My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-25-1994 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1994
>
07-25-1994 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2023 9:50:04 AM
Creation date
12/11/2023 9:43:35 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
266
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
-T ■1 Case Name and Slate Plaintiff's Claim Tower Height Preemption?Court's Holding |Howard v.City of Buflingante937 F.2d 1376 (9lt) Cir. 1991) California Denial of application to increase antenna height.51 feet Partial preemption.City free to deny permit as long as it has considered the application, made factual findings, and attempted to negotiate satisfactory compromise.1 Guschke V.1 City of Oklafioma City763 F.2d 379 (1985) <br />Oklattoma * <br />.................................................................. <br />Challenge city's blanket height zoning restrictions.78 feet No explicit FCC action lo pieempt state law.Neither federal statutes nor regulations preempt City of Oklahoma City's zoning regulations regarding radio antennas. <br />In re Medina <br />Resolution 88 18 <br />' <br />(no cue here) <br />Minnesota <br />Application (or <br />amended conditional <br />use permit and <br />variance. <br />4 at 65 leel <br />2 at 70 feet <br />No. reasonatilo <br />accommodation <br />City council granted conditional use <br />permit subject to cenain limitations, <br />including height. <br />Bodony v. <br />Incorporated Village of <br />Sands Point <br />681 F.Supp. 1009 <br />(E D.N.Y. 1987) <br />New York <br />Ctiallenged denial of <br />zoning variance. <br />86 feel Yes.Summary judgment denied declaring <br />city unreasonable in limiting antenna <br />height to 56.5 feet. City also failed to <br />make findings. Court ordered parties to <br />arrive at compromise. Reversed and <br />remanded case to district court lor <br />entry of summary judgment in favoi ol <br />Pentel. City's fieight limitations ol <br />accessory buildings at 25 leet. <br />1 Penlul V. <br />1 City of Mendoia Heights <br />8th Cir. Coiiit ol Appeals <br />Docket No. 93 1026 <br />(Oct 1993) <br />Minnesota <br />Challenged denial to <br />extend antenna 11.5 <br />feet. <br />proposed <br />68 leet <br />No, leasonatile <br />accommodation. <br />PRO 1 requires the City reasonably to <br />accommodate Pentel's needs as an <br />amateur radio operator. Reversed and <br />remanded to the district couit for <br />summary judgment in lavor ol Pentel. <br />f^ f
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.