My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Ordinance No. 20072
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Ordinances
>
1990s No. 19660-20183
>
Ordinance No. 20072
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 3:48:52 PM
Creation date
1/12/2009 12:31:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Ordinances
CMO_Document_Number
20072
Document_Title
Ordinance extending the moratorium on building and land use permits for telecommunication towers and antennas within the City as imposed by Ordinance No. 20063; and declaring an emergency.
Adopted_Date
12/2/1996
Approved Date
12/2/1996
CMO_Effective_Date
12/2/1996
Signer
Ruth F. Bascom
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
analyses and tasks . The telecommunications plan will include at least three major components <br />~1} development of an ordinance, zoning and right-of way policies; ~2} determination of a fair <br />franchise fee for the use of the right-of way; and ~3} identification of community needs and <br />analysis of how those needs can be met, The City anticipates spending at least $55,000 to contract <br />with consultants to assist the City with the development of the plan. These consultants include <br />a Washington, D.C. law firm with specialists in telecommunications law, and a Seattle <br />engineering firm with specialists in telecommunications technology. In addition to city staff <br />assigned to work on the project, the City also is using the services of the Lane Council of <br />Governments ~LCGG} to assist with the plan's development. Finally, the City recently hosted a <br />Conference on the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to which local governmental entities <br />including Lane County, Springfield, the University of Oregon, Eugene Water and Electric Board, <br />Springfield Utility Board, LCGG, and school districts} were invited. <br />9. Since the passage of the Act in February, the City has received numerous inquiries <br />from telecommunications providers about construction of telecommunications facilities within the <br />City, including calls from ~1}cellular, paging, and PCS providers, ~2} independent non providers <br />who want to lease space to telecommunication providers, and ~3} land use consultants and <br />attorneys representing unnamed companies and individuals. Within the past several weeks, almost <br />15 applications have been filed for conditional use permits far new telecommunications towers and <br />antennas . <br />10. Consistent with the Telecommunications Act, the City intends to allow all wireless <br />telecommunications providers to locate facilities and do business within the City. With planning, <br />issuance of necessary permits for such providers can be streamlined, and therefore expedited. The <br />City requires time, however, to study the feasibility of requiring co-location of facilities and <br />imposing limits on the type and location of telecommunications facilities. As noted in paragraph <br />7, even the providers do not all agree on the feasibility of requiring co-location. Time also is <br />needed to develop the telecommunications plan. A short-term moratorium on building and land <br />use permits for telecommunications facilities would provide the City Council with the time to <br />adopt a telecommunications plan and develop implementing ordinances that will meet the needs <br />of both the telecommunications providers and the people who reside and work in the City. In <br />S rint S estrum L.P. v. Ci of Medina, a federal court concluded that such ashort-term <br />moratorium is consistent with Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act. Based on the general <br />findings above, and the specific findings below, the City Council finds that such ashort-term <br />moratorium also is consistent with state statutes governing moratoria. <br />ORS 197.520(3) FINDINGS <br />11. GRS 197.5203}provides that a local government may impose a moratorium based <br />on a demonstration of "compelling need." Such a demonstration must be based upon reasonably <br />available information, and include findings: <br />A. That application of existing development ordinances or regulations <br />and other applicable law is inadequate to prevent irrevocable public harm from <br />-3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.