1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

HOA Restricting Dish

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by LilGator, Apr 21, 2010.

  1. GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    3,236
    0
    Feb 1, 2006
    That actually wouldn't hold any water in court. No access to his Balcony, via any common access route. Balcony would be treated as an exclusive use common area.
     
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    That wakes up a different beast. I'm assuming from the photos and layout that the balcony cannot be accessed from other condos. If so the definition could be challenged. But as common space the HOA has more authority to regulate.
     
  3. DoyleS

    DoyleS Icon

    1,028
    8
    Oct 21, 2002
    El Dorado...
    I think there is still a problem as the Horizontal boundaries are defined by planes of the interior surfaces of the walls which would not include a deck or patio where the dish is located. Those areas seem to be defined as limited common areas. A clever way to define it if you are trying to keep stuff off of decks and patios.
     
  4. TulsaOK

    TulsaOK New Member

    3,469
    0
    Feb 23, 2004
    I'd love to see a copy of their Covenants. Maybe from their web site?
     
  5. GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    3,236
    0
    Feb 1, 2006
    Limited common space, is to cover who has the responsibility for balcony waterproofing because they want to ensure that the decks are properly maintained and waterproofed. The still can't limit what he can do, as there is no access to this area, from any common space area.
     
  6. LilGator

    LilGator Cool Member

    21
    0
    Dec 17, 2009
    Sorry for the confusion- if I've used the term patio, I have meant balcony.

    It is indeed only accesible via the door in my living room. It is also a six floor balcony, so good luck walking up to it. I have a hard time believing this could be called anything but an exclusive use area (in regards to OTARD). Is this possible, no matter any "definitions" in the master deed?

    Here are all documents I have links to online:

    The Brio Rules & Regulations
    The Brio Master Deed Part 1
    The Brio Master Deed Part 2 - Floor Plans
    The Brio Master Deed Part 2 - By-Laws
    The Brio Amendment to Master Deed
    The Brio Pool Rules
    The Brio Moving Guidelines
    Fine Policy
    The Brio Reserve Study
     
  7. RTCDude

    RTCDude AllStar

    72
    0
    Feb 3, 2005
    When I first got Dish years ago, I wanted to set it up quickly without having mount the dish onto the roof. Instead I mounted the dish to a 18x18 inch board, weighted it down with bricks in the living room, and shot THROUGH the sliding door glass. The signals were a little low, but worked. I used that for almost three months before I moved the dish to the roof (got tired of the dog knocking the dish out of alignment). You might this trick with your window while your dish is "taken down" instead of suspending your service.
     
  8. Lee L

    Lee L Hall Of Fame

    3,134
    0
    Aug 15, 2002
    The FCC regs are pretty clear. They can call it anything they want, but if it is only acessible form the residence of the dish owner, then you can put a dish there, maybe with the exception of registered historic properties or true safetey regulations, neither of which seem to come into play in this situation. They did this purposefully to keep associations from changing definitions in an attempt to get around the spirit of the law.
     
  9. LilGator

    LilGator Cool Member

    21
    0
    Dec 17, 2009
    Petition was sent to the FCC yesterday, with copies going to condo association and association manager. Both of those were attempted today and notices left. Should I bother requesting a redelivery or just wait to see if they go pick them up within the 15 days? Since they were certified, I have receipts proving I sent copies to both.

    The FCC should receive the petition tomorrow.

    I also was contacted by someone from SBCA.org:

    I'll work with her to have a letter sent from her to the association, manager, and maybe developer as suggested.

    Cable installed today, and I am taking down the dish temporarily- reminded of how sucky cable is. A whopping 42 HD channels including premiums, vs 120 HD with Dish Network including premiums. Oh, and even the introductory 6 mos pricing is more than what I've been paying with Dish.
     
  10. DoyleS

    DoyleS Icon

    1,028
    8
    Oct 21, 2002
    El Dorado...
    Keep us posted on any developments. This situation has come up numerous times before and it is always good to have current info and resources in knowing how to deal with it.
     
  11. TulsaOK

    TulsaOK New Member

    3,469
    0
    Feb 23, 2004
    No need to have the letters redelivered. You have the receipt that they were delivered and that's as good as service.
    I hope there is no commitment with the cable company.
    It sounds like you've got this thing on the right track to a successful resolution.
    I wish you luck and look forward to "the rest of the story".
     
  12. LilGator

    LilGator Cool Member

    21
    0
    Dec 17, 2009
    Just wanted to let everyone know that Lisa at SBCA has been extremely helpful and drafted a letter she will be sending to the association and manager (and maybe developer as well). I thought I might include it here in case it may be of use to someone later down the road:

     
  13. matt

    matt New Member

    4,858
    1
    Jan 11, 2010
    Sounds like you are on your way. Keep it up!
     
  14. GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    3,236
    0
    Feb 1, 2006
    Keep up the good work. I almost wish you had a camera to take a picture of Board members when they they get all this information, the petition, the Letter, should be a funny site.

    Best thing about this post, is both Direct, and Dish users have rallied around in support.
     
  15. matt

    matt New Member

    4,858
    1
    Jan 11, 2010
    Haha yeah when I opened the pictures I almost said something but we need to stick together on this :grin:
     
  16. May 2, 2010 #136 of 163
    BenJF3

    BenJF3 Godfather

    308
    0
    Sep 12, 2008
    I reviewed this thread and technically via OTARD, he could mount the antenna via clamps to the railing and have it protrude if he wanted to. I think how he has it is the least obtrusive and I really can't believe the HOA is making an issue out of this.
     
  17. May 2, 2010 #137 of 163
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    "An antenna that extends out beyond the balcony or patio is usually considered to be in a common area that is not within the scope of the rule. Therefore, the rule does not apply to a condominium or rental apartment unit unless the antenna is installed wholly within the exclusive use area, such as the balcony or patio."

    Mounting on the railing and having it protrude is NOT protected by OTARD.
     
  18. May 2, 2010 #138 of 163
    BenJF3

    BenJF3 Godfather

    308
    0
    Sep 12, 2008
    Thanks for the clarification because I've seen it done this way. Generally, the HOA gave up the fight after presentation of the OTARD document and wasn't as stubborn as LilGator's. So, he could mount to the railing as long as the dish is under the overhang and within the balcony. I was merely pointing out the option because it would keep the antenna more stable for alignment purposes.
     
  19. May 2, 2010 #139 of 163
    scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    6,432
    59
    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC
    The only thing I might have done different with his tripod would be to mount it on some wood that I could have weighted it down with. He even had it set that putting the legs against the patio door , it was aligned.
     
  20. May 2, 2010 #140 of 163
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    His tripod arrangement (pictures earlier in thread) kept the dish virtually out of site and certainly within the exclusive use portion of the balcony. It helps that he was on the upper floor (a 2nd floor installation might have more of a sight angle). You can barely tell he has a dish.

    The problem seems to be the HOA defining everything outside of the walls of the units as "common" ... including the balconies. The balconies cannot be accessed by other tenants so they should match the FCC's definition of "Exclusive Use".

    If this battle is won it will be won based on the reality of OTARD ... not assumptions about what it covers when it doesn't allow everything. Restrictions can still apply.

    BTW: The apartment I lived at for a while allowed dishes that were not protected by OTARD. Eastward facing units with a bucket mounted dish setting outside of the unit ... northward facing upper level units with 4x4 wood beams holding a dish far enough out to see over the roof. All sorts of stuff that isn't protected. But all that is gone. They are virtually dish free now.

    (They did appropriately ban penetrating mounts such as lag bolts and putting a post in the ground. There were a lot of tie strap mounts and rope - especially with the 4x4 hanging out to the north mounts. All mounts had to be removable without damage to the property and no holes could be drilled.)
     

Share This Page