What do you think are "reasonable" antenna accomodations by developers and HOAs?

[K9STH]

UP:

Even if the restrictions are changed, anything that was done by a homeowner that conformed to the original restrictions before the restrictions are changed are "grandfathered". That is, they can remain. If the property is sold, then things might get "sticky". Depending on the original agreement one signed, anything that has been "grandfathered" may, or may not, be allowed to remain. That is when the lawyers get involved!

Glen, K9STH

[N4UP]

UP:

Even if the restrictions are changed, anything that was done by a homeowner that conformed to the original restrictions before the restrictions are changed are "grandfathered". That is, they can remain. If the property is sold, then things might get "sticky". Depending on the original agreement one signed, anything that has been "grandfathered" may, or may not, be allowed to remain. That is when the lawyers get involved!

Glen, K9STH

Glen, I don't doubt what you say is true in some jurisdictions, maybe even in most places, but our HOA attorney insists that any changes legally made ( i.e., through due process, in compliance with our articles, bylaws, and North Carolina statutes, by 2/3 majority vote of the homeowners, and properly recorded ) do apply to everyone in the development. The "reason" they say it would apply to everyone here is that by virtue of buying property here, everyone has therefore already agreed to be subjected to the HOA articles, bylaws, and covenants, and associated "process" ... meaning 2/3 majority rule.

Of course one can always challenge any such change by bringing a lawsuit, but that can be quite expensive, and likely to fail ( according to our property management company president and his HOA-specialist attorney, both of whom were involved in developing the North Carolina statutes that apply to HOAs ). I personally think that grandfathering is fair to the minority, but apparently that doesn't apply here. If a 2/3 majority want us to have green mailboxes that are shaped like kangaroos, then we will all have green mailboxes shaped like kangaroos.

What I care about is a adding a covenant that is ( reasonably ) permissive of antenna structures rather than entirely prohibitive. But since I am apparently the only licensed ham in a community of over 100 properties it seems quite unlikely I could obtain 2/3 majority support. More likely it would require an FCC ruling or changes to the North Carolina statutes. However, when the state legislature passed the NC Planned Community Act, they made it so that only some provisions applied to "older" communities like mine, while all provisions apply to newer communities; so even if they changed the "law" it might not apply to my community. It might, but it might not. Life is too complicated, so for now I will stick with my multi-band rotatable dipole in the attic.

[WB2WIK]

CC&Rs are something the American people let happen, slowly over several decades...I blame everybody including myself and past generations.

But whoever thinks that all new housing must have such covenants is incorrect. I checked here over the past several weeks and there are brand new houses being built right now that don't have any, nor are they part of any HOA. They're just not "tract" homes, they're built one by one. Slightly more expensive than in a tract, but frankly, not by much. It's still a matter of "cost per square foot" and if the going rate is $250 per square foot as it is in this area, that's pretty much what things cost. If it's all marble and gilded, maybe more; if it's all ramshackle and horrendous, maybe less. But the market determines what stuff's worth.

[W3RXO]

I should have read further, before responding.

[W3RXO]

I think reasonable accommodation would be:

-Antennas restricted in height to 20' above the tallest approved structure on the lot
-Three such installations maximum per lot
-Installations subject to safety inspection by a registered/licensed professional engineer
-Installations subject to grounding requirements per NFPA/NEC
-Homeowner accepts liability for any damage to other owner's properties or any common properties in the event of system failure; homeowner responsible for insurance coverage on installed systems to verify probable compliance with the liability

These seem fairly reasonable to me and would allow a ham to actually work several bands with unobtrusive antenna systems, while protecting neighbors' rights.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Very good description of what I believe would be a reasonable accomodation
I should have read further, before responding, with the previous post. Steve said it perfectly.