Item 3 - PH/Ord. on Cell Towers - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.. "."~.Ci~.of Eugene ' .,...:....::.'/:~Plmg Dep~ent . 'APR 1.'0 2004. REC.EIVED ~" ."M~a Jonson ~d I w~ted to get ~s packet of i~o~afion reg~g ~e Eugene Te]eco~Cafion Or--ce to You. It seres to be a work in pro~ess M~ addifion~ items c~ling for yet ~other cover le~er. ' O~ i~ti~ approach ~ October 2002 w~ to provide ~ ~ysis of~e emire Teteco~ Ore'ce. E~er ~s ye~, bo~.M~a ~d I met M~ sever~ Co~cil members ~d ~e Mayor ~d prodded P~kets to those we did not meet M~ personally, co--ems.by some of~ose we spoke M~ led m to conclude ~at a comprehensive approach to re. siting ~e. Eugene ore.ce might not be succeSs~ ' ':.'~ .where~ ge~g to ~e core of o~ concerns ~d suggesting ~e most dkects approach to resolv~g some of ~ o~'issues might be more productiVe. We felt a setback pro.sion w~ ~e most direct approach. From read~g the s~ff obse~ations subdued t° the Co~cil along M~ ~e vis~ ~, my impression is · at ~e Planing Dept. feels ~at ~e exist~g ord~ce is ~cfioffing just fine.' I have worked M~ sever~ neighborhoo~ in Eugene on ~e siting of cell phone ~mission.towers. The suggestion ~at ~e n~bers of applications may not w~t rehsiting t~s ord~ce does ~ ~j~tice to ~ose nei~borhoods ~pacted not O~y by ~e ac~l facili~ berg located ~ ~ek midst but ~so ~e public '"process M~ W~ch ~ey have to contend. The time, ener~, ~d reso~ces ¢oth emotion~ ~d franciS)" req~ed on ~eir p~ to fi~t ~ ~appropriate p]acemem of a tower ~e ~ a~ly ~gh price for ~e public to pay when ~ere may be a be~er approach. Hahng recemly been.involved M~ T-Mobile proposes ~ Hillsboro ~d Newberg, I ~ve Mmessed how · e ~e ~d inte~i~ of coverage deemed necess~ by prodders is generating ~e dem~d for more faci~ties. Wo~dn't it m~e se~e to have ~ ord~cc that ~ticipates what may come ~ opposed to one · at Only reflec~ p~t experience? .~so, one brief cogent on We~esday's ~scmsion, ~ere is a distinction be~een public need ~d Public w~t ~at should to be ac~owl~ged. I t~ ~at distinction w~ missing d~g ~e April 14~ dipole. I have included ~e recem decision ~ ~e US Dis~ict Corn, T-Mobile vs ~e Ci~ of Hillsboro, OR. T~s decision Mll ~ve broad.~plicadons in the ongo~g discussion of~e fi~ts of loc~ j~sdictions in dete~g ~e placement of these ~smission towers M~n ~e s~c~e of ~e 1996 Feder~ " Co~cafions Act. As ~ ~ide, Judge Mosm~ is considered a conse~ative judge. Cit~ens for ~e Responsible Placement of Cell Phone Tr~smission Towers is loo~ng fo~d worhng .' M~ the Ci~ in ~s upcoming endeavor. .~6na Lins~omberg cc: Sus~ M~r IV-57