My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 6 - PH/Cell Towers
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-12/06/04Mtg
>
Item 6 - PH/Cell Towers
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:53:55 PM
Creation date
12/1/2004 2:43:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
12/6/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
172
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Illinois <br /> Offi~ ofR~l ,~tm~ <br /> Universit~ of i1~ at U~a~pai~ <br /> Real Estate <br /> Letter <br /> <br /> The Price of Zoning Revisited: <br /> Zoning Issues Raised bY the Telecommunications Act of 1996 <br /> Carol C. McDonough <br />The Teleconununications Act of 1996~ Cleveland, is noteworthy because it The 1996 Act was passed following <br />contains provisions that may affect a reinforced the earlier notion ofa hierar- the somewhat recent development of the <br />municipality's ability to implement chy of land uses - with single-family personal communication services (PCS) <br />zoning regulations. This article briefly residential use at the top of the hierarchy .mode of wireless, communication(Pcs <br />summarizes the history and purpose of - to be protected. From an economic ~s a type of digital service). Thc deVelop- <br />zoning regulations, discusses the chai- standpoint, municipal zoning regula- ment of PCS, which'offers better sound <br />ienge to local zoning posed by the Tele- tions are meant to.mitigate the negative quality and better' security than thc older <br />communications Act (along with recent externalities that a real estate owner's use cellular systems, has brought withit an <br />activities at,the state level and in thc of his property might impose on other increased need for tower sites on which <br />federal courts), and offers an approach by members of the community, transmitters can be placed. PCS is located <br />which municipalities can Optimize their at a higher frequency range, requiring <br />role in thc process of locating sites for Challenges to Local Zoning towers that are closer together than the <br />telecommunication towers. Municipalities' longstanding and broad older cellular towers were. The improved <br /> .. power to oversee land use has been called technology is also likely to necessitate <br />Traditions of Local Control into question ns legislative enactments more towers through increased custom- <br />For the better pan of a century, land use and judicial rulings have pushed local er demand. It is estimated that, in high <br />control has been largely a local govern- zoners' wishes aside in favor of improved demand areas, PCS ~itters will have <br />mental function in our country. The first wireless phone service. One example is to be situated about a mile apart. <br />comprehemive zoning ordinance in the Congress's 1996 passage of the Telecom- The typical municipal zoning ordi- <br />Unit~l States was adopted in New York munications Act, which opens doors for a ' nance requires a PCS provider to obtain <br />City in ! 916, and other municipalities federal agency to overrule local Officials a variance or a special permit in order to <br />soon followed, The zoning enabling acts on siting telecommunication towers. The construct a cellUlar tower. A var/ance is <br />of many states are based on the federal Act (which has no impact on most zoning required when thc proposed tower woUld <br />Standard Zoning Enabling Act of 1926. . functions) empowers the Federal Corn- be built in a zoning district that prohibits <br />In the 1926 landmark decision Euclid munications Commission (FCC) to pre- such structures; receipt of a variance <br />v. Ambler P, ealty Co., the US Supreme erupt local officials' decisions on thc usually requires prcofofhardship owing <br />Court rejected arguments that zoning placement, construction, and modifies- to the topography of other nearby sites. <br />laws were an uncomtitutional depriva- tion of personal wireless service facili- A specialpermit is required when a cell <br />tion of property without due process, and ties. The FCC is given express regulatory tower is a permitted use of the proposed <br />subsequently many state courts upheld power over wireless facilities' radio ire- locus; the permit indicates that the local- <br />the concept of zoning. The Court's deci- quency emissions when concerns arise ity has found ~he proposed tower not to <br />sion, involving a land owner in suburban over possible environmental impacts, be unreasonably detrimental. Ofcourse, <br /> under the 1996 Act the FCC can second- <br /> Inside This Issue... gue,s a local decision to deny approval. <br /> The i~CC seems willing to require a~,~ <br /> The Value of~oning 4 tance of towers that loco] officials r~joot, <br /> ~ ImPa~s ofl~o,~paable L~nd Uses Z though the evidence to date is limited. <br /> The Greatest RealEstnte Movies of~ill T/me 9 The federal judioimy also has shown <br /> a willingness to substitute its vi~'s for <br /> Deals Illustrated IZ the wishes of local rogulator~, although it <br /> <br /> IV-lO8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.