Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 25, 3:44�pm, Bill Horne wrote:
My wife and I looked at over 100 houses before we selected the one I live in now. I have *no* HOA, *no* CC&R's, and *no* problem putting up antennas: I had to fire three agents who hadn't heard me when I told them what *my* requirements were. Thanks for proving the point, Bill. Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means something's really wrong somewhere. Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means something's really wrong somewhere. I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy; I think the problem was a lack of suitable houses, so the agents showed you "almost good enough" houses. You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over 2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins. Michael is right: the agent represents the *SELLER*, not the buyer. He is legally obligated to disclose _some_ things, but professionally obligated not to disclose anything else that might lower the house's value. Agents are not your friends. I disagree; they can be. But the main point is that the agent, whether a buyer's agent or a seller's agent, doesn't make any money until a sale happens. I think all this is having a negative impact on amateur radio. Here'swhy: 1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone). The effect is particularly strong on young people, who can't just move and whose resources are usually less. 2) Lots of hams who live in restricted homes are much less active amateurs than they would be if they didn't have the hassle. 3) Certain areas become "no-hams" zones, because more and more hams steer clear of them. 4) The publicity and visibility of amateur radio decrease over time, because nobody sees antennas, and hams operating stealth don't talkabout it. How many of us first discovered amateur radio, or found our first Elmer, by seeing his/her antenna(s)? For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing. I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the resources of the satellite-dish folks. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 1/28/2010 8:43 AM, D. Stussy wrote:
Hey Jeff: I thought it was when you stuck the all-metal table knife into the live electrical outlet as a child that did it. That's nothing special: we *ALL* did *THAT*. ;-) Bill "Curly" Horne, W1AC |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Bill Horne" wrote in message
... On 1/28/2010 8:43 AM, D. Stussy wrote: Hey Jeff: I thought it was when you stuck the all-metal table knife into the live electrical outlet as a child that did it. That's nothing special: we *ALL* did *THAT*. ;-) Yes, but Jeff held on. Anyone use a hairpin - with each prong in a separate hole? |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 27, 8:29 am, wrote:
Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means something's really wrong somewhere. Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means something's really wrong somewhere. Yes, there is, but it's what we have to work with. All the agents I worked with were of the big picture on the billboard type. It would veer way OT, but my XYL who works in the flooring industry and has regular contact with contractors and RE agent, could tell you stories that would make you hair stand on end. The closest comparison I can make is that there is a strong "carny vs rube" relationship going on. And they are the carney. You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over 2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins. Thanks for proving my point, Jim. I spent a lot of time researching my house. When a house reached "serious status", I took measurements, I talked to the neighbors, I had my lawyer go to the courthouse to check over the deed - in addition to the completely worthless deed insurance they make you buy. And he found an issue that we made the owners pay for. But the point is there is a choice, and if a person lacks the patience to find out what they are buying into, then I don't know how to advise them. There's the old saying about buy in haste and repent at leisure. 1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone). hehe, I was wondering when Gladys would come up... 8^) But you brought us back to Ham radio specifically, so that's great. I agree wholeheartedly. Old Mr Bloom from up the road was my introduction to two way radio. He had a tower with one of those triple vertical dipoles on it that you could switch the pattern on - I forget what they are called. But a friend and I knocked on his door, and politely asked if we could see his radios. He told us to have our parents call him to make sure it was okay, and then we stopped by again to see his shack. Pure magic! Lights and glowing meters and that electronic smell of tubes that whenever I smell tube equipment these days it takes me right back. Otherwise I agree with all those points. For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing. I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the resources of the satellite-dish folks. For as much charm as our introduction to Ham radio was, it is going to be different today. If we decide that we need to get young people interested in Ham radio, it will have to be in a manner in which they are used to. I had an idea about making a 2 meter HT that had texting ability, as well as voice. The texting mode would be PSK-31. Note that PSK31 actually does work with FM - it isn't as useful as the SSB version, but it still works. A kid with a Technician license and his/her friends of like qualifications would use these things similarly to cell phones, but it would be their own channels. After starting, the more adventurous might look into repeater construction. Regular Ham type stuff. Eventually they would likely gravitate to HF if they found that interesting. It would certainly be a different paradigm than what most people who became Hams when very young went through. But we don't have novice class any more, and have to come up with something else. Some Hams I have pitched this to have been vehemently oppose to the idea. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Michael J. Coslo" wrote
I had an idea about making a 2 meter HT that had texting ability, as well as voice. The texting mode would be PSK-31. Note that PSK31 actually does work with FM - it isn't as useful as the SSB version, but it still works. A kid with a Technician license and his/her friends of like qualifications would use these things similarly to cell phones, but it would be their own channels. -------------- The beauty of that is that if the kids are close enough to work simplex, all that may be required for an antenna is a small indoor one, and certainly a 5w HT isn't powerful enough to get into a neighbor's electronics. I once had a Ringo AR-2 hanging from a hook in my apartment ceiling. Howard N7SO |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael J. Coslo wrote:
You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over 2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins. Thanks for proving my point, Jim. I spent a lot of time researching my house. When a house reached "serious status", I took measurements, I talked to the neighbors, I had my lawyer go to the courthouse to check over the deed - in addition to the completely worthless deed insurance they make you buy. And he found an issue that we made the owners pay for. But the point is there is a choice, and if a person lacks the patience to find out what they are buying into, then I don't know how to advise them. In some states, CCRs can be really hidden. For example a builder may buy a portion of land already subject to restrictions. Doing a normal title search usually won't find the restriction, since the builder will seem to be the first to put Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions on that particular piece of land. Incidentally a careful shopper also has to watch out for easements. I also have to note once again that not every potential home buyer even considers CCRs or understands that a restriction on let's say additional structures might bar a tower even if said tower is attached to the residence. One other problem is numerous municipalities try to ban antennas and fighting that ban can be expensive. Finally let me note that in some states, a ham who loses a legal fight against a Covenant can not only end up liable for his or her legal costs but those of the party who (i.e. the neighbor or HOA) who brought the suit. There's the old saying about buy in haste and repent at leisure. I suspect most folks are more concerned about location, price and size than antennas, that's true even for most hams I suppose. I don't know how much haste is involved, but focus tends to shorten in such circumstances. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 27, 12:45�pm, Steve Bonine wrote:
You go to a real estate agent. � You give them your wish list. �They do the best that they can to meet it. �The chances of them finding a house that meets 100% of your requirements is nil if your wish list is comprehensive. House buying is a tradeoff. �The items on your wish list related to ham radio are no different than anything else. �It's as silly to tell a real estate agent that you absolutely must have three bedrooms as it is to tell them that you absolutely must not have a CCR. I disagree! I think it depends on how you write the requirements. Maybe the house for you actually has four bedrooms. � Maybe the house for you actually has a CCR but it's something that you can live with. �Those are YOUR decisions. �If you never see the potential properties, you won't have the opportunity to make the decision. Again, it's a matter of writing the requirements correctly. Most people do not have the time to investigate hundreds of homes and all the details. If they did, they wouldn't need an agent! There's also the fact that in many situations it's not a one-person decision. If Spouse A has a lot of time and patience but Spouse B does not, looking at lots of homes is liable to cause Spouse B to put pressure on Spouse A to compromise on requirements. The way I would do it is the following: First on the list would be the "must haves". These are minimum requirements that cannot be compromised. For example, if I'm set on a house in certain school districts, there's no point in showing me homes outside those districts. If I'm moving in order to have a better antenna farm, there's no point in showing me houses with less ground or anti-antenna restrictions. Second would be negotiables; things that there could be some compromise on, such as a bathroom near the shack, a multi-car garage,etc. Third, requirements would be written in the most flexible terms possible. If I absolutely must have three bedrooms, the requirement would be "Minimum of three bedrooms" so that a four-bedroom house wouldn't be ruled out - but a two-bedroom house would be. Same for a lot of other things. A no-farm-animals CC&R would be fine; a no- antennas one is a deal-killer. The key is to find a real estate agent who understands what you're looking for and is able to show you a reasonable number of homes; not everything that might conceivably meet your need, but not rule out something arbitrarily because it is 2002 square feet and your max was 2000. And part of that is making absolutely clear what's negotiable and what isn't, and not wasting time on homes that cannot meet the requirements. Ham radio may not be important to everyone, but it's important to me, and what I see are unreasonable rules restricting it. Yes, CCRs are a real issue for ham radio today. �But condemning them as inherently evil isn't going to accomplish anything because it's only a tiny minority of the population that wants to erect a tower in their back yard. �Most everyone thinks CCRs are good and in that environment they're not going away. �Best to understand how to work within the system. The problem is that "the system" is often specifically designed to prevent being worked within. In my township, there is zoning of every property. Zoning is simply a set of government ordinances, and as such can be changed, amended, varianced, or overlaid with special rules. Nothing in the zoning ordinances is unchangeable, and there are strict limits on what zoning can restrict, because the power of government is constitutionallylimited. In similar fashion there are "nuisance ordinances" about things like noise and keeping the property in reasonable repair. There are also building codes for safety reasons. And some properties in my township have deed restrictions, a form of CC&R. These can restrict things much more than zoning can, and can be made unchangeable because they are contracts agreed to upon buying the property - one of which is to require all future owners to do the same. Most deed restrictions cannot be changed or varianced because they're specifically set up not to be. What I see happening more and more is that deed restrictions and similar one-sided unchangeable contracts are being used to replace zoning, nuisance ordinances and building codes. And I think that's a very bad thing which must be resisted however possible. Because if we don't, eventually there won't be anyplace left to have an antenna, let alone a tower. I'm old enough to remember a time when, if you told an American that people were trying to sell homes where you couldn't put a TV antenna on the roof, the response would be "That's crazy; they'll never sell!" And they would have been right. But a little bit here and a little bit there, and now it's not unusual at all. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pictures of your antennas in the Antennas in the World directory | Antenna | |||
Using 2 antennas in car | Equipment | |||
WTB 80/40 Mor-gain or Antennas West PM Antennas | Antenna | |||
FM Antennas | Antenna | |||
FM Antennas | Antenna |