# Boston May Ban Sat dishes From View



## rventura (Jan 21, 2006)

Check this out.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...06/10/17/city_may_banish_tv_dishes_from_view/


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

rventura said:


> Check this out.
> 
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...06/10/17/city_may_banish_tv_dishes_from_view/


Rventura,

According to Federal Legislation and the FCC it is ILLEGAL to ban outright or to otherwise place conditions on Antenna Installation (satellite Dish's less than one meter or ANY Size OTA Antenna) that causes the prospective subscriber to NOT be able to get a signal or place UNDUE installation costs upon them.

Boston, when they determine what they propose is ILLEGAL will have to back down.

The only way Boston can LEGALLY place any conditions upon installers would be to declare all of BOSTON a Historic district and only then could they place conditions on Antenna installations, and still not be able to ban then outright.

America, "Home of the Free", YEAHH RIGHT. As long as you pick the right color House, agree with the status quo ETC.., LEAVE PEOPLE ALONE!!!

John


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

All they need is a judge to decide that the rule isn't unreasonable. OTARD scares most communities into not having laws/regulations but it does not prohibit all laws/regulations. Perhaps what the issue needs is a major city like Boston who can afford to take the issue through the court process to decide what OTARD can and cannot do.

The question to ask is "Is there a less obtrusive place I could put my dish without excessive extra cost?" The definition of excessive is the key. Some believe that OTARD allows you to put a dish anywhere they want - it doesn't.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

I'm pleasantly surprised. That was a balanced article that described OTARD (not by name) as well as what some Boston city counsilors want.

My favorite quote from the article is by Robert Mercer of DirecTV, saying that dishes are unfairly singled out. "Why not force cable to bury their lines in the ground? What's so attractive about a bunch of cables?"


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

I don't know if Boston is like my town but some of our city commissioners are also members of the county cable board. They receive free cable service for being on the board and many people think that they are "bought and paid for" because whenever something comes up that concerns the cable company (like franchise disputes) they always seem to vote in favor of the cable company. I sure hope that the satellite dish owners in Boston win this one because if they don't it is likely that they will try the same thing here.


----------



## LI-SVT (May 18, 2006)

So...antennas are unsigtly but telphone, 
cable TV, and electrical services are'nt:nono2: ?

Sounds like opening a can of worms to me.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It is amazing how a repetitive ugly can blend in to the background.
It would also depend on the neighborhood, but utility poles can be found in alleys behind homes (with other ugly stuff). Perhaps if there are front yard utilities front yard dishes would be more "acceptable".


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

A lot of these kinds of rules and restrictions just seem to me like a whole bunch of nobody-else's-business. Some folks in this country get so worked up over what other people are doing.

If my neighbor was running a crack-house that would not be good.... but putting up an antenna or dish to watch TV? How could anyone possibly have any problem with that?


----------



## LI-SVT (May 18, 2006)

James Long said:


> It is amazing how a repetitive ugly can blend in to the background.
> It would also depend on the neighborhood, but utility poles can be found in alleys behind homes (with other ugly stuff). Perhaps if there are front yard utilities front yard dishes would be more "acceptable".


That is a good point. After reading the article the first thing I thought of was San Fransisco. I used to visit my sister there and always remember how beautiful some of the houses were but it was hard to see it because of all of the poles and wires.


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

I suppose one way they could go is work out a deal with Dish and Direct such that each building can have a single dish + appropriate splitters and the signals get routed to the people inside that require signals. It'd cut down on the number of dishes at least.


----------



## debpasc (Oct 20, 2005)

My subdivision already has this requirement -- no dishes in view from street or neighboring properties. All telephone and cable is underground, too. Regarding the dishes, though, all houses here are flat-roof adobe style with parapets so it's very easy for the dish to be invisible from the street and surrounding properties.


----------



## RJC49 (Oct 15, 2006)

[The rule prohibits restrictions that impair a person's ability to install, maintain, or use an antenna covered by the rule. The rule applies to state or local laws or regulations, including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants, homeowners' association rules, condominium or cooperative association restrictions, lease restrictions, or similar restrictions on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has an ownership or leasehold interest in the property. A restriction impairs if it: (1) unreasonably delays or prevents use of; (2) unreasonably increases the cost of; or (3) precludes a person from receiving or transmitting an acceptable quality signal from an antenna covered under the rule. The rule does not prohibit legitimate safety restrictions or restrictions designed to preserve designated or eligible historic or prehistoric properties, provided the restriction is no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the safety or preservation purpose.

A local restriction that prohibits all antennas would prevent viewers from receiving signals, and is prohibited by the Commission's rule. Procedural requirements can also unreasonably delay installation, maintenance or use of an antenna covered by this rule. For example, local regulations that require a person to obtain a permit or approval prior to installation create unreasonable delay and are generally prohibited. Permits or prior approval necessary to serve a legitimate safety or historic preservation purpose may be permissible. Although a simple notification process might be permissible, such a process cannot be used as a prior approval requirement and may not delay or increase the cost of installation. The burden is on the association to show that a notification process does not violate our rule


----------



## joblo (Dec 11, 2003)

> "We have buildings that have three floors, but there are six dishes hanging off the front," said Marygrace Gravallese, a 49-year-old East Boston resident who subscribes to cable. "I'm sick and tired of looking at them. It makes me sick when I'm driving down the street. Somebody needs to do something."


Well, one can certainly see the safety hazard here.

I think there's a clear need for remedial driver education classes in East Boston.


----------



## KKlare (Sep 24, 2004)

We had a major fire that destroyed many poles and the county decide to underground utilities (power and cable) in that area but the phone company (Qwest) said no and refused although they do it in other areas of the city/county of 18000. I guess they could not be forced to eliminate the ugly poles.
-Ken


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

joblo said:


> Well, one can certainly see the safety hazard here.
> 
> I think there's a clear need for remedial driver education classes in East Boston.


Ever driven in the Bostan area ? As far as I'm concerned, the whole area needs to go back to driver's ed....


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

*City plan envisions requiring citizens to move satellite dishes
to backs of buildings, but proposal may violate FCC Rules.*

The Boston City Council, citing a proliferation of satellite television dishes across
the city, is considering banning the devices from the front of buildings.

Saying that the dishes are potentially dangerous and increasingly hard to overlook
in parts of the city where some buildings are festooned with them, city council
members will consider a measure to confine the satellite television receivers to
the rear of buildings, out of public view.

"For some, it's an eyesore," said Council Pres. Michael Flaherty, who sponsored
the measure. A public hearing before the council's Public Utilities and Cable
Communications Committee is scheduled for Friday. ...

Full story @ The Boston Globe

(Ed. Note: The other "Boston" thread, originally in the Dish Discussion thread was
moved and was properly merged into this General Discussion thread to avoid
having two threads running concurrently on the same topic.)


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

Just read this article! Thanks for posting that link here, because I never would have seen it! Have not read the globe in 25 years!!

First, if the City Council is going to try to do this then they better also grant a video franchise to Verizon! I'll bet that this has less to do with dishes being eyesores and more to do with the council being in comcraps pocket! Just another attempt to limit choice of consumers! 
My dish is not on the front of my house so it wouldn't effect me, but I am dead set against any such ban! 

Maybe I'll slip outof work on friday and slip into cityhall!


----------



## stevemaec (Feb 15, 2003)

telephone poles hurt when one falls on you so are they going to outlaw those.They look so bad in front of the streets.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Satellite dishes are asthetically pleasing to me -- I suppose it's because they're
cool symbols of the latest in modern, pie-in-the-sky high-technology.

Utility poles, with all those messy wires hanging down and breaking off during
winter siorms, endangering life and limb, are obsolete, unattractive relics of the
early days of the previous century.


----------



## Lyle_JP (Apr 22, 2002)

scooper said:


> Ever driven in the Bostan area ? As far as I'm concerned, the whole area needs to go back to driver's ed....


Agreed. Worst drivers in the nation, and I've driven in New York, Dallas, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, San Francisco, Orlando, and D.C., just to name a few places. Not that any of this is on topic.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

I'm vacationing in the area right now.

Even in Texas I've never seen cars fly by a cop on the freeway at 80-85 mph (speed limit 65) and he just sits there... can't decide which one of the 1000's to stop - WOW!!


----------



## cybrsurfer (Sep 17, 2006)

If Boston wants it that way then the city should pay the expense for satellite companies. Boston should pay for relocation of the dishes!


----------



## mrhdtv (Oct 9, 2004)

This is laughable. SCheck out this article from today's Columbus Dispatch.

http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/10/18/20061018-A1-03.html

There's even a picture of one of the "refrigerator" sized boxes being placed in people's front yards. It's OK for AT&T but an 18" dish is unsightly!


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

mrhdtv said:


> This is laughable. SCheck out this article from today's Columbus Dispatch.
> 
> http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/10/18/20061018-A1-03.html
> 
> There's even a picture of one of the "refrigerator" sized boxes being placed in people's front yards. It's OK for AT&T but an 18" dish is unsightly!


Yep the ppl are gonna love all these FIOS boxes across the country.


----------



## bluedogok (Sep 9, 2006)

I bet it has more to do with city franchise taxes from the cable company than it really does how it looks or how safe they are.


----------



## oldave (Dec 22, 2003)

There's an argument to be made that every dollar sent to a satellite company is a dollar that's not re-invested in the community... and that's gonna make politicians salivate... 

If someone points out to politicians that the local cableco re-invests their money in the community in the form of salaries and franchise fees, you can be there'll be some cities and counties who'll go for outright bans on satellite TV unless/until that money is sent back to the community.

Look for city councils and county commissions (or whatever the local flavor of gubmint is called) to latch on to that argument and work to ban satellite.

Believe me, some will go for it... it's hard to ignore a dollar on the table.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There are local installers and agents of the satellite companies. Some of the money comes back to the communities. Franchise fees are practically a requested bribe. I like seeing them for covering costs caused by the cable companies (some have been known to damage city property while installing poles and cable). But in some areas it just seems to be a payment to keep competition away.

If cable companies were locally owned and operated businesses it might be different. But we're dealing with megacorps that take most of the money out of town.


----------



## Tran Sponder (Oct 19, 2006)

Hell hath no fury like Rupert Murdoch scorned...

Besides, $10 bucks says that in the end it will only affect those who can move the dish without interferring with service. Nobody will lose their service because of LOS issues, just a lot of busy techs relocating dishes.


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

Does anybody have or know of a link to FCC rules that apply to this issue?? I am preparing an email to all members of the city council and would like to include some ammo!!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Don't waste your time trying to get the City of Boston to pay the cost of dish
relocation -- fight the issue of relocation in the first place. Don't let yet another
governmental entity encroach upon or attempt to dilute your right to have your
dish on your owned or controlled poperty in the first place.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Boston suffers a spike in violent crime rates, the Big Dig has tunnel ceilings fall, no new affordable housing for people and THIS is what makes the news from the City Council?


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

Thanks for the link! I am including that document in my email!


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

So I,ve emailed the entire city council. One response, from the office of the councilor who is out in front of this thing. Exchanged a couple of emails with him and can see to some extant what they object to.(see attached photos) I think that those photos show the extreme. I do plan on going to the hearing! He did say that they did not wish to "ban" dishes!


----------



## cbeckner80 (Apr 19, 2006)

KKlare said:


> We had a major fire that destroyed many poles and the county decide to underground utilities (power and cable) in that area but the phone company (Qwest) said no and refused although they do it in other areas of the city/county of 18000. I guess they could not be forced to eliminate the ugly poles.
> -Ken


I know it's expensive, but you'd think in the long run it would be cheaper in an area with ice and heavy snow. We have a lot of problems in parts of the Atlanta area with pine tree limbs falling on lines when we get ice. People go with out power for days at a time.


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

joblo said:


> Well, one can certainly see the safety hazard here.
> 
> I think there's a clear need for remedial driver education classes in East Boston.


I drive in East Boston often, belive me, you don't need to take your eyes off the road to see theese things!

and, about our driving skills! I've driven all over this country our rep is not deserved!
once south of philly *NO ONE KNOWS HOW TO DRIVE!*


----------



## toy4two (Aug 18, 2006)

”We have buildings that have three floors, but there are six dishes hanging off the front," said Marygrace Gravallese, a 49-year-old East Boston resident who subscribes to cable. “I'm sick and tired of looking at them. It makes me sick when I'm driving down the street. Somebody needs to do something."

:eek2: This guy needs to get a life? He is going to give himself a heart attack over this. I can't belive there are people in the world like this. Not in my backyard just became not on the streets I drive through. :nono2:


----------



## toy4two (Aug 18, 2006)

James Long said:


> There are local installers and agents of the satellite companies. Some of the money comes back to the communities. Franchise fees are practically a requested bribe. I like seeing them for covering costs caused by the cable companies (some have been known to damage city property while installing poles and cable). But in some areas it just seems to be a payment to keep competition away.
> 
> If cable companies were locally owned and operated businesses it might be different. But we're dealing with megacorps that take most of the money out of town.


Some community service our local cable company "COX" is doing, we financed a new ballpark for our team, The Padres, yet they refuse to let anyone in San Diego not on cable watch our team, not on the Internet MLB.TV, not on Directv MLB Extra Innings, NOTHING. Gee thanks COX. :nono2:


----------



## toy4two (Aug 18, 2006)

iceman2a said:


> So I,ve emailed the entire city council. One response, from the office of the councilor who is out in front of this thing. Exchanged a couple of emails with him and can see to some extant what they object to.(see attached photos) I think that those photos show the extreme. I do plan on going to the hearing! He did say that they did not wish to "ban" dishes!


Tell your council man to adopt FIOS in the area and you'll see the dishes disappear. Bet they will fight tooth and nail NOT to allow FIOS because of the franchise fees that he is collecting and the rest of the council. Its the almighty dollar. The reason dishes are up in the first place is cable service/quality sux.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

Let's have some fun with this. 
The Boston Globe has an online survey as to whether the Dishes should be banned from view. Currently it is running 61.9% against with about 1220 votes in. Here is the link if you would like to cast your vote. As a Californian who likes Lobster, I felt it important for me to vote.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...06/10/17/city_may_banish_tv_dishes_from_view/

..Doyle


----------



## Lyle_JP (Apr 22, 2002)

> As a Californian who likes Lobster, I felt it important for me to vote.


 Perhaps you mean clam chowder. I think you have to go further north for the good lobsters! :facelick:



> "We have buildings that have three floors, but there are six dishes hanging off the front," said Marygrace Gravallese, a 49-year-old East Boston resident who subscribes to cable. "I'm sick and tired of looking at them. It makes me sick when I'm driving down the street. Somebody needs to do something."


I wonder how this guy survived the decades before cable, when everyone had giant spindly metal yagi antennas on their roofs (sometimes several).


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Are you people even paying attention? Or is it just that your reading comprension
is at a 2nd grade level? Two posters have referred to Mary Grace Gravallese as a
male. Unless things are a lot more weird in Beantown than anyone thought, I would
bet the farm that "Mary Grace" is a female.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

If I were the judge my reasoning would go something like this:

Federal law supercedes local restrictions regarding TV antenna installations. The dishes are allowed if they are active antennas.

Dishes not connected to receiving equipment are not being used as antennas and must be removed.

--- CHAS


----------



## topcats69 (Oct 5, 2004)

Nick said:


> Satellite dishes are asthetically pleasing to me -- I suppose it's because they're
> cool symbols of the latest in modern, pie-in-the-sky high-technology.
> 
> Utility poles, with all those messy wires hanging down and breaking off during
> ...


Pluss you can hit poles when you fall asleep at wheel and they kill you. A dish would never do that.

What if you front faces south. and thats only way to get sat sig??


----------



## Lyle_JP (Apr 22, 2002)

Nick said:


> Are you people even paying attention? Or is it just that your reading comprension is at a 2nd grade level? Two posters have referred to Mary Grace Gravallese as a male. Unless things are a lot more weird in Beantown than anyone thought, I would bet the farm that "Mary Grace" is a female.


In my defense, I was only quoting toy4two's posting, which attributed the quote to a male.


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

toy4two said:


> Tell your council man to adopt FIOS in the area and you'll see the dishes disappear. Bet they will fight tooth and nail NOT to allow FIOS because of the franchise fees that he is collecting and the rest of the council. Its the almighty dollar. The reason dishes are up in the first place is cable service/quality sux.


The only problem with that is that Verizon will not run FTP in the city until it's finnished every place else in the state! It's 2 years out at best! I mentioned that in my email about granting Verizon a video franchise, but I have some conflicts of intrests in Verizon getting a franchise, unless certian conditions are met. But thats not an issue to discuss here!


----------



## iceman2a (Dec 30, 2005)

Lyle_JP said:


> Perhaps you mean clam chowder. I think you have to go further north for the good lobsters! :facelick:


Boston Harbor lobsters are every bit as good as Maine lobsters!  In fact they are "Maine" lobsters!


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Only because Maine used to be considered part of Massachusetts Bay Colony!


----------



## durl (Mar 27, 2003)

What political party is the majority on the city council? (Do I even need to ask?)


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

I've never been to Boston but whenever this one Vendor comes out, he brings what he calls "Lobstas". If all I can get is clam Chowda then I'll have to recall my vote.

..Doyle


----------



## Tran Sponder (Oct 19, 2006)

There does appear to be validity to their concern. I don't see any reason why 6 satellites pointed at the same location need to be on a building.

Only problem is, if they all share a satellite either the apartment manager will need to be responsible for the maintainence of the dish, or if there isn't a manager of some kind an agreement would need to be reached where the maintainence of the outside equipment (sat, line, multi) needs to be divided evenly amongst those who share the dish.

Consolidating the dish is easy from an equipment standpoint. Getting several people to get along isn't...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There is an issue with the satellite compaines when it comes to consolidating dishes. Ownership is part of the problem. The needs of individual subscribers within the building may vary (E* vs D*, HD vs SD) and it is easy to run out of outputs on switches. And when that switch fails which account gets charged?

We're getting into engineered systems. Standard installs are individual installs - even if there are multiple customers with side by side dishes.

BTW: One of the 'fixes' we commonly use for E* switches is to "power them down" by disconnecting all receivers. If your neighbors are sharing the switch you have to get the neighbor's cooperation to fix your reception.


----------



## J_Bell (Jan 2, 2006)

I live outside of boston and drive threw it daily those pictures are extreme examples of whats going on.

The area is prodominantly hispanic and comcast does not have international channels that these folks are looking for. Not to mention the cable system is very antiquated with digital cable only being added last year. 

My question is with dish how would you give the customers in the house all the satellite feeds they need to recieve internationals if one is say 61.5 and some are on 129 some 110 some 119 ? Is there an ability to stack switches to get all these channels to say 12 tv's ? (assume 4 tvs per apartment and a 3 family home is the norm there.)

I know dtv may be easier but with dish it gets very expensive.

Btw i have interest here because my city is close and I know if this floats then it will happen here next.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

The DP34 switch has 4 outputs to receivers however, you can cascade up to 3 of these switches so that you can feed 12 tuners. The switch can handle inputs from 3 satellites eg: 110,119 and 61.5. All 12 tuners can be tuned to different channels. A dual tuner receiver would require two of the outputs so if everyone had dual tuner receivers, you would only be able to supply 6 separate receivers. The newer DPP44 switch can also be cascaded. I think you can only cascade one additional switch on it. With two DPP44 switches, you can feed 8 receivers. If they are the new Dual tuner receivers they can also use signal separators so that that it only requires 1 output for each dual tuner receiver. Effectively you could feed 8 dual tuner receivers this way. 
There are a number of options in multitenant buildings for reducing the number of dishes on a building but it would likely require the Landlord to have the antenna system installed. I would think even Dish Network would be willing to front some of the cost to be able to dominate an entire building but that is not my call. 

..Doyle


----------

