08-22-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/ cperacions and tde legitimate interests of local governments in regulating local zoning matters." PRB-1 ' 22. After weighing local, federal, and amateur interests, the .=-CC issued a ruling that has a limited preemptive effect on local regulations. PRB-1 ^ 24. The federal courts that have addressed this ruling have upheld 1 wla oreemctive effect.See. e.c._.Evans V. Beard of County Commlrs, 994 F.2d 755, 76C-61 (10th Cir. 1993); Themes v. Citv T;.V^c;iHP Park. Kv.., 779 F.2d 1187, 1188-69 (6th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Courts applying PR3-1 have discerned two means by which PR3-1 may preempt a'local ordinance. First, the local regulation may be preempted on its face. The city's coning ordinance dees not conflict on its face with PR3-1 because it neither bans nor imposes an unvarying height restriction on amateur radio antennas. Evans V- Board of Countv Comm'rs, 752 F. Supp. 973, 976-77 (D. Colo. 1990); y, citv of Edmond_s_, 671 F. Supp. 1270, 1274 (W.D. Wash. 1987).“ Second, ?R3-1 also preempts a coning ordinance that a city has not applied in a manner that reasonably accommodates amateur com-munications. ^ Evans, 994 F.2d at 761; yarMiVian v. ooeVy River. 748 F. Supp. 1241, 1248 (N.D. Ohio 1990). The FCC refused to specify a .height below which local governments could not regulate, and instead declared that "local regulations which involve placement, screening, or height of antennas based on health, safety, or aesthetic considerations must be crafted uO accommodate reasonably amateur corn.. :nications, and wO rep..esent ..he minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the local authority's legitimate purpose." FR3-1 5 25. ‘■Pentel's argument that the city's ordinance is void for vagueness is without merit. See' Kolender v-—Lawson, 461 . • ' 357-58 (1983); Williams v. Citv of Columbia. 906 F. 2d 994, ,98 Cir. 1990). -5-