My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/02/2006
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/02/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:40:32 AM
Creation date
10/25/2006 11:15:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
11/02/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
126
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
<br />Page 2 - Special Issue <br /> <br />ZB. <br /> <br />Dear Subscriber: <br /> <br />We are pleased .to offer you this Special Issue, and we want to take the <br />~me to thank you for choosing our publication. Our newsletters are meant to <br />keep you on the cutting edge of new developments and help you implement the <br />best practices that will save you money and time. Peruse our website for <br />infonnation about all of our products and services at www.quinlan.com or <br />call us at (800) 229-2084. . <br /> <br /> <br />?;;:Y~ <br /> <br />Dennis Hofmazer <br />Publisher <br /> <br />The Telecommunications Act of 1996 <br /> <br />Wireless provider wants to hide antenna in fake chimney <br />Lawmakers believe plan undermines legislative intent <br />Citation: T-Mobile USA Inc. v. County of Hawaii Planning Commission, <br />Slfpreme Court of Hawaii, No. 24381 <br />HAWAII - Voicestream PCS II Corporation wanted to install a .stealth an- <br />tenna at a private residence in an agricultural area. Voicestream planned to <br />attach a false chimney and to build a separate garage to house antenna equip- <br />ment. <br />The County of Hawaii Planning Commission determined Voicestream was <br />required to apply for special permits. <br />Voicestream sued, challenging the commission's contention that special <br />pennits were required. The court ruled in favor of the commission. It found <br />Voicestream's planned structures did not fulfill the legi~lative intent of the <br />relevant law, which was passed at a time when landlines were still the major way <br />of providing communications. <br />Voicestream appealed, arguing its plan clearly fulfilled the relevant legisla- <br />tive intent. <br />DECISION: Reversed. <br />The structures in the instant case, namely the false chimney and the <br />garage housing accompanying equipment, were consistent with the <br />legislature's intent. <br />According to the relevant law, the legislature's intent was to "better serve <br />farmers and others residing in agricultural lands. " Importantly, there was no <br />difference in function between the landlines available when the law was passed <br /> <br />@ 2006 Quinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048. <br /> <br />48 <br /> <br />/.~ : . <br />t",.- . <br />t.:.':.:. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.