Laserfiche WebLink
I CEIVED <br /> <br /> July 22, 2004 <br /> <br /> City Attorney <br /> City of Eugene360 East 10th Ave:, Suite 300 <br /> Eugene, OR 97401 <br /> <br /> Re: Amendments to Cell Tower Ordinance ~ (Eugene Code Section 9.5750) <br /> <br /> This is in addition to my comments dated July 20. 2004. <br /> <br /> The last item addressed in your revision is "Fees." The change from. "may" to "shall" <br /> does strengthen this provision. Yet the "shall" seems to only ensure that a fee is required <br /> to cover the costs of an independent peer review oftech,~ical information. Yet given the <br /> history of this prOvision (to my knowledge it has never been utilized), there seems no <br /> .language providing gUidance as to when independent technical review is needed. It <br /> would seem the letter of the law would only gUarantee the funds be available. <br /> <br /> Of course, there would be times when a review would not be required- e.g. in an <br /> industrial area with no homes or schools in the vicinity. However, say that a service <br /> provider seeks a variance to site closer than the 1000 ft or 800 ft setback, it would seem <br /> then that independent technical review of that application should be mandatory. <br /> <br />Again, thank you for this opportunity. <br /> <br />l~mber: Citizens for e~ons~Jtr~ Placement of cell Phone Transmission Towers <br />87140 Territorial Rd. ~ ' ' ' <br />Veneta, OR 97487 <br /> <br />Also, a Eugene home owner <br /> <br /> ·. IV-56 <br /> <br /> <br />