Study ordered for controversial ham radio antenna. Post #370.
Study ordered for controversial ham radio antenna: " MIKE BLASKY mblasky@napanews.com(9) Comments
City puts curbs on towering backyard antenna
For several residents of Coombs Street in Napa, Jeff Hullquist is their least favorite neighbor – or rather, the 55-foot-tall antenna outside … Read more
Neighbors protest radio antenna in historic district
When Napa resident Kathleen Wolf returned to her Randolph Street home in April, following a three-month trip to France, she was surprised to s… Read more
A yearlong neighborhood dispute over the appropriateness of a 55-foot amateur radio antenna in the backyard of an Old Town home will drag on for at least a few more months.
The City Council on Tuesday asked for a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review to determine what impact – if any – Jeff Hullquist’s tower at his Coombs Street home has on the cultural integrity of the historical Napa community.
“I believe there is some substantial evidence in the record that there may be significant impact under CEQA on the historic district,” Councilwoman Juliana Inman said.
The council on Tuesday heard several appeals: Hullquist appealed a November Planning Commission decision to limit tower usage to overnight and evening hours, as well as lower the tower when not in use; his neighbors appealed an earlier Cultural Heritage Commission ruling that initially deemed the tower suitable.
Any formal decision on the tower’s future will be delayed until after the review, which will decide how the tower affects the quality of life in the neighborhood. And it’s likely that several city boards, including the Planning Commission, will have to weigh in again before the matter returns to the council.
“I do believe that we have discretion in whether to permit the antenna or not, in terms of exceeding our zoning standards. I think we need to look at what impact is,” Inman said.
This dispute has raged since last February after Hullquist, a ham radio enthusiast, constructed the tower on his property at 467 Coombs. But zoning laws limit structures over 30 feet, city officials said, and Hullquist was forced to retroactively apply for the necessary permits.
His neighbors’ initial shock upon seeing the “unsightly” tower has been replaced by resentment, anger and a growing sense of dread that their idyllic, cozy district would be forced to live forever with the stain of wires and cables looming above their heads.
As Hullquist argues his right to broadcast transmissions across the world, communication with his neighbors has ended.
Lon and Linsey Gallagher, who also live on Coombs, brought a lawyer to the hearing. Hullquist did, too.
Linsey Gallagher told the council that Hullquist was selfish, allowing his hobby to destroy his neighbors’ views. She questioned whether the tower was a safety hazard for her two young children.
“I didn’t ask for this, and I have to defend my family against it,” Linsey Gallagher said.
“I can’t escape the gaze of this PG&E substation apparatus from any of the windows in my home, or from anywhere in my backyard, for that matter. It’s massive,” she said.
City staffers told the council that neither side was willing to bend.
Council members agreed that limiting Hullquist’s hours of use likely clashed with federal law, which says radio operators must be reasonably accommodated. Limiting or restricting usage isn’t likely legal.
But “reasonable” is a broad term, said Councilman Peter Mott. The law doesn’t entitle Hullquist to build a tower as high as he wants, even if a shorter tower limits his range.
“A rancher in Nevada might say 200 feet is reasonable for his tower,” he said. “I don’t know if the federal government is saying Mr. Hullquist gets to broadcast to France.”
Vice Mayor Scott Sedgley said he was frustrated that Hullquist built his tower before getting the necessary permits, a classic case of asking for forgiveness rather than permission.
If Hullquist had gone the established route, Sedgley said, it’s possible much of the animosity with his neighbors and ensuing headaches could have been avoided.
“Unfortunately, this has used lots of taxpayer resources to try to get some resolve,” Sedgley said.
Mott agreed.
“You can’t change a lightbulb in a historic district without checking to see if it’s the right lightbulb,” he said.
The council might not be the final word on the dispute, however.
Hullquist said after the meeting that the environment study was a nonsense decision intended to harm him financially. He’s required to pay for the CEQA report, which could cost him thousands.
Depending on discussions with his lawyer, Hullquist said, he might take the matter to federal court."
--------------------------------------------
Comment:
This tower case has continued to fester for almost a year. Unfortunately, Jeff Hullquist's neighbors have a point. Hullquist should have asked for a variance to the city's 30-foot/9.14 meters structure limit before he erected his 55-foot/16.76 meters tower. The city council was not impressed by Hullquist's request for forgiveness and the after-the-fact application for a zoning variance. So, the Calistoga City Council asked that a California Environmental Quality Act review be done on the tower. According to the city council, the purpose of the study would determine the impact of the now illegal tower on "the cultural integrity of the historic Napa community." By not following the zoning variance procedure, Hullquist opened himself up for needless ridicule and condemnation. On the other hand, the amount of technical and scientific ignorance displayed by the town's residents is truly amazing. The NIMBY (not in my backyard) syndrome is alive and well. I'm not saying Hullquist would have received permission in the first place to erect a taller tower than the city's law requires, but, at least, he could have spared himself a little grief and a lot of attorney's fees by following the proper procedure. Cellular phone providers face a similar quandary when they try to erect towers for their digital and phone services. It's sad when miscommunication and ignorance compound a simple issue.
For the latest Amateur Radio news and events, please check out the blog sidebars. These news feeds are updated daily.
You can follow our blog community with a free email subscription or by tapping into the blog RSS feed.
Aloha es 73 de Russ (KH6JRM).
'via Blog this'
City puts curbs on towering backyard antenna
For several residents of Coombs Street in Napa, Jeff Hullquist is their least favorite neighbor – or rather, the 55-foot-tall antenna outside … Read more
Neighbors protest radio antenna in historic district
When Napa resident Kathleen Wolf returned to her Randolph Street home in April, following a three-month trip to France, she was surprised to s… Read more
A yearlong neighborhood dispute over the appropriateness of a 55-foot amateur radio antenna in the backyard of an Old Town home will drag on for at least a few more months.
The City Council on Tuesday asked for a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review to determine what impact – if any – Jeff Hullquist’s tower at his Coombs Street home has on the cultural integrity of the historical Napa community.
“I believe there is some substantial evidence in the record that there may be significant impact under CEQA on the historic district,” Councilwoman Juliana Inman said.
The council on Tuesday heard several appeals: Hullquist appealed a November Planning Commission decision to limit tower usage to overnight and evening hours, as well as lower the tower when not in use; his neighbors appealed an earlier Cultural Heritage Commission ruling that initially deemed the tower suitable.
Any formal decision on the tower’s future will be delayed until after the review, which will decide how the tower affects the quality of life in the neighborhood. And it’s likely that several city boards, including the Planning Commission, will have to weigh in again before the matter returns to the council.
“I do believe that we have discretion in whether to permit the antenna or not, in terms of exceeding our zoning standards. I think we need to look at what impact is,” Inman said.
This dispute has raged since last February after Hullquist, a ham radio enthusiast, constructed the tower on his property at 467 Coombs. But zoning laws limit structures over 30 feet, city officials said, and Hullquist was forced to retroactively apply for the necessary permits.
His neighbors’ initial shock upon seeing the “unsightly” tower has been replaced by resentment, anger and a growing sense of dread that their idyllic, cozy district would be forced to live forever with the stain of wires and cables looming above their heads.
As Hullquist argues his right to broadcast transmissions across the world, communication with his neighbors has ended.
Lon and Linsey Gallagher, who also live on Coombs, brought a lawyer to the hearing. Hullquist did, too.
Linsey Gallagher told the council that Hullquist was selfish, allowing his hobby to destroy his neighbors’ views. She questioned whether the tower was a safety hazard for her two young children.
“I didn’t ask for this, and I have to defend my family against it,” Linsey Gallagher said.
“I can’t escape the gaze of this PG&E substation apparatus from any of the windows in my home, or from anywhere in my backyard, for that matter. It’s massive,” she said.
City staffers told the council that neither side was willing to bend.
Council members agreed that limiting Hullquist’s hours of use likely clashed with federal law, which says radio operators must be reasonably accommodated. Limiting or restricting usage isn’t likely legal.
But “reasonable” is a broad term, said Councilman Peter Mott. The law doesn’t entitle Hullquist to build a tower as high as he wants, even if a shorter tower limits his range.
“A rancher in Nevada might say 200 feet is reasonable for his tower,” he said. “I don’t know if the federal government is saying Mr. Hullquist gets to broadcast to France.”
Vice Mayor Scott Sedgley said he was frustrated that Hullquist built his tower before getting the necessary permits, a classic case of asking for forgiveness rather than permission.
If Hullquist had gone the established route, Sedgley said, it’s possible much of the animosity with his neighbors and ensuing headaches could have been avoided.
“Unfortunately, this has used lots of taxpayer resources to try to get some resolve,” Sedgley said.
Mott agreed.
“You can’t change a lightbulb in a historic district without checking to see if it’s the right lightbulb,” he said.
The council might not be the final word on the dispute, however.
Hullquist said after the meeting that the environment study was a nonsense decision intended to harm him financially. He’s required to pay for the CEQA report, which could cost him thousands.
Depending on discussions with his lawyer, Hullquist said, he might take the matter to federal court."
--------------------------------------------
Comment:
This tower case has continued to fester for almost a year. Unfortunately, Jeff Hullquist's neighbors have a point. Hullquist should have asked for a variance to the city's 30-foot/9.14 meters structure limit before he erected his 55-foot/16.76 meters tower. The city council was not impressed by Hullquist's request for forgiveness and the after-the-fact application for a zoning variance. So, the Calistoga City Council asked that a California Environmental Quality Act review be done on the tower. According to the city council, the purpose of the study would determine the impact of the now illegal tower on "the cultural integrity of the historic Napa community." By not following the zoning variance procedure, Hullquist opened himself up for needless ridicule and condemnation. On the other hand, the amount of technical and scientific ignorance displayed by the town's residents is truly amazing. The NIMBY (not in my backyard) syndrome is alive and well. I'm not saying Hullquist would have received permission in the first place to erect a taller tower than the city's law requires, but, at least, he could have spared himself a little grief and a lot of attorney's fees by following the proper procedure. Cellular phone providers face a similar quandary when they try to erect towers for their digital and phone services. It's sad when miscommunication and ignorance compound a simple issue.
For the latest Amateur Radio news and events, please check out the blog sidebars. These news feeds are updated daily.
You can follow our blog community with a free email subscription or by tapping into the blog RSS feed.
Aloha es 73 de Russ (KH6JRM).
'via Blog this'
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for visiting my Amateur Radio Blog. I value your comments and suggestions. For Amateur Radio Antenna Topics and Discussions, stay here. For Amateur Radio News and Trends, please visit my news site at https://bigislandarrlnews.com.
Aloha es 73 de Russ (KH6JRM).