Laserfiche WebLink
301 F.Supp.2d 1251 <br /> (Cite as: 301 1LSupp.2d 1251) Page 1 <br /> <br /> United States District Court, . 414106 Most Cited Cases <br /> D. Oregon. <br /> under Oregon law, city can prohibit proposed use <br /> VOICE STREAM PC8 I, LLC, d/b/a T-Mobile, of property on sole ground that use is offensive to <br /> Plaintiff, aesthetic sensibilities. <br /> Golden Road Baptist Church, Involuntary Plaintiff, <br /> v. [3] Zoning and Planning C=~384.1 <br /> CITY OF HILLSBORO, Defendant. 414k384.1 Most Cited Cases <br /> <br /> Civil No. 03-365-MO. Under Telecommunications Act (TCA), local <br /> zoning board is entitled to make aesthetic judgment <br /> Feb. 2, 2004. in ruling on conditional use' application for wireless <br /> telecommunications tower, as long as judgment is <br /> grounded in specifics of ease, and does not evince <br /> Background: Wireless telecommunications .merely aesthetic opposition to cell-phone towers in <br /> service provider brought action under general... Communications Act of 1934, § <br /> Telecommunications Act (TCA) seeking to overturn 332(c)(7)(B), 47 U.S;C.A. § 332(c)(7)(B). <br /> city's decision to deny its conditional use <br /> application .to erect wireless telecommunications [4] Zoning and Planning ~354.1 <br /> tower in,:residenfially zoned area. 41410 84.1 Most Cited Cases <br /> <br /> Holdings: The District Court, Mosman, $., held Substantial evidence supported city's decision to <br /> that: " <br /> deny, on aesthetic grounds, conditional use <br /> (1) substantial evidence supported city's decision application for wireless telecommunications tower <br /> to deny application on aesthetic grounds; in residentially zoned area, despite applicant's <br /> (2) city's decision did not effectively prolu'oit contention that decision was. based solely on <br /> wireless services in city; and general, unsubstantiated aesthetics concerns, in light <br /> (3) city did not unreasonably discriminate against of evidence that city considered specific scene in <br /> provider, which proposed tower would appear, city gave <br /> consideration to proposed tower's distance from <br /> Judgment for city. surrounding homes, and proposed tower would not <br /> have filled complete void in coverage but instead <br /> would only have improved indoor coverage. <br /> West Headnotes Communications Act of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B), 47 <br /> U.S.C.A. § 332(e)(7)(B). <br /> [i] Z°ning and Planning C=~708 <br /> 414k708 Most Cited Cases [5] Zoning and Planning C:=~685 <br /> 414k685 Most Cited Cases <br /> Court reviewing local zoning decision affecting <br /> 'wireless telecommunications towers pursuant to In seeking to overturn cit,/s decision to deny <br /> Telecommunications Act (TCA) must examine conditional use application for wireless <br /> entire record, including evidence contradictory to telecommunications tower in resident/ally zoned <br /> local government's decision, in determining whether area, burden is on applicant. Communications Act <br /> substantial evidence supports - decision, of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B), 47 U.S.C.A. § 332(c)(7)(B) <br /> Communications Act' of 1934, § 332(c)(7)(B), 47 <br /> U.S.C.A. § 332(c)(7)(B). <br /> [6] Zoning and Planning (g:~642 <br /> [2] Zoning and Planning C=~36 414k642 Most Cited Cases <br /> <br /> Copt. © West 2004 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works <br /> <br /> IV-58 <br />http ://print. westlaw.com/delivery.html? dest=atp&dataid=A O05 5 80000006618000197 8611... 4/14/2004 <br /> <br /> <br />