congress to extend PRB-1 to include CC&R's. WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN and have him/her support HR 1478.
Also, many states (20 at last count) have laws in support of PRB-1. Another intersting fact is that if your Homeowners Association singles you out, hire a good lawyer (preferebly a fellow ham) and ensure that they are enforcing every little letter of the covenant to everyone. One "exception" and the entire covenant can be called into doubt.
Simtechiii
09-26-2003, 12:43 AM
Just bought a house in Hampton, Va. last April in a CC&R neighborhood. One of my stipulations for signing the contract was that the CC&Rs did NOT prohibit the installation of antennas on the property. The realtor representing the builder was certain no such restrictions existed, but he, our realtor and I read the document a couple of times to confirm it. In the city of Hampton, a ham is permitted to install a 50' tower without any problem. After signing the contract to purchase the home, we were provided with a copy of the CC&Rs and given three days to cancel the contract. Again, I read the rules several times, to confirm no restrictions existed. Had the rules prohibited the installation of any antennas, I would've cancelled the contract in a heartbeat and my wife would've had to look elsewhere.
73,
Steven / KG6JEV/4
One got to be careful with Real Estate Agents. They like to hide the facts about CCR's and Assoc's Fees.
That's baloney. Real estate agents are licensed professionals, and would risk losing thier license by "hiding the facts". Real estate laws are different in every state. Until about a month ago, a real estate agent in Florida had to disclose that there were CCR's on a property being sold. The law has recently changed, and now the real estate agent has to provide a buyer a copy of any existing CCR's. But they don't have to READ them to you, that's your job.
If you are buying a house and are concerned about CCR's, ASK for a copy of them in writing, and then READ them yourself.
You guys should open up a Deli. This discussion started with a load of baloney, and more baloney is added regularly.
A CC&R is the governing laws........
Baloney. A deed restriction has nothing to do with the "law".
CC&Rs are basically subdivision-zoning laws........
Baloney. Deed restrictions have nothing to do with zoning laws.
Let's boycott any property with CCR's.
Duh. Like there are enuff hams buying houses that anybody would even notice.
PRB-1......
Should be called PRB-Zero. Because in the years it has existed, it has helped the cause of ham radio antennas ZERO.
Face reality. Normal people don't want to live next door to a 100 foot lightning rod. Or have the neighbors cousin living in a trailor in the neighbors front yard. Or live next to somebody raising goats in their back yard. CCR's were invented to preserve property value, and since a house is the largest investment a normal person ever makes, most normal people are interested in preserving that investment.
If ham radio is more important to you than property value, simply get in your pickup truck and go buy a house out in the boonies and put up all the towers you want.
Here's a nice ham location (http://home.hawaii.rr.com/kh7r/) for sale. Six towers, lots of antennas, no CCR's.
73, Jim KH2D
Had the rules prohibited the installation of any antennas, I would've cancelled the contract in a heartbeat and my wife would've had to look elsewhere.
Good for you Steven. You're the only ham so far that is participating in this discussion that has the noogies to tell his wife who the boss is. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
73, Jim KH2D
k5lxp
09-26-2003, 02:33 PM
kg7wd wrote:
> One got to be careful with Real Estate Agents.
> They like to hide the facts about CCR's and Assoc's Fees.
KH2D responded:
> That's baloney. Real estate agents are licensed professionals,
> and would risk losing thier license by "hiding the facts".
I went through a home purchase just a shorth time ago, during an open house I asked my realtor about CC&R's on the property. #The response was, and I quote, "What's a CC&R?" #It was only after I made an offer and made it conditional on deed or covenant restrictions regarding antennas did I ever see the covenant document. #I attempted to dismiss this person as my realtor for incompetency but I had already signed a contract with this realtor's agency and it would've gotten complicated. #I did write a letter to the agency stating my displeasure but that didn't get far either. #The point of my post is that most transactions occur without the slightest regard for restrictive covenants, especially where an XYL is involved. #It's just not on the radar screen for any realtor, they are usually more concerned getting prequalified people into the property and collecting their commission. #Ultimately it is up to you, the home buyer, to become educated and diligent about researching the property you intend to purchase. #When it's over, the realtor will be nowhere to be found. #K2HD, you'll be proud, I told the XYL she could pick whatever house she wanted within our price range as long as I could have a tower. #Not only did she oblige, she found a house *with* a tower.
Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
k5lxp@arrl.net
K2HD, you'll be proud, I told the XYL she could pick whatever house she wanted within our price range as long as I could have a tower. Not only did she oblige, she found a house *with* a tower.
Fantastic. That's what ham radio needs. More Real Men.
73, Jim KH2D
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w0on @ Sep. 24 2003,07:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This article was written after 6 years of research. At first, I too believed that CC&Rs were private agreements. Then after talking to many attorneys and planning boards I began to re-think my position. I read hundreds of CC&Rs and interviewed many folks who wrote them. My opinion has little importance here. What is really significant is your opinion. If you agree with me that these are governing laws and for the reasons I submitted, then PRB-1 is in error. The FCC excluded CC&Rs based on the assumption that they are private. This is not true.
Only the original signing parties can change a private agreement. Should one signer be deceased, then the court can be petitioned to give new direction. Many confuse private agreements that apply to parks and memorials to CC&Rs. CC&Rs permit the governing body to make change without your approval. This is the same principle that applies to any government, city or state. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t control, make change and be private. The reason for being private is to prevent change.
Because PRB-1 applies to governing bodies, it also applies to CC&Rs. Your opinion can change this.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
KD7YMR
09-26-2003, 08:50 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ Sep. 24 2003,15:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">call me an anarchist, but I will not buy a house where a neighborhood committee has control over what I want to do with my property with the laws set by the state or county.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You know you could always JOIN the committee and give them fits about it. #Get your friends to vote you in and then the committee can't get rid of you. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
#It would be a great learning experience for them, you think? #Learning how Freedom actually operates. . . #Again? # Isn't it funny that we have so many want-to-be dictators? #They've totally forgotten that when they tell someone "NO" and then they make it stick, that they've just removed that very same freedom from themselves as well. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
n2obm
09-26-2003, 10:01 PM
Before I bought the house I went by the developers office and asked him for 'written permission' as stated in the CC&Rs. He stated that he had 'no further vested interest'. The property has passed hands several times in the ten year history of the house. He further stated that since a HOA had not been established, requires a two-thirds majority vote of the homeowners, within two years of the first sale....his comment was 'they (CC&Rs) are not worth the paper it's printed on'.
He told me the CC&Rs were to protect him.
He had a previous development with a house he could not sell. The house next door had already sold. The buyer felt to decorate it with nude figurines (the guy was a porn king). I told him I understood.
Too bad the City is going to annex us. Maybe someone could speculate if the City has the authority to enforce CC&Rs. I hope not!
K4TAX
09-27-2003, 02:32 AM
One little known fact about CC&Rs. #When one signs a real estate contract to purchase property, it automatically puts the buyer in the position of agreeing to accept and abide by the CC&R's. # Regardless if you read them, knew about them or didn't know about them. #Most real estate agents and sellers seem to forget to mention that CC&Rs exist on a #piece of property.
Read before you sign. #Ask if there are any restrictions related to the property or subdivision. #And ask to see a copy for your review. #To be legally binding, these documents are required to be filed in the same office as the property deeds. #If not filed with the Register of Deeds, they are not enforceable.
After you sign it's too late.
73
Bob, K4TAX
WD4AWO
09-27-2003, 06:41 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KH2D @ Sep. 25 2003,21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Face reality. Normal people don't want to live next door to a 100 foot lightning rod. Or have the neighbors cousin living in a trailor in the neighbors front yard. Or live next to somebody raising goats in their back yard. CCR's were invented to preserve property value, and since a house is the largest investment a normal person ever makes, most normal people are interested in preserving that investment.
If ham radio is more important to you than property value, simply get in your pickup truck and go buy a house out in the boonies and put up all the towers you want.
73, Jim KH2D[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
KH2D must have driven by my place.
BTW, the goats produce fantastic milk. Just a bit on the creamy side with a little aftertaste. Goes down good with Pabst Blue Ribbon as a chaser.
n7wsb
09-28-2003, 07:52 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KA3RFE @ Sep. 24 2003,16:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CC&Rs have nothing to do with zoning laws. They are private contracts and have nothing to do with common law. If you buy into a community with these issues, you're signing a contract that you will abide by them. Basically you sign away your rights to do what you wish with your property that other citizens of the area can do.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Historically they have - wether official or not. CC&R's were used for instance to divide the town up racially. This is illegal now but it still happens though.
They are still used to control wether or not you have to put up christmas lights in December or wether or not you are allowed to have antennas. On the christmas lights actually a jewish guy in Portland sued the neighborhood committee and won over that issue. So maybe all we need are good lawyers http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif.
No its not zoning per se - its obviously a far cry from the city comprehensive plan but it tends to serve the same purpose. For example in Beaverton its illegal to put up those a-frame style advertising boards on public sidewalks. There are also limitations on how tall a tower can be on private property inside town - these are covered by zoning laws. CC&R's in fact ammend these laws. For most communities I don't think its right. It reminds of a small mini government inside the city.
WD8OQX
09-28-2003, 07:55 AM
What are CC&Rs ?
FERTILIZER!!!!
WA9SVD
09-29-2003, 02:10 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n2obm @ Sep. 26 2003,15:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Before I bought the house I went by the developers office and asked him for 'written permission' as stated in the CC&Rs. He stated that he had 'no further vested interest'. The property has passed hands several times in the ten year history of the house. He further stated that since a HOA had not been established, requires a two-thirds majority vote of the homeowners, within two years of the first sale....his comment was 'they (CC&Rs) are not worth the paper it's printed on'.
He told me the CC&Rs were to protect him.
He had a previous development with a house he could not sell. The house next door had already sold. The buyer felt to decorate it with nude figurines (the guy was a porn king). I told him I understood.
Too bad the City is going to annex us. Maybe someone could speculate if the City has the authority to enforce CC&Rs. I hope not![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
For your own protection, I hope you got the "no further vested interest" and "not worth the paper on which they're written" parts in writing. It's too important to leave such an "understanding" to a verbal agreement, especially without witnesses to the statement; while non necessarily being untruthful, he could be mistaken.
And a City (town, village, etc.) does not enforce CC&R's. CC&R's are enforced by the HOA, contractor, whomever; it is a private contract yourself and the entity that made up the CC&R's. The only way the City gets involved is if a lawsuit over the CC&R's is filed and has to go to court.
I'd still see a lawyer to make sure you haven't been mislead, even if unintentionally.
The biggest problem is that CC&R's are more and more common, and not everyone can work where they choose to live; most have to accommodate a spouse, be close to good schools, etc. as well as live reasonably close to work.
N3HOE
09-29-2003, 12:18 PM
CC&R's have their advantages as well as their disadvantages, certainly. Those who say that hams who don't want restrictive covenants ought to buy homes without CC&R's, simply don't know the real estate marketplace today (at least in certain major portions of the country). I have traded five residential properties in as many years, up and down the Eastern US. In so doing, I have done some serious shopping in examining dozens of additional homes. So I can tell you that purchasing new construction (as well as a lot of existing homes) without CC&R's is virtually impossible in the areas that I have investigated. Yes, I said "impossible". It really is that bad. And I say "bad" not about CC&R's, but for the lack of any real choice for consumers.
When home shopping, one must always insist on seeing the full text of any and all CC&R's. While I have had some developers and real estate agents conceal the existence of these documents by not offering them outright, I have never had anyone fail to provide me with their CC&R's immediately upon asking. I've really got to say, anyone who waits until the day of closing to receive a copy of their CC&R's, is really tempting to fool. Ask for and receive your copy of this document before you sign anything—even you initial deposit check. If a developer or agent balks at this request, then he or she is a crook, and you should walk away. Who knows what else crooks like this may be concealing!
But, there is still hope. Look far and wide, and you may find CC&R's that specifically allow outside antennas for without regard as to purpose. That's the way it is at my home here in Florida where I moved into a newly constructed development. And, the same situation existed at one of two homes I purchased in Georgia. You see, the developer here in Florida believed—correctly or incorrectly—that under recent FCC regulation, that they had to make "reasonable accommodation" for any sort of outdoor antennas. And they wrote their original CC&R's to that effect. We are on postage-stamp size lots in this development it seems, so the developer did include what I consider to be a reasonable height restriction on all antennas. (There is literally ten feet between houses here, side-to-side.)
Subsequently, I volunteered for membership on our development's Architectural Control Committee (that approves particular antenna installations), and became it's original founding member. Our committee has maintained a reasonable attitude toward antennas in the three years of its existence. In fact, we never felt compelled to turn down any antenna applications at all, to date. (Yes, I am well aware that by FCC rules, we MUST allow antennas for certain particular services.) Our committee appointments are of indefinite length, and I intend to stay involved as long as I can. Even if I should happen to leave however, I have no reason to doubt that our committee (and our Board of directors, as well) will continue a reasonable attitude toward outdoor antenna installations.
So, do your home shopping carefully. Still, there are not enough communities in which CC&R's allow outdoor amateur radio antennas, to accomplish federal objectives for the Amateur Radio Service. Therefore, I remain convinced that only preemptive Congressional legislation can adequately resolve this problem.
Kind regards,
Alan Dixon, N3HOE
Contributing Editor
Popular Communications
[Please copy replies to: <wpuc720@juno.com> "wpuc720-at-juno-dot-com"]
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w0on @ Sep. 24 2003,07:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
To help clear up that a CC&R is a contract question.
In the colonial days, it was permissible to set aside property to be used as a memorial, park, or historical site. The purpose and intent was that the property was to remain in the stated condition without the ability to change. This was private restriction and enacted by deed declaration. Future owners of that property had to agree to this condition. The spin off of this law is the basis and agreement that a landowner has the right to do with property as the owner sees fit. This is as far as it goes. This is also the basis used in the creation of a city or CC&R. The only restriction in any of these cases is that no known law may be violated in the process of creation of these entities. Today this is the basis used when a CC&R is filed. The difference between these declarations is that private restriction deals with property with no change and the later controls zoning and sets up a government to make change. The only common area is that all owners enacted their wishes. The CC&R is the same principle used by pioneers when they set up towns and cities. The pioneer land developer controlled building placement, and building style and added law enforcement as it affected personal rights. In other words the early developer created a town that has the ability to make change. The developer more or less ran the town until which time the town grew to a size that it could govern itself. Today we call this a city government. Folks who moved to town did not sign a contractual agreement with the city. They just bought a house and obeyed the laws. This is still the same today. These are no contracts or agreements with the government when moving into a house. This is a common and accepted practice.
Today developers file what is called a CC&R. The covenant sets up and passes on a government and the C&R is the laws of that government. In other words a CC&R is the governing laws for a defined boundary. Within these laws are addition zoning laws that tighten up local city and county restrictions. A city calls their boundary a city limit and a CC&R defines its boundary as a subdivision. The developer enacts addition zoning laws and laws that restrict personal rights in order to attract folks to buy in his development. The governing body can enact additional zoning laws or further restrict personal rights. By the same token they can remove zoning laws and drop requirements that restrict personal rights. Some of these developments are as big as cities in size. In Jacksonville, Florida on the West side of town, they have one development that will have 13 thousand homes and another that will have 20 thousand homes. If this is not called a city within a city I don’t know what is. For this reason, one can think of a homeowners association as being a subset of the county or city government. The CC&R further defines county and city governing and zoning laws. You are subject to both sets of laws.
As moving into and living in a subdivision is exactly the same as living within a city without a subdivision there are no contractual agreements with the government. The land use declaration is filed for the City and CC&R with the same intent. This intent is to set up a government with laws that will control a specified area. This is important for two reasons. First and most importantly is that “Fair and Equitable” applies. This means that in a like situation what applies to one must apply to another.
The other reason is that based on the fact that the creation of a subdivision is the same as the creation of a city, laws that apply to one will also apply to the other. As in both cases there is no contraction agreement with the governing bodies. This means PRB-1 is in error. On Page 10, foot note 6 states that their ruling does not apply to those in contractual agreement. A CC&R is not a contractual agreement, but the means that sets up a government like the city government. This means that the same law should apply both, in this case by what is called fair and equitable. The only thing that you sign when you buy a house is a contract for deed. You have a need to know that addition-governing laws apply, but there is no contractual necessity to be in agreement.
Only the buying public and can change the restrictions on CC&Rs. If sales go down, the restrictions will change. As long as the buying public doesn’t care to read them, there is not much we can do other than educate them.
A lot of these facts can be found on the ARRL web site. Please support ARRL as well as the “Fair and Equitable” legislation. The legislation is not for the reason I presented here, but will have the same affect.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
KI5GH
09-29-2003, 02:33 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ Sep. 24 2003,17:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">call me an anarchist, but I will not buy a house where a neighborhood committee has control over what I want to do with my property with the laws set by the state or county.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Good luck! I've been looking into property in "the country". Much of that has CC&R's as well these days
AG4QV
09-29-2003, 04:02 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WB2WIK @ Sep. 25 2003,09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is not a single place in all the U.S. where homes are not available for sale without CC&Rs. #I've made a study of this for the past seven years (will be eight next March), and am compiling data to publish a book on this subject in 2005. #Name the location, I can provide you with a listing of homes for sale without CC&Rs -- without exception. #I just did exactly this for a ham in Denver who make a long posting about no housing being available there without CC&Rs....within two weeks, I had a list of 20 homes free of covenants and restrictions all within a 30 minute drive of Denver's airport, and over a very wide price and feature range.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
To find 20 homes within 30 minutes of the Denver airport is like finding nothing at all.
The population of Denver is about 1/2 million. At 4 persons per home, there are approximately 125,000 homes within 30 miles of the airport. Every year approximately 24,000 homes are sold in that area. Assuming homes are on the market for 2 months before being sold, at any one time there are about 4,000 homes for sale within 30 minutes of the Denver airport. And you found 20 that did not have CC&Rs!! That's 1/2 of 1%.
I believe that your data shows that it is very difficult to find a home for sale without CC&Rs.
de Robert, AG4QV
kb9pza
09-29-2003, 07:24 PM
look at the pdf from the fcc.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2971A1.pdf
or
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2971A1.txt
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
N5CTI
09-29-2003, 07:51 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb9pza @ Sep. 29 2003,14:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">look at the pdf from the fcc.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2971A1.pdf
or
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2971A1.txt
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Eldon, these have nothing to do with Amateur Radio. The case at hand was regarding a television antenna.
One of the premises starting this whole thread is that Homeowners Associations are governments established by CC&Rs. This flies in the face of reality: reading the documents establishing the CC&Rs, reading deeds, rulings by the FCC, etc. You know, there's a reason why many folks refer to CC&Rs as "deed restrictions." Where they are reliably enforced, there are documents that the buyer signs at closing that state the buyer will abide by the restrictions. Efforts to circumvent CC&Rs by trying to make the argument that Homeowners Associations are governments, and are thereby subject to PRB-1 limitations, will just divert energy from more productive activities.
WB2WIK
09-29-2003, 08:24 PM
AG4QV, your answer was a bit ridiculous, as well as erroneous.
-The number of homes for sale as of 3 weeks ago (when I checked) within 30 mins of D.I.A. in Denver was 231, not "over 4000." That's per the Denver Area REA.
-I replied with "20 homes" simply because I restricted my search to: Homes with 4 or more bedrooms; homes with 3 or more bathrooms; homes with 2 or more car garages; homes with 1/3 or more acre of property; homes within a 30 minute drive of D.I.A., which obviously encompasses only about 1/8 of the Denver Metro Area (on a bad day, it takes 30 minutes to escape D.I.A., since the airport exit is more than 5 miles long); and homes verified by my Title company to have no covenants, conditions or restrictions on file with the County. I also restricted my search to homes having a listing price of under $450,000.
Even with these specific restrictions, I found that approximately 10% of the homes on the market at any price and with any features fell into the "no covenants" category.
Had I broadened my search to, say 45 minutes, or maybe to 45 minutes of "downtown" (which is nowhere near the airport), or to 3 bedrooms, or any number of other variables, I would have uncovered more homes.
One should get the facts before making such statements.
WB2WIK/6
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N5CTI @ Sep. 29 2003,12:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Efforts to circumvent CC&Rs by trying to make the argument that Homeowners Associations are governments, and are thereby subject to PRB-1 limitations, will just divert energy from more productive activities.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Boyd, I agree with you whole hardly. To pursue whether or not a homeowners association is a government is a mood point as far as PRB-1 is concern. This has already been approached before. I wrote this in mind as more as to how the CC&R evolved and originated. Our attention now should be directed toward support of up coming legislation. I also support ARRL for their tireless effort to find solutions to resolve this problem.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
N3HOE
10-01-2003, 02:15 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KH2D @ Sep. 25 2003,21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...Normal people don't want to live next door to a 100 foot lightning rod...CCR's were invented to preserve property value, and since a house is the largest investment a normal person ever makes, most normal people are interested in preserving that investment.
If ham radio is more important to you than property value...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
CC&R's exist for a number of reasons, often stated in the opening clauses of the document in question. Two prominent reasons are of course, protecting property values, and esthetics.
# Yet there is a common misunderstanding among many homeowners and even among quite a few amateurs regarding antennas and towers. That misunderstanding is that amateur radio antennas and their supporting structures somehow lower property values. They don't. Any competent real estate agent knows this, whether or not they choose to disclose this fact in any given situation. Additionally, a study reported by the ARRL a few years back soundly upholds this principle.
# Just a few years ago, I bought a home in a newly constructed housing development. I became active in our homeowners association from the very beginning. During our Architectural Control Committee's earliest series of meetings, we deliberated on matters of enhancing property values and of maintaining and improving esthetics. As one might imagine, we discussed the customary questions about what sorts of things should or should not be permitted, and which homeowner improvements should require prior Committee approval.
# Pooling our collective knowledge and experiences (some of us had recently traded several properties each, some for investment purposes), we came to the only logical conclusion:
AN IMPROVEMENT TO A PROPERTY DOES NOT LOWER PROPERTY VALUE.
If anything, it RAISES property value. This applies not only to the subject property, but to adjacent properties, and to the community as well. Given this simple reality, anyone can see that there is no reason that amateur radio, and homeowners' along with community interests, cannot coexist and in fact, thrive. And that is excellent news!
# Then again, there is the question of esthetics. That argument may never be settled, given that perception is entirely subjective, and impossible to quantify. So it goes...
Kind regards,
Alan Dixon, N3HOE
Contributing Editor
Popular Communications
Founding member, Monaco Estates Homeowners Association - Architectural Control Committee
"MONACO ESTATES, AN ANTENNA-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY."
[Please copy replies to me at: "wpuc720-at-juno-dot-com"]
W9WHE
10-01-2003, 03:53 PM
Just a few minor corrections to an otherwise informative article.
1) CC&Rs are NOT laws. They are a PRIVATE restrictions, (made on the public record) which limit the use of land. When you buy the property encumbered by CC&Rs, you agree to be bound CONTRACTUALLY by such rules, even if you did not read them. In effect, you WAIVE rights and protections which you might otherwise have and agree to follow the CC&Rs.
2) IF the CC&Rs authorize a HOA (home owner's association) the HOA MAY also be authorized to prommelgate other rules beyond the CC&Rs recorded in the public record.
3) CC&Rs and HOAs do NOT have any judicial power. They only have the power to make private rules, which must be enforced by the public courts, if a dispute arises.
4) CC&Rs do NOT necessaraly dissappear just because the HOA takes over from the Developer. Unless the CC&Rs provide otherwise, they are perminant unless ALL (not merely a majority) band together and revise the recorded CC&Rs
W9WHE
10-01-2003, 04:07 PM
I think N3HOE is dead wrong.
A 100ft tower DOES lower property values because it narrows the number of people willing to pruchase the property. Fewer willing buyers translates into longer sell times AND lower prices. Do you really think that the AVERAGE (non-ham) person, presented with 2 identical properties, would choose the property next to the 100ft tower with a 5 element Quad?
If you answered yes, you need a reality check. Most average (non-ham) people view such things as a genuine "eyesore", not an "improvement".
Value is determined by desireabillity. Do you honestly think that living next to a 100ft tower, guylines, and a 5 element quad are viewed by the average (non-ham) as desireable?
If you answered yes, you need a reality check.
As for the ARRL study, all I can say is that you must ALLWAYS consider the source before you rely on ANY so-called "study". I prefer to rely on common sense. So should you.
W9WHE
10-01-2003, 04:15 PM
N3HOE writes:
"If anything, [a 100ft tower] RAISES property value. This applies not only to the subject property, but to adjacent properties, and to the community as well".
Huh?
According to N3HOE's opinion, the average (non-ham) presented with two identical properties, would actually pay MORE just to live next to a 100ft tower?
If you agree with N3HOE, I have some magic beans I want to sell you. Please e mail me immeadiately!
AE6IP
10-02-2003, 06:10 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N3HOE @ Oct. 01 2003,07:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
AN IMPROVEMENT TO A PROPERTY DOES NOT LOWER PROPERTY VALUE.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Not quiet, as any amateur photographer who has contemplated adding a darkroom will quickly tell you.
Improvements like model railroads in the basement, darkrooms in the garage, and amateur radio towers fall into a category of specialized changes because they limit the additional value of the property to others with the same interest.
The impression that the property may be more difficult to sell because of needing a specialized buyer can lower the market value of the property, although it doesn't always.
ac0lt
10-02-2003, 05:45 PM
Hello!?? Fact is, hams are in the minority, and non-hams, for the most part, like CC&Rs. It's classical majority dictatorship http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I will write again what I wrote in a previous thread (and will probably get flamed for it again)... I do not believe the government has any business fiddling around with private contracts. Extending PRB-1 to CC&Rs is just wrong, it puts a minority's wishes over the majority's, government-sanctioned. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
If you don't like CC&Rs, don't go there. Most of my non-ham friends live in CC&R'ed neighborhoods and like it that way, specifically because of the CC&Rs - in fact, some complain that theirs is not restrictive enough... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I like my 'free' 20 acres, and realize that if one of my neighbors chooses to start piling up junk cars in his backyard, I might not have a recourse; I can live with that, others don't want to.
WA9SVD
10-02-2003, 10:23 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Oct. 01 2003,23:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N3HOE @ Oct. 01 2003,07:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
AN IMPROVEMENT TO A PROPERTY DOES NOT LOWER PROPERTY VALUE.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Not quiet, as any amateur photographer who has contemplated adding a darkroom will quickly tell you.
Improvements like model railroads in the basement, darkrooms in the garage, and amateur radio towers fall into a category of specialized changes because they limit the additional value of the property to others with the same interest.
The impression that the property may be more difficult to sell because of needing a specialized buyer can lower the market value of the property, although it doesn't always.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
There seems to be a fundamental difference here. While "Model railroading" or a "photographic darkroom" may be CONSIDERED an improvement, they are also specialized changes, and only affect the individual owner's property, and (normally) have NO impact on surrounding properties, and the "improvement" provided by these items may not be of value to a new buyer. And their existance should have absolutely NO effect upon the property value of the surrounding neighbors.
An antenna tower, however, does impact the surrounding properties, and may be seen as a detriment, rather than an improvement. (And if all I could afford to put up is a dipole,and the neighbor had a 70' tower with a 5 el. yagi, I'd be unlikely to consider that an improvement that raised MY property value!)
This whole thing seems rather simple to me.
If I see a condo project, CCR's
If I see a new neighborhood with all houses some boring shade of pastel, CCR's
It really is a choice here. If you want to live in the "exclusive" neighborhood with soccer moms and many SUV's, you won't make it as a ham. If you choose an older neighborhood, (as I did) you can put up any antenna you want and still have a nice living arrangement!
The biggest problem with new developments are NIMBY'S who don't like anything that's outside their own aesthetic box. Boring neighborhoods=boring people.
WX7B
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WX7B @ Oct. 03 2003,09:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you choose an older neighborhood, (as I did) you can put up any antenna you want and still have a nice living arrangement![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
One of the trends that I have found is that some older neighborhoods that have homeowner associations are now changing their CC&R to exclude antennas. I don’t know if this is nation wide, but it is a growing trend in Kansas City in some of the gated communities. When buying into one of these communities, be sure to ask what pending legislation the association is looking at before you buy. Older hams in these areas have been grand fathered in. There may be antennas in the development and you will not be able to have one. Also before you buy be sure to get the latest CC&R on record.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
W9WHE
10-07-2003, 03:58 PM
WX7B writes:
"If you want to live in the "exclusive" neighborhood with soccer moms and many SUV's, you won't make it as a ham".
NONSENCE. I live in just such a neighborhood. I use an inverted V fan diople cut for 40/20/17/15 that lays flat on the roof of my 2 story home. I have worked 256 countries.
According to WX7B, I guess I just will never "make it as a ham". I guess I should sell out now for $2 to WX7B. Such dribble. Ignore such liberal class warfare nonsence.
Put your family first. Live where it is best for you. Then, put up some wire and have some fun.
WB2WIK
10-07-2003, 05:41 PM
W9WHE, congrats on your 256 countries.
Everyone has his individual goals, and it sounds as though you've fulfilled your own, with regard to amateur radio.
However, your results would not come close to fulfilling mine, or possibly others'. It's not how many countries you work, it's how long it took to do it. In a DX contest, I've worked that many countries in a single weekend. Did you do that with your fan dipole on the roof? I doubt it.
I enjoy
Radiosporting, another word for competing with my fellow hams who have a similar interest, and without this aspect of the hobby, I'd have lost interest many years ago. I also don't have a lot of time to operate, but do enjoy operating, so I'd like to make the most of the limited time I have. Life's too short to wait in pileups.
But that's just my own feelings, and not everyone's -- for sure.
Regarding the claim that CC&Rs protect homeowners from certain activities that would devalue neighborhoods, in my experience, this is pure rubbish. Zoning ordinances in most communities already prohibit anything dangerous or devaluing in nature. Where can you park a bunch of rusting old cars, with or without CC&Rs? Certainly not anywhere I've ever lived, and I've lived in a lot of places. Here in Los Angeles, which is a very "ham friendly" city (allows towers without conditional use permit for hams, provided a simple building permit is issued -- and California did adopt PRB-1 wording already), no one can park anything unsightly on their property, and unsightliness is clearly defined.
We also cannot disturb the peace; cannot leave lawns unmowed (fire hazard laws); cannot allow property to become dilapidated; cannot park on the streets one day per week (street cleaning ordinance); must have automatic gas shutoff valves installed (earthquake ordinance); and a zillion other things that are regulated by codes and statutes enacted over the past century or so. What in the world would CC&Rs need to additionally regulate?
Absolutely nothing meaningful. They exist purely to create conformity to which I, and most creative, artistic or liberty-loving people greatly object.
WB2WIK/6
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W9WHE @ Oct. 07 2003,07:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WX7B writes:
"If you want to live in the "exclusive" neighborhood with soccer moms and many SUV's, you won't make it as a ham".
NONSENCE. I live in just such a neighborhood. I use an inverted V fan diople cut for 40/20/17/15 that lays flat on the roof of my 2 story home. I have worked 256 countries.
According to WX7B, I guess I just will never "make it as a ham". I guess I should sell out now for $2 to WX7B. Such dribble. Ignore such liberal class warfare nonsence.
Put your family first. Live where it is best for you. Then, put up some wire and have some fun.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hey Jon,
Your reality is obiviously different than mine. Most newer neighborhoods on the west coast DO prohibit ANY sort of antenna and the associated RF. Your neighborhood didn't exist when I lived in Urbana in the '60's and probably has lots of CCR's, and if most of the NIMBY types knew you were operating, they'd try to shut you down.
Those DARN Soccer Moms!
My point, which you chose to misinterpret, is that "newer" neighborhoods tend to be hostile to ham radio and antennas. I've experienced this first hand. And, yeah, it's usually someone (ie soccer Mom, or out here, the print skirt hippie) who is mostly concerned about aesthetics. How did you get to your political rant? Based on that, I don't think I'd want to live in your sterile white bread environment anyway. Pass the mayonnaise.
Hey, if you want to sell me your radios for $2, fine. If you want to bail on ham radio, it's your decision. I don't understand why people like you with peculiar right wing views have to spin political on a simple issue like CCR's.
WX7B
PS: It's "Nonsense" not "Nonsence"
WB2WIK
10-08-2003, 06:28 PM
It's also "drivel," not "dribble."
Poor spelling notwithstanding, W9WHE is just jealous because we live in California, with 350 days of sunshine and warm weather a year while he's in Chicago.
Only kidding...I've lived all over, and every place has its merits. But since moving to L.A. (exclusively for the weather -- I had absolutely no other reason to be here; well, maybe the Universities, too, since I have four daughters with the first one college-bound next year) I can't help rib those in "cold country" about being very happy I left such far behind.
Must admit it does crack me up that places most (and surely I !http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif would consider to be not terribly desirable for living actually have CC&Rs restricting anything at all. Having lived in places that are cold & snowy, and humid & buggy, and dismal & depressing, a seller would have to pay me, and a lot, to move to such climes.
Happily living in sunny L.A., with a new Governator, no CC&Rs, and ham-friendly ordinances...
WB2WIK/6
w0jrs
10-10-2003, 12:59 AM
Just a suggestion... instead of fighting CC&Rs, why not vote with your feet and move to small town america? We left a city with a CC&R attitude - it imposed a regulation that hams must receive the permission of all residents within several hundred feet prior to pursuing a variance, to which the variance would ultimately be shot down, for something as minor as a 40' tower - and moved to being a mile down the road from a small community in America's flyover country.
Instead of zoning nightmares, small communities overall appreciate hams and have the ability to evaluate such activities individually rather than through broad restrictions over all. Having participated in numerous small community city council meetings the past few years for work, I can advise that they're much more concerned about the barking dog, trash burning in the front yard or that junker car on blocks than they are any ham tower. They're generally grateful for the support we provide (just make sure you get out and support your community with your ham license - from weather spotting to providing support at the town parade!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Quit supporting those who don't support us - there are plenty of great small communities that welcome our amateur practice.
Jamie/W0JRS
kb9ulk
10-13-2003, 04:45 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KA3RFE @ Sep. 24 2003,16:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CC&Rs have nothing to do with zoning laws. They are private contracts and have nothing to do with common law. If you buy into a community with these issues, you're signing a contract that you will abide by them. Basically you sign away your rights to do what you wish with your property that other citizens of the area can do.
My residential property is not in a CC&R area and I can put as many antennas as I wish on my roof or in my back yard. I can park my vehicles anyplace. I can paint my house whatever color I want, #I can put a basketball hoop up, I can put firewood outside my house, and many more things. But there are communities around here that you are not able to do ANY of these things. So it's not a matter of common law or zoning. The common law would be "a man's home is his castle." The zoning would be "x number of houses per acre with open space of 'X' acres with street width of X with all underground utilities and building permits must be approved in advance."
Or at least that's my take on those things.
I inherited a building lot in a very nice water-privileged community with CC&Rs that I will never build on just because of those things. It's not very restrictive but outside antennas are not allowed. This association mostly just administers the common community beaches and clubhouse and piers and they (we) have a special taxing district to pay for full time police services.
73, Pete KA3RFE[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
There are some state laws that over ride these sub-division rules regarding antennas and towers. If you are a Licensed Hams they have to work with you and come to some aggreement so you can install Radio antennas. I know Wisconsin and Illinois have these laws in place becuase they recognize the benifits and services we offer the community.
WB2WIK
10-13-2003, 04:22 PM
W0JRS, I admire and agree with your sentiment, but not all small communities are ham-friendly nor CC&R-free. Not by a long shot.
I'm in America's second largest city (by population) and a variance is not required of amateur radio operators to install towers or antennas. A building permit is (required for construction, such as a tower foundation); but a variance is not. This, in a city of 4 million people, in a metro area of 11 million people. And this state did adopt PRB-1, so it will be difficult for any community within the state to ignore it.
Only problem remaining is CC&Rs. And the only ones who can make those disappear are you and me, and millions of others....by simply not buying those properties.
WB2WIK/6
W6JWB
10-29-2003, 01:18 AM
I live in a townhouse, in the Silicon Valley. When we bought it, I asked for copies of any CC&R's. I was told that I had to ask the townhouse association for them. The townhouse association told me to ask their management company. The management company ignored my request. Finally, I had to decide whether or not to buy the property, so we bought it. Later, when the president of the townhouse association saw a ground wire coming out of the second floor window, he told me about the CC&R's restricting antennas. I told him that I had not been able to get a copy, so he finally got it for me. Sure enough, the HOA has the power to do pretty much anything they want to the owners. However, recently the president of the homeowner's association was arrested for child molestation, so maybe nobody will be looking for antennas any more.
I also own some rental townhouses in Houston. The HOA there is also out of control. Their management company said that one of my tenants had oil stains on the concrete floor of his carport, and they had to be removed. So, I had my property manager go look at it. She could not find any stains. The following week, I received a letter saying that they were going to take me to court and have me fined $100 per day until the problem was corrected. So, I had my property manager get the carport pressure-washed. Shortly after that, the HOA told me that they were going to have all the carports pressure washed.
For a while, I owned a lot in northern California. I checked on the CC&R's before buying it. Among other things, it said that the developer could have a heavy equipment yard in the development, but the home owners could not have a workshop, or operate any business in their home. You could have a dog or cat, but not a pet rabbit. You could not have a detached garage or any other building separate from the house. Once construction on your house was started, it had to be completed, including painting, within a specified number of months, which presumably meant that it could never be re-painted. You could remove any trees that you needed to remove in order to build your driveway and house, but other than that all trees that were there when the development was created had to be left. Presumably that meant that if a tree grew large and then died, and was a danger to the house, you would just have to tear down the house rather than remove the tree.
My wife and I are now planning to buy a house in Florida, for vacations and eventual retirement. The realtor tried to convince me that CC&R's are a good thing. I told him about some of my problems with HOA's, and he know understands why I won't buy in a deed-restricted community.
I agree that there have to be some restrictions on what people do. That is the reason for government. The city and the county have zoning laws and other ordinances. Those should be sufficient. At least those are written by government officials who are elected by a majority of the voting population. Most CC&R's are created by the developer, who can basically put anything he wants into them, as long as it is not prohibited by law, and these things often remain in effect forever, so the developer can actually create rules that have the force of law. I will not buy another property that has CC&R's!
de John, W6JWB
n2obm
10-30-2003, 03:31 AM
After following this thread for awhile, may I also add:
The Constitution affords us the right of 'freedom of speech'. And what good is the right to free speech if you do not have the freedom to listen. This was part of the argument (and $eriou$ lobby effort on behalf of the SAT dish industry) for PRB-1.
My FCC ticket authorizes me to use a 'shared/public natural resource' (the RF medium) to exercise my rights within the parameters of this authorization.
THE POINT IS...SHAME ON ME FOR CONTRACTUALLY limiting my antenna 'options'. But until either a HOA or the original developer (see my previous post) stops by to tell me to take it down....I am QRO in North Carolina (when I get back from Iraq).
de YI/N2OBM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W9WHE @ Oct. 07 2003,08:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WX7B writes:
NONSENCE. I live in just such a neighborhood. I use an inverted V fan diople cut for 40/20/17/15 that lays flat on the roof of my 2 story home. I have worked 256 countries.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif # In our neck of the woods in Kansas, the boiler plate CC&R states that there shall be no radiating antennas above ground. #I am not sure how they exclude cell phones from this ruling, but I was informed by their legal department that this included car and hidden antennas. #When looking at the property, I was thinking about an antenna in the attic. #I was told that if the association found out that had one, they would sue me. #In this case, it is what they find, not what they can see. #Glad I asked the right questions first.