My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMinutes - 12/06/04 Mtg
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2004
>
CCMinutes - 12/06/04 Mtg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 10:29:22 AM
Creation date
2/7/2005 11:13:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
pole would require a variance. He predicted the additional process and expense could delay or prevent <br />entirely the implementation of this technology in significant parts of the community. <br /> <br />In closing, Mr. Barta stressed that RF radiation issues were related to placement of antennae and not cell <br />towers. He said attempting to take this into account would require a more comprehensive change in the code <br />than presented in the ordinance. He conveyed the general support of the University for the City's assessment <br />of sufficient fees to evaluate the coverage needs of applicants and said it would welcome a review of the <br />city's overarching wireless coverage needs. <br /> <br />Douglas P. Evans, 1500 Northeast Irving Street, Portland, director of development for Team Mobile <br />Wireless, submitted a letter to the City Council outlining the reasons he thought the proposed changes to the <br />ordinance were fundamentally flawed. He stated that industry representatives would favor the proposal that <br />was forwarded by the Planning Commission. He called the ordinance before the council a %ontinuation of <br />the piecemeal approach" and predicted that it would cause further problems in time. He felt the wireless <br />industry had been singled out for onerous, expensive, and time-consuming regulation that was not applied to <br />similarly situated providers, though it had invested over $5 million in the community. He commented that <br />the wireless industry was required to pay to prove no harm every time it needed to make a change. <br /> <br />Ron Fowler, 6940 Southwest Dale Avenue, Beaverton, consultant for Cingular Wireless, expressed support <br />for the recommendation from the Planning Commission and support for postponement of further <br />amendments. He thought the ordinance as currently presented was difficult for staff to apply and difficult <br />for the industry to comply with. He conveyed the willingness on the part of industry representatives to <br />participate on a task force with concerned neighbors and Planning staff to review it and come up with a good <br />and workable code. He asserted that wireless phones were rapidly replacing home phones and with this <br />change would come the need for more neighborhood cell facilities. He noted that many cities embraced the <br />location of communication sites on school grounds and home properties. He did not agree with the setbacks <br />as proposed. He opined that everyone would win with a good code, but that the code as proposed was a <br />;;bad one." He remarked that wireless representatives were not the ;;villains" but were merely representing <br />the communication method of the future. <br /> <br />Michael Smith, 685 Trail Avenue, of Silke Communications, asked the council to take into consideration <br />the recommendation that came from the Planning Commission. He recommended a ;~total rewrite" of the <br />ordinance as proposed. He also suggested the ordinance be closely scrutinized in order to avoid possible <br />invocation of any Measure 37 claims. <br /> <br />Ed Fournier, 25977 Southwest Canyon Creek Road, Wilsonville, consultant for Verizon Wireless, <br />concurred with previous testimony. He supported a full rewrite of the code, specifically with regard to <br />setbacks, as proposed setbacks would effectively prohibit most providers from expanding. He averred that <br />the underlying concerns upon which the proposed setbacks were founded had never been outlined. As such, <br />he surmised the setbacks resulted from concerns for health. He reiterated that the 1996 Federal <br />Telecommunications Act had prohibited this concern from being included in part of the basis for denial. He <br />also concurred that putting a variance procedure into place would lead to the variance procedure becoming <br />the rule and not the exception. He stated that Oregon did not have a State Radio Frequency Engineer. He <br />thought the best action for the community, the industry, and citizens would be the formation of a task force. <br /> <br />Zachary ¥ishanoff, Patterson Street, thought passage of the ordinance would not succeed in keeping the <br />telecommunications situation under control. He felt the hospital building alone would deploy ;;all sorts of <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 2004 Page 6 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.