My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040390
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
CCMIN040390
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:34 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:18:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
170 <br /> <br /> There being no testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the public <br /> hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes expressed some concerns regarding changing the <br /> ordinance. He stated that the communities have CC&Rs, approved by <br /> the City and the State Department of Real Estate City, which <br /> relate to satellite dishes on roofs. He pointed out that <br /> satellite dishes on rooftops are noisy and unattractive and would <br /> upset the neighbors. He indicated that he opposes the change and <br /> was in favor of keeping the existing ordinance in place. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver agreed with Mr. Brandes. He stated that having <br /> satellite dishes on rooftops would create problems about reception <br /> and setting appropriate limitations to what can be picked up from <br /> satellites. He mentioned that he would prefer to see staff get <br /> more information about what is appropriate, what restrictions are <br /> in order, and how far the City could go in limiting satellite <br /> dishes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes pointed out that there is an existing ordinance <br /> and that if Council takes no action on the proposed change, that <br /> ordinance would stay in place. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer agreed with Mr. Brandes and Mr. Tarver that roof- <br /> mounted satellite dishes are not attractive. He stated that the <br /> City has an ordinance, the legality of which is being challenged <br /> in court. He indicated that he would not support any change in <br /> the ordinance and would prefer to have a judicial body rule on it <br /> rather than change it because of the lawsuit. He then asked Mr. <br /> Roush if the existing ordinance would remain in effect if Council <br /> takes no action. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said yes. He stated that the City is being <br /> challenged in court with respect to the placement of satellites in <br /> backyards, not on rooftops. He expressed concern that should the <br /> Federal Court judge look at the entire ordinance and determine <br /> that any portion of it is pre-empted by the federal regulation on <br /> satellite dishes, the entire ordinance could be declared improper, <br /> and the gentleman would be allowed to keep his satellite dish. <br /> This could result in an award of attorney's fees and some other <br /> fees. The proposed ordinance change was brought before the <br /> Council in an attempt to address this issue and save the City some <br /> money and trouble in the future. <br /> <br /> The Council took no action on the matter; the existing <br /> ordinance on satellite dishes remains in effect. <br /> <br /> Item 6c <br /> Capital Improvement Proqram Fiscal Year 1990/91 Throuqh 1994/95 <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian presented his report (SR 90:139) regarding the <br /> matter. <br /> <br /> - 6 - <br /> 4-3-90 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.