PDA

View Full Version : W3YNI Wins Zoning Hearing Board Appeal



W3WN
12-13-2008, 10:12 AM
Courtesy of the WASHRag, Volume 12 #10, December 2008:

Following a hearing on a neighbor’s appeal of Chuck Mills W3YNI’s second tower permit on Thursday, November 13th, 7:30 PM, the Penn Township Zoning Hearing Board Voted 5—0 in denying the appeal and permitting Mr. Mills to retain his tower.

Two different reporters for Tribune Total Media newspapers wrote extremely similar articles, last month both stating that “a group of residents” had continued to oppose the permit for the tower. The articles can be found at http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune ... 98545.html (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/westmoreland/s_598545.html) and http://www.yourpenntrafford.com/penntra ... ower-issue (http://www.yourpenntrafford.com/penntraffordstar/article/zoning-hearing-board-again-considers-radio-tower-issue). The article announcing the results also indicated that there were multiple neighbors opposing the tower http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune ... 02666.html (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/westmoreland/s_602666.html)

However, amateur radio operators who attended the meeting in support of Mr. Mills stated that only one neighbor, Mr. John & Mrs. Jill Ducar, testified in opposition to the permit at this hearing, as opposed to “5 or 6” at the hearing over the first permit. In fact, many neighbors spoke in favor of Mr. Mills and his tower, according to the articles, or signed letters of support. He also had supporting testimony from an engineer and the county RACES officer.

News reports stated that Mr. Ducar’s primary complaint was merely over the position of the tower. “We are not contesting the presence of an antenna structure on the property, but rather its location and lack of screening from adjacent properties." He wants the tower moved further back in the yard, were existing trees would provide additional screening. However, Mr. Mills and his attorney, Mike Lazaroff K3AIR, pointed out that moving the tower at this point would cost $4500 or more and would cause other long-term problems, making this unreasonable. Photographs of the property that were presented at the hearing indicated the tower is already screened to a great degree by existing trees.

Despite this public statement, however, during the hearing, audience members reported that they overheard Mrs. Ducar saying to other neighbors "...we just want that tower GONE". Unfortunately, Mr. Mills and Mr. Lazaroff were not made aware of these comments until after testimony in the hearing had closed, or they would have tried to get this on the record.

According to Mr. Lazaroff, the township solicitor noted that PRB-1 and the (then) soon to be enforced Act 88 require a good-faith negotiating effort between the amateur radio operator and the municipality. Mr. Mills & Mr. Lazaroff were able to document this to the satisfaction of the hearing board, and that they had been willing to (reasonably) compromise beyond what the letter of the law required.

One thing that is clear as that for several months, going back to the original permit and permit hearing, the Zoning Office had been willing to issue the permits to Mr. Mills. Once they were fully informed on their responsibilities under PRB-1, they have made good faith efforts and performed good faith negotiations to a conclusion favorable to Mr. Mills. While there was, at first, some opposition from the township itself, they acquiesced once the solicitors took a good, hard look at what the law said and what Mr. Mills’ rights were.

It appears that the actions of only one or two neighbors were extending the process and causing additional expenses on both the township and on Mr. Mills. These neighbors may have been abusing the legal process by filing these frivolous actions trying to force the township to enforce everything in a very hair splitting, hyper-technical matter. Yet, while these neighbors argue about the precise location of the tower, almost down to the inch, regardless of the cost of moving the structure, there are counter-complaints that their hands are not clean, as these same neighbors have put up accessory use structures without permits, in areas of the property where they're clearly not allowed.

Mr. Ducar had no immediate comment pending a review of the decision. He will have 30 days to appeal the decision to the Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas.

KC8TCQ
12-13-2008, 05:59 PM
My whole take on this is simple. Thjere is no way in hell I would buy property in some area like that, where there are deed restrictions or HOA's. Unless the idiots are making my house payments, and paying my property tax, they have absolutely NO right to say what I can or can not put on my property as long as it meets local ordinances.

N9FE
12-13-2008, 08:15 PM
Just one a-hole in the neighborhood is causing all this crapola..

WA4TM
12-13-2008, 09:55 PM
Just one a-hole in the neighborhood is causing all this crapola..

I would bet that 90% of the other people in the neighborhood hate this a-hole, probably causes everyone a lot of trouble, and he probably kicks kittens and puppies too!!!!

W3WN
12-13-2008, 09:59 PM
My whole take on this is simple. Thjere is no way in hell I would buy property in some area like that, where there are deed restrictions or HOA's. Unless the idiots are making my house payments, and paying my property tax, they have absolutely NO right to say what I can or can not put on my property as long as it meets local ordinances.

Chuck has no deed restrictions or HOA's. That wasn't the issue.

Summary:
W3YNI had a roof mounted beam for years. No complaints. He filed to put up a 53 foot tower. One neighbor (the Ducar's) objected. They filed to have the permit revoked. They convinced a few neighbors to support them the first time around. And they found a very minor technicality to force the Zoning Board to revoke the first permit.

W3YNI and his lawyer, K3AIR, decided to file for a second permit before filing suit. At first, in fear of the concerns that the Ducar's had, the Zoning office wasn't going to grant the permit. Then Mike talked with them -- and pointed out the law, and that they had addressed all concerns raised in the second permit. About the time the permit would (under state law) be automatically granted with no action, the second permit was granted. The Ducar's again appealed.

As you can see in the article above, the Ducar's had no support from the rest of the neighborhood the second time around. It basically boiled down to this: They didn't want to look at a tower. Regarless. Period.

Well... sorry, tough luck. The Zoning Hearing Board (IMHO) made the right decision by upholding the second permit.

I understand from K3AIR that if there is an appeal, the Ducar's would have to show that the Board made an error in law in granting the permit to Chuck. That doesn't look too likely.

The bottom line is this: You can't please all the neighbors all the time. Chuck has made a good faith effort, but it comes down to one neighbor who objects to a tower, just because. Zoning permits the tower; and there are no deed restrictions or HOA's, so those are irrelevant.

And... if the Ducar's are really so hell bent to stop the tower and have all Zoning enforced strictly according to the exact letter of the law... well, I understand that they may have their own issues with structures that don't have building permits... so, as Confusius is supposed to have said:

Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

73

ke7rvh
12-13-2008, 10:22 PM
i might be showing my ignorance but i thought as a licensed amateur radio operator we are federally granted the right to operate our radio stations. witch includes a tower provided it doesn't conflict with FCC regulations on hight, regardless of local ordinances.

WTKX
12-13-2008, 10:48 PM
Please send QSL cards with pictures of towers to...

John Ducar
4 Oakridge Drive
Irwin, PA 15642

Here's some perspective for ya:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&saddr=4+Oakridge+Drive+Irwin+PA&daddr=60+Regola+Drive+Irwin+PA&hl=en&geocode=&mra=ls&sll=40.331661,-79.709491&sspn=0.00175,0.003455&ie=UTF8&ll=40.379677,-79.660363&spn=0.003498,0.006909&t=h&z=17

N5RLR
12-14-2008, 03:20 AM
i might be showing my ignorance but i thought as a licensed amateur radio operator we are federally granted the right to operate our radio stations. witch includes a tower provided it doesn't conflict with FCC regulations on hight, regardless of local ordinances.
For the most part we're subject to local ordinances except as provided in PRB-1, which has been codified into state and local law in some areas, if memory serves. Also, antenna-height restrictions may come into play near airports.

N9FE
12-14-2008, 07:51 AM
i might be showing my ignorance but i thought as a licensed amateur radio operator we are federally granted the right to operate our radio stations. witch includes a tower provided it doesn't conflict with FCC regulations on hight, regardless of local ordinances. Yes this the way it is suppose to be. But as this story proves it does not allways work that way. We have a few guys here that are putting up towers now before the citys or towns get bigger and start pulling this same thing..

W3WN
03-01-2010, 11:59 AM
Not that I'm trying (like some people do on other sites) to resurrect a thread from the dead, but...

I thought a few of you might enjoy putting some faces with the calls:[attachment=0:3rkrromb]K3AIR W3YNI N3LLR.JPG[/attachment:3rkrromb]

Left to right, Mike K3AIR (the lawyer), Chuck W3YNI, and Bill N3LLR (Atlantic Division Director). Photo taken yesterday at WASHFest 2010,

[For legal purposes: if you'd like to use it elsewhere, feel free to do so so long as you note that the picture was taken by & is copyright 2010 by Ron Notarius W3WN & used with my permission. Not that I'm trying to be a pain, but for reasons to boring to go into, I've been advised to add that to "newsworthy" photos.]

And as a coda... Chuck mentioned to me yesterday that his neighbor is trying to stir up trouble again. Including sending letters to several high ARRL officials, including Bill, kvetching. I don't know all the details, suffice to say the neighbor didn't care for Bill's reply and then apparantly complained to ARRL Hq about that! Some people just don't know when to quit...

73

WTKX
03-01-2010, 02:22 PM
Perhaps this will set a precedent regarding anti ham radio poop heads.

KG4CGC
03-01-2010, 02:27 PM
I see Bill, Hank and Dale. Is Boomhauer chatting up a bird?

W3WN
03-01-2010, 02:57 PM
I see Bill, Hank and Dale. Is Boomhauer chatting up a bird?
Who?

KG4CGC
03-01-2010, 03:15 PM
I see Bill, Hank and Dale. Is Boomhauer chatting up a bird?
Who?
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c79/bebop5/hank.jpg

WTKX
03-01-2010, 03:19 PM
Okay, something weird happened.
I think I hit the edit button by accident.

I gotta stop trying to mess around on a tiny screen. Sorry about that.