Designated Dish Installation Wiring and Location Not Used

Started by SeanM4 • 10 replies • 1797 views

💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

SeanM4 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

The homes in our community all have a designated spot for dish installation and there is a prewire of RG6 cable in the attic that runs to that spot. If there is not a usable view of the satellites from that spot for any reason, then the wire can be moved from within the attic to a different side of the house with the required view of satellites. Some types of satellite dish receivers now require two cable runs, but an additional line could always be installed at the same location by the installer.

This setup had worked fine for the first few years with the original owners. Over the years there has been turnover with new owners and many tenants and now most of these people are just choosing random places to install dishes and running new cabling up, down and across the exterior walls of the homes. The renters and new owners do not bother reading the documents that let them know that prewiring is available so they do the installations without even attempting to use it out of ignorance and laziness.

The biggest problems and biggest eyesores have been at the homes of renters who don't care about how wiring looks and do whatever is cheapest and most convenient for the installer who is unaware there is prewire in the attic. Sometimes the cabling is just dangling loose (DYI installs). Using the cabling prewire may have been easier if it had been used and sometimes not because the installer prefers not to go in the attic.

Can the HOA do anything to make these people either use the prewire that's hidden from view or have the wiring jobs done more neatly and more hidden from view (such as running under eaves and painting wires to blend into the builing)?

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,047

Posted:

Sean,

Although the HOA may not prevent a satellite dish from being installed on property owned by the member they may adopt guidelines as to the preferred locations and how cables are to be addressed. However, the restrictions may not unreasonably increases the cost of the installation. Since the cable is already run, I do not see this as an issue but you will need to be prepared for that argument.

The issue for the Association will be enforcement and getting past the knee jerk reaction from the member who may take the enforcement action as a denial of allowing the dish vs just a requirement in preferred locations and/or appearance of dressing cables.

Here is a link FCC fact sheet about antennas.

Tim

SeanM4 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

I have already seen the FCC website regulations, but I have never seen anything specifically about ability to enforce the appearance of cabling ie, either don't run any new cables at all (since prewiring is already provided), but if you *must* use new cables because there is no reception satellite within reach of the prewiring, then install the new cables in the most inconspicuous routing available and paint wires that cannot be hidden to blend in.
The FCC regs say the HOA can requiring painting the dish itself, but they forgot to address the mounting hardware and wiring.

If they ran these cables in the rear of their homes or on sides not visible from the street, no one would notice it or care, but they are so blatant on the street facing sides of most of the houses. There now so many houses with cables winding across the face of the homes at eye level because of tenants pinching pennies on the installations.

Is saying it would cost an extra 30 minutes of labor to run the cables under the roof eves and that they don't want to paint the wires because that would cost them some money to buy paint and apply it a valid defense for these people?
If painting a dish can be required, why not also painting exposed cables?

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,047

Posted:

Sean,

I work in broadcasting and I will have to admit that paint damages the insulation of the cable (the outer jacket). Yes I have seen many cables painted, that doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do.

My Association, in VA, has adopted the following:

In accordance with Federal Communications Commissions’ ruling of Over the Air Reception Devices (OTARD), the following guidelines exist concerning dish style antennas:

Size: Dish size may not exceed 1 meter (39.37") in size.

Location: In order to maintain a colonial style to the property, the Board of Directors has established a hierarchy of locations when installing dish style antennas to obtain an acceptable signal quality.

1. Devices shall be installed solely within such individual Lot and shall not be installed on Common Area, and are to be placed at the rear roof portion or rear yard, or yard area, within the lot. Ideally, the device should not be visible from the street unless acceptable signal quality is unavailable.

2. To the maximum extent possible, Devices shall be located in a place shielded from view when standing on the street and from the view of other lots; provided, however, that nothing in these Rules would require installation in a location from which an acceptable quality signal cannot be received. This section does not permit installation on Common Area, even if an acceptable quality signal cannot be received from the individual Lot.

3. If acceptable signal quality still cannot be obtained dish antennas may be installed within the front of the property. Notification of this type of installation should be sent to the ACC along with a statement from the installer that this is the only location that could be used to receive acceptable signal quality.

4. The Association shall not be required to alter or remove any landscaping on common property for reception purposes.

No antenna may be mounted on the common areas of the Association.

Cabling: Cables associated with the installation and use of dish style antennas should be bundled together and, if required to run outside of the home, attached to the home so it not detract from the appearance of the property or community.

Installation: Homeowners are responsible for ensuring that antennas are securely installed and they in no way affect the safety of others.

SeanM4 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

Paintable coax cable is available and even if they have cable that wasn't designed to be painted, the coax could be covered with a paintable cable concealer or maybe just some paintable tape.
The prewiring was provided by the builder so no exterior cabling would be needed or need to be painted if they just use the existing hidden cables they were supposed to have used in the first place.

If the only homes that didn't use the provided prewire location were the ones that had something like a tree blocking the view to the satellite, there would only be a few homes with these issues instead of most of the homes with dishes installed in the last couple years. Even if there is an obstruction, the cable can still be moved to another side either from in the attic or by legnthening the cable and running it under the eaves.

Does being ignorant of the prewired coax because they didn't read the owners handbook that tells them about it give them a valid defense to not redo the installation? "Sorry, I didn't know there was already cable provided and I assumed I could do whatever I wanted. I already installed the dish where it is and I don't want to spend money to change it now."

Is there something that specifies what is "unreasonably increases the cost of the installation?" Many dish resellers have free installation if done in the quickest and most convenient way for the installer. Anything else costs extra, but what is unreasonable?

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Sean,

The answer to your question: "Is there something that specifies what is "unreasonably increases the cost of the installation?" is right in the FCC ruling, which you say you've read. Look for these questions: "What types of restrictions unreasonable delay orrevent viewers from using an antenna?", "What types of restrictions are prohibited?" and "What is an unreasonable expense?"

I think if you required the cables to be hidden from view it would not be considered an unreasonable delay or expense. I would suggest informing the members of the assn's requirement that cables be hidden from view whether it be by mailing, to each member, the specific ruling regarding satellite dish antennas or posting a periodic notice in your newsletter, or both. Once this requirement is in place then members could be sent violation notices if they don't adhere to it. You may also be able to require members who have already mounted antennas with exposed wiring to come into compliance, but I would check that out with your attorney before sending a violation notice.

SeanM4 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

There are some vague language that is subject to interpretastion:

"It may also be unreasonable for a local government, community association or landlord to require a viewer to incur additional costs associated with installation."

"A requirement to paint an antenna so that it blends into the background against which it is mounted would likely be acceptable, provided it will not interfere with reception or impose unreasonable costs."

The resident can say "It cost me nothing to not paint or do anything else to attempt to hide the cabling, but it costs something to do so. Therefore, I think any expense is an "unreasonable expense."

I can't tell from the FCC page if $50 or $100 or $200 of extra costs associated with neatly hiding the cables can be called unreasonable additional costs.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Sean,

The FCC rule also says (in determining the reasonableness of the exp): "Whether there are similar requirememnts for comparable objects such as a/c units. . .".

The BOD could call Direct TV and ask how much extra it costs to hide the cables. I doubt it's an "unreasonable" amount.

Bottom line: either the BOD is willing to require that the cables be hidden or just live live with the cables hanging off the houses because they're too afraid to adopt the rule for fear that someone might complain that it results in an "unreasonable" cost to comply with that requirement.

No matter what the rule is someone is always going to complain. If the BOD is concerned about being fair they won't have any problems even if someone does complain.

SeanM4 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

What about enforcing a rule requiring the designated installation point to be used unless there is an obstruction at there preventing reception?
If they use the provided cable and mounting point, painting or hiding of cables would then be unnecessary. However, if they wanted a dish installation that required more than one line of cable, the installer would need to go into the attic to run the extra cables (and, of course, charge an extra fee to do).

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Sean,

Maybe what the board really needs to do is remind the members that there is cable in the attic. If a member wants or needs more than one line of cable then its an expense they generated, not the BOD. I'm sure it would be no problem for the installer to hide the cable and most likely doesn't cost extra.

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,047

Posted:

Sean,

The Association can designate an primary installation point. If you read the guidelines I posted, you will see that we identified an order of installation places.

I would suggest that you have the association do what has already been recommended, inform the membership and then start enforcement. There is a point of over thinking an issue. No matter how much time you put in on a guideline you will never please everyone and never account for all arguments. Just do the best you can and follow through using common sense when an argument raises it head.

Tim

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

✓ Ask follow-up questions
✓ Share your experience
✓ Get expert advice
✓ Access 350,000 discussions

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here