|
page 3 of 12
<br />
<br /> 301 F.Supp.2d 1251 Page 2
<br /> (Cite as: 301 F.Supp.2d 1251)
<br />
<br /> District court reviews record de'nero to determine bears burden of establishing that city engaged in
<br /> whether it supports applicant, s claim that city's unreasonable discrimination in violation of
<br /> rejection of application for wireless TeleCommunications .4~t (TCA). Commttllications
<br /> commulficalions tower effectively prohibits such Act of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I), 47 U.S.C.A. §
<br /> towers in city. Communications Act of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I).
<br /> · 332(e)(7)(B)(i),47U.S.C.A.§332(c)(7)(B)(i). '1253 Christopher P. Koback, Davis Wright
<br /> Tremaine, LLP, Portland, OIL for Plaintiff.
<br /> [7] Zoning and Planning ~=~384.1
<br /> 414k384.1 Most Cited Cases Pamela J. Beery, Paul C. Eisner, Beery &Elsner,
<br /> LLP, Portland, OR, for Defendant.
<br /> Single zoning 'decision can give rise to effective
<br /> prohibition of wireless services in violation of
<br /> Telecommunications Act ('rCA). Communications OPINION AND ORDER
<br /> Act of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B)(i), 47 U.S.C.A. §
<br /> 332(c)(7)(B)(i). MOSMAN, District Judge.
<br />
<br /> '[8] Zoning and Planning ~=~384.1 ' Plaintiff Voice Stream PCS I, LLC ("plaintiff')
<br /> 414k384.1 Most Cited Cases brings this lawsuit under the Telecommunications
<br /> Act of 1996 ("TCA"), seeking to overturn the City
<br /> City's decision to deny conditional use application of Hillsboro's decision to deny plaintiffs
<br /> for wireless telecommunications tower in conditional-use applicati°n to erect a
<br /> residentially zbned area did not effectively, prohibit wireless-telecommunications (or, as commonly
<br /> Wireless services in city, in violation of called, a "cell-phone")tower in a residentially
<br /> Telecommunications Act ('rCA), where proposed zoned area. The issues in this case pit the TCA's
<br /> tower would have simply improved existing indoor intention to deregulate the wireless telephone
<br /> coverage, not filled complete void in coverage, industry-against the' traditional control over local
<br /> applicant could have' achieved its objectives by -land use maintained by municipalities. For the
<br /> installing two towers at other locations, and cit,fs reasons discussed below, municipal control prevails '
<br /> decision was based on specific circumstances in thiscase.
<br /> -presented, not on unsubstantiated general
<br /> observations. Communications Act of 1934, § I. Background
<br /> 332(c)(7)(B)(i), 47 U.S.C.A. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i).
<br /> Personal wireless services are dependent upon low
<br /> [9] Zoningand Planning ~=~384.1 power, high frequency radio . signals that are
<br /> 414k384.1 Most CitedCases tnmsmitted from antennae placed on preexisting
<br /> structures, such as water towers, or on newly
<br /> City's decision to deny conditional use application coustmcted towers. See generally Southwestern
<br /> for wireless telecommunications tower in Bell Mobile b~y$., v. Todd, 244 F.3d 51, 56-57 (lst
<br /> .residentially zoned area did not unreasonably Cir.2001); Sprint'Spectrum, L.P.v. IVilloth, 176
<br /> discriminate against applicant, in violation Of F.3d 630, 634-35 (2d Cir.!999). As a subscn'ber
<br /> Telecommunications Act (TCA), even though city travels within a cellular provider's service area, the
<br /> had previously granted conditional use permits for cellular call in progress is transferred from one cell
<br /> two other wireless communication facilities ia site to another without noticeable interruption. T.o
<br /> residential areas, where there was no evidence of increase quality of service and therefore attract
<br /> any relevant similarity other than common zoning subscribers, providers usually have an incentive to
<br /> designation.~ CommuRications Act of 1934, § increase the number of cells and correspondingly
<br /> 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I), 47 U.S.C.A. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I). decrease the geographic coverage of each cell. In
<br /> furtherance of this plan to improve service,
<br /> [10] Zoning and Planning ~:=~685 coverage within an area is maintained by arranging
<br /> 414k685 Most Cited Cases antennae in a honeycomb-shaped grid. When the
<br /> grid is placed over a city map, desired tower
<br /> Unsuccessful applicant for conditional use locations of course often fall in residential areas.
<br /> application for wireless telecommunications tower And because wireless technology is. relatively
<br />
<br /> Copr. © West 2004 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt Works
<br />
<br /> IV-59
<br />
<br />httnr//nrint we.~tl~w e,r~m/dellvRrv htrnlgrleet=--ntn,eo-rlntnld=Ailil~Rfif~fl(l(l~l~l Rlqilf~ 1 Q'7~1 I a/1
<br />
<br />
<br />
|