Item 6 - PH/Cell Towers - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.....;... ::.'?':.,Planning Department .. 'APR 1.6 Z004 'De~ ~. Coyle: REC.EIVED ~" ." '~' M~a Jo~on ~d I w~ted to get ~s packet of i~o~ation reg~d~g ~e Eugene Te]eco~cation Ore--ce to you. It seems to be a work in pro~ess M~ addifion~ items c~]ing ~or yet ~other cover . Om iNti~ apprOach ~ October 2002 w~ to provide ~ ~ysis of~e emke Teteco~ Or~. E~lier ~s ye~, bo~ M~a ~d I met Mth sever~ Co~cil memberS ~d the Mayor ~d prodded Packe~ to those we did not meet ~ personally, co--ems.by some of~ose we spoke ~ led ~ to conclude ~m a comprehensive approach to rehsiting ~e. Eugene ore, ce might not be succeSs~ ~' ".'- .where~ ge~Ng to ~e core of o~ conce~ ~d suggesting ~e most ~ects appro~h to resolv~g some of ~ o~'issues might be more productive. We felt a setback prohsion w~ ~e most d~ect approach. From reading the s~ obse~mions subdued t° the Co,oil along M~ the vis~ ~, my impression is . ~at ~e Pl~ng Dept. feels ~m ~e existNg ordN~ce is ~cfio~ngjust fine.' I have worked M~ sever~ nei~borhoo~ in Eugene on ~e siting of cell phone ~ssion.towers. The suggestion ~at ~e nmbers of applications may not w~t rehsifing ~s ordN~ce does ~ Njmtice to ~ose ' nei~borhoods ~pacted not O~y by ~e actual faciliW beNg located N ~ek midst bm also ~e public · "pro,ss M~ WNch ~ey have to comend. ~e t~e, ener~, ~d resomces Ooth emofion~ ~d f~ci~) req~ed on ~eir pm to fi~t ~ inappropriate placement of a tower ~e ~ a~ly high price for ~e public to pay when ~ere may be a be~er approach. Having recently been involved Mth T-Mobile proposals N Hillsboro ~d Newberg, I Mve Mmessed how · e ~e ~d intensi~ of cover~e deemed necess~ by prodders is generating ~e dem~d for more . facilities. Wo~'t it m~e seine to have ~ ord~ce that ~ticipates what may come ~ opposed to one · at Only reflects p~t experience? .~so, one brief cogent on We~esday's discmsion, there is a distNcfion be~een public need ~d Public w~t ~at should to be ac~owledged. I ~ ~m distinction was missing d~g ~e April 14m I have Ncluded ~e recem decision N ~e US Dis~ict Co~ T-Mobile vs ~e Ci~ of Hillsboro, OR. TNs decision Mll have broad.~plicafions in ~e ongoNg discmsion of ~e rights of loc~ j~sdictions in dete~g ~e placemem of ~ese ~s~ssion towers M~n ~e s~c~e of the 1996 Feder~ "Co~cafions Act. As ~ ~ide, Judge Mosm~ is considered a conse~ative judge. Citizens for ~e Responsible Placement of Cell Phone Tr~smission Towers is loohng fo~d worMng "M~ ~e CiW N ~s upcom~g endeavor. ....~6na Lins~omberg cc: Sus~ M~r IV-57