The houses on which these dishes were mounted are located in a locally designated historic district. Chapter 169-5 of the city code states very clearly:
A certificate of appropriateness is required to carry out any exterior alteration, additions, restoration, reconstruction, or moving of a landmark or property within an historic district, or to make any material change in the appearance of such a property or its windows, or to install or move a satellite dish.
There is no way a certificate of appropriateness was granted to the placement of these satellite dishes.
This is not the first time satellite dishes have been installed without a certificate of appropriateness, but it is certainly the most offensive example. Perhaps it's time for the code enforcement office to send a copy of the map of the historic districts in Hudson and notify the companies that install satellite dishes that they are in violation of city code if a dish is installed in a historic district without a certificate of appropriateness.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK
Carole, I understand your desire to keep Hudson visually pure, however you are supporting the monopoly of Mid-Hudson Cable in our town by doing so. We need some alternative services that don't require dishes, however this option does not exist at present. How about a dialogue about MHC's agreements with Hudson government??? Best, your Neighbor
ReplyDeleteYou miss my point, Tad, unless you're suggesting that Direct TV and Dish won't want to do business in Hudson if they are required to follow the law, get a certificate of appropriateness, and install their dishes in a place where they cannot be seen.
DeleteHow about installing the satellite dishes on the roofs of buildings, so they aren't in-your-face?
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that it is the house owner's responsibility to comply with zoning and historic district rules, not the satellite company's responsibility.
ReplyDelete-- Jock Spivy
Excuse me, folks, but read the law. Are these satellite dishes on the porch "a material change" or not? That's all Carole was commenting on -- rightfully so! Enforce the law or change it. Obviously, the property owner bears responsibility for following the law and thus is responsible for where the dish people install their gadgets. But again, isn't the City responsible for enforcing the City's laws? Are we going to now start blaming car companies for cars going through red lights? Please, some common sense here.
ReplyDeleteTo get an unobstructed siting of the satellite i thought these dishes HAD to be on roof tops ?!
ReplyDeleteA few times in my life I was told ignorance of the law is no excuse. And I thought that lower State St. had the monopoly of houses w/ dishes. Oh, if only Hudson had a larger market for Comcast.
ReplyDeleteI agree that they are so unsightly and in multi family
ReplyDeletebldgs they are to me a total eyesore...I prefer to subscribe to Directv for numerous reasons..Altho' I don't like the look of the dish..I do not live in Hudson at present, but when I did, the dish was placed on a roof corner where the signal could be reached. In my case a rear corner.I do know that Directv does not feel responsible for removing dishes once up, and say it is the home owner's / customers responsibility to take them down...When I moved from Hudson, I requested them move the dish from that residence to my current one, but they refused. So it would appear the dish is your property once mounted..More choices for TV would be nice. Captive audience are we? Obviously aesthetics are not a consideration...
It would also seem that it would be a danger issue being so low on the house...I can envision someone walking into it while texting...lol..seriously tho'
ReplyDeleteDish TV hid our dish very well and are half the price of direct TV just saying
ReplyDelete