Laserfiche WebLink
ATTACHMENT B <br /> <br /> AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY <br /> <br /> October 12, 2004 <br /> <br />To: Eugene Planning Commission <br /> <br />From: Eugene Planning Division; City Attorney's Office <br /> <br />Re: Amendments to Cell Tower Siting Ordinance <br /> <br />Action Requested: To make a recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed <br /> amendments to EC 9.5750 (Telecommunications Devices- Siting <br /> Requirements and Procedures) <br /> <br />Brief Summary of Agenda Item: <br /> <br />At a work session on April 14, 2004, the City Council adopted a motion to initiate amendments <br />to EC 9.5750 to (1) extend setbacks for new cell towers to 1000 feet from the nearest school and <br />800 feet from the nearest residences; (2) codify the requirement for independent consultant <br />review and verification; and (3) codify zero tolerance for interference with public safety <br />communications. <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />The current version of EC 9.5750 is substantively the same as Council adopted in Ordinance <br />20078 in 1997, shortly after Congress adopted the Federal Telecommunications Act in 1996. <br />The ordinance responded to an increasing number of requests to construct cell towers and related <br />facilities that accompanied the rapid growth of cellular phone service. <br /> <br /> Federal law places substantial restrictions on cities' ability to regulate siting of <br /> telecommunications facilities, but in many cases the extent of those restrictions is not well <br /> settled. It is dear, however, that cities may not adopt regulations that either "prohibit or have <br /> the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services." The potential impacts of <br /> federal law on the proposed ordinance are discussed in more detoJl below. <br /> <br /> The CounCil is scheduled to hold a pubic hearing on the proposed amendments on November 22, <br /> 2004. <br /> <br /> Code Amendment Approval Criteria <br /> <br /> The proposed changes are a City-initiated Type V application. If Council chooses to adOPt the <br /> amendments, it must find that the amendments are cOnsistent with (a) applicable statewide <br /> planning goals and (b) applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable provisions, if any, <br /> of adopted refinement plans. <br /> <br /> <br />