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

Home Browse Search

Page 8 of 12 301 F.gupp.2d 1251 Page 7 (Cite as: 301 F.$upp.2d !251) d~olo~mt b~M upon a~o~o ~3. ~ oouR r~oo~s mo~ oo~id~rafiom...."); d~gener, 174 F.3d at. 890-91 appear mon~onM ~ o~ hom~ (uphol~g ~mg bo~'s &~i of o~Rwhono w~oh ~ ~in 100 f~t of a ooR-pho~ ~wer ~cause ~e tow~ would be "mi~fly" ~d ~wer. ~137. However, ~e si~ ~e not "~oonsis~nt" ~ ~e neighborh~ ~ w~ch ~ W~on Co~W. Mo~ver, ~id~ bou~t ~eff homes ~ re~ce on ~e ~ca~d above, ~e co~ ~& it neigh~rhood's ex~g r~i&n~ c~c~r). ~ si~cmt ~t p~s ~m, ~ough o~on~ ~de gene~ ~se~o~ exp~-"[a]~r fil~g ~e n~b~ of about ~e na~ of cell-phone towers, ~ey ~o sites for ~mh," ~269"-chose fo~ 'co~ide~ ~e specific scene N wNch ~o proposed homes wNch ~ at le~t 3~0 f~t ~om Wwer would appel. ~H~hone Wwem ~ ~e sit~ most ~pwpdate for p~oses of ~aw~g a Moreover, ~e ci~ also gave co~idmfion to ~e comp~son to pl~fiffs Proposed site. propos~ Wwegs dis~ce ~m s~o~g homes. ~e ci~ co~cil cit~ ~ appr~s tes~ony ~t no o~er ceR-phone .faciliW ~ &e ciW si~ ~ close ~oupled wi~ &e ci~s a~efic j~t ~ &e to ~id~ces ~ would pl~s propos~, tower. ~ct &e propos~ tower would not ~1 a comple~ R.39. ~ &e bond's wor~, "~e ceR ~wer ~ ~ void ~ coverage but ~ad wo~d o~y ~prove ~e would be ~ ~e he~ of ~ R-7 s~gle f~y ~door or, ~ pl~s te~, "~" coverage. msid~al nei~borhood ~d wo~d be ~e ~16; s~ Pl~s R~ly Memor~d~ at 3. ~o~o~ eq~t of plao~g a ce~ tower ~ ~e ~ining whe~er ~o ~w~ wo~d c~ter of a ~b~iom" R.27. ~ a~tio~ ~e "pubic ~te~s~" ~e ci~ w~ '~&in i~ au~ofi~ to bo~d ~ca~y dis~shed ~e ~o o~er wei~ ~e.benefit of merely ~pro~g ~e e~g pre~6~ly approved ce~-phone fac~i~es w~ch sit ~vemge ag~t ~e nega~ve a~efic ~pact ~ s~gle-f~ily residen~ zone. R.27. ~e bo~ tower wo~d ca~e. See, e.g., Ci~ of Mequon, 352 obsewed -~t one of ~e e~s~g ~c~ties w~ F.3d at 1149 ("A ~o~ble d~ision whe~er to plac~ on ~ e~s~g ~ght pole at ~ a~e~c field ~prove ~e com~c~ of ~ ~t~ for .~d *1259 ~t &e o~er si~ ~ ably sec~on of ~e cellphone. ~mm~oa~o~ ~e8 b~c~ ci~ ac~ss .~m a co~erci~ d~ct. R:27. At ~e comidem~om. ~e ~t ~ ~e con~bu~on ~t propos~ site, ~e r~ord ~dicates ~t m~y of ~e ~t~ ~ m~e ~ ~e a~i~ of ce~phone neighing hous~ ~ be~e~n 100 ~d 200 feet s~c~. ~e second ~ ~e a~e~c or o~er h~ '~om ~e proposed tower. ~ one ~mess obsesS, ~t ~e ~t~ ~1 ca~e."). Such a poHcy-b~ed "It]he p~posed ce~ tower site reg~s of where d~ion ~ p~ely &e ~e of decision Con, ss plac~ on ~e prope~ wo~d be within 100 feet of left to 1~ zo~g ~&. a s~gle-family site." ~769. [4] Keep~g ~ mind ~e s~d ~ mealy "mo~ ~ fac~ ~ ~ aRempt ~ comp~ ~e proposed site ~ a s~" ~d less ~ a pr~nder~ce, to o~ sites where homes ~e ne~ ~-phone ci~ b~ i~ de~ on. ~ci~t e~d~ce. fac~iti~, pl~s o~ exp~ ~mess picked fo~ Ce~y, m pl~ ~n~&, it ~ ~ss~lo to "~bj~t" homes w~ch ~e no l~s ~ 350 feet ~nc~ &e p~os~ tow~ wo~d not be a ~om ~e newest ce~-phone fac~. ~265, b~ght, ju~ by ~e s~ photo~p~ ~269-70, K.279, ~289. ~ch of &e expea's fo~ ~o~. ~s co~'s role, however, ~bj~t homes is ~ W~gton Co~ (w~ch ~te~ect i~ o~ judgment, but ra~er to apply ~cludes ~e Ci~ of Hfl~boro) ~d one of ~e defe~n~ s~d of ~bs~ e~ce to hom~ ~ ~ ~e ci~. No~bly, W~on Co~ ci~'s jud~enC S~ To~, 2~ F.3d at ~8 ("~e ~cor& ~cate ~ of ~e expe~'s chosen homes ~ssib~ of ~g ~o ~comistent conclusiom ~a~y ~e over 450 feet ~om &e ne~st cell- ~om ~e e~nce does not preyer phone faci~, ~ one of ~ese ~ee homes berg a~inis~ve agenc~s ~g ~om berg 900 feet away. R. 138-39. ~m &e ci~ ~ ~fore ~ by subs~ e~nce."); Aege~er, 174 it pl~ffs o~ e~d~ce ~ca~g ~e propos~ F.3d at 888 ("~e &e ~ncl~iom site is simcity ~ffer~t ~om ~e ~a's most ~ached may not be ~e offiy ~ss~le ones, ~ey ~d c0mp~ble sit~. ~3] ~ppo~ ~ &e ~R~ ~o~ ~d ~fom mint be ~c~."). ~le' ~e ~ ~ ob~gated to ~ew Copt. ~ West 2004 No CI~ to ~g. U.S. Go~ Wor~ IV-64 http://print.westlaw.com/delivery.html?dest=atp&dataid=AO055800000066180001978611... 4/14/2004