My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Application Materials
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2014
>
CU 14-3
>
Application Materials
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2014 10:49:48 AM
Creation date
5/1/2014 8:24:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
14
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
CINGULAR WIRELESS
Document Type
Application Materials
Document_Date
5/1/2014
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
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
%XX <br />I <br /> <br />Neighborhood/Applicant Meeting Notes <br />Project Information: <br />AT&T Site ID:EG46 Fox Hollow & Amazon Road <br />Address: 4060 West Amazon Road <br />Parcel: 1803172100100 <br />Zone Designation: R1- Low Density Residential <br />Project Description: <br />AT&T is proposing to install a new wireless facility in the City of Eugene. The proposal consists <br />of installing a 75-foot monopole designed to look like an evergreen tree (‘monopine’). The <br />ancillary ground equipment will be installed within a proposed equipment room designed to be <br />compatible in appearance with the existing on-site structures. <br /> <br />Meeting Summary <br />AT&T representatives from both Lexcom Corporation and from the engineering company, <br />Hatfield & Dawson along with representatives of the underlying property owner held a <br />neighborhood meeting on January 30 th at 4060 West Amazon Road. The doors opened at 6 pm <br />and the Town Hall style meeting began at 6:30 pm with opening remarks from the property <br />owner, followed by a summary of the above proposal by AT&T representatives. The neighbors <br />had an opportunity to speak, followed by a brief response from the representatives of this <br />proposal. A total of 14 people chose to speak and/or ask questions. Responseto the proposal <br />varied: <br /> <br />Seven individuals in opposition to the facility voiced specific concerns regarding the following <br />topics: <br />Health & safety: Non-ionizing radiation and cumulative effects of RF emissions on <br />humans, <br />Environmental safety to local wildlife (birds and bees), <br />Improper siting in a residential neighborhood, <br />Impact of the proposal on the beauty of the Amazon corridor, <br />Federal Government oversight not restrictive enough to ensure human safety. <br /> <br />Six individuals spoke in support of the facility voicing the following topics: <br />Competition for local provider keeping costs lower for most users, <br />Better coverage in an area that has been consistently poor, <br />Reduces the proliferation of towers in the area as other carriers can locate on site, <br />Voiced approval of the monopine design as it better suited the area, <br />Better communication options for both individuals and businesses, <br />Affordable internet alternative to local cable companies, <br />Better coverage for emergency situations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.