JANISCH Amy C <br />From: Cindy Allen <cindyallen2l@yahoo.com> <br />Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 7:59 PM <br />To: TAYLOR Becky G <br />Subject: Fw: Cell Tower regulations <br />Attachments: CMS Overview.doc; Ordinance Goals.doc <br />On Thursday, October 2, 2014 4:19 PM, Mona Linstromberg <lindym@peak.org> wrote: <br />Greetings ...................several residents of Eugene have expressed concern regarding the current City of Eugene <br />Telecommunication Ordinance and the proliferation of cell phone towers in Eugene neighborhoods. Lane County has <br />placed the revision of its Telecommunication code on it long range plan (maybe this fiscal year - maybe next). I was <br />involved in the original process in writing the code at the County and in encouraging the City to require independent <br />technical peer review in its code (previously it had been discretionary and a never utilized provision). Regarding the <br />City's code, there really are no (other than noise) technical standards required (e.g. capacity, coverage, propagation <br />maps) so there is really nothing to review. This needs to change. <br />The email below to Commissioner Sorenson is from one of the primaries of The Center for Municipal Solutions <br />(CMS) along with the attachments provided to Commissioner Sorenson and, subsequently, to Commissioner Farr, <br />Chair. CMS actually was hired by the City of Eugene for the evaluation (when applicants provided technical <br />information prior to the City's requiring technical review) of SR 03-16. This tower was proposed by Voicestream <br />(subsequently T-Mobile) near a school at 24th and Polk Streets. The evaluation spoke volumes on the anomalies <br />included in the application. The application was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant. I have made copies of this <br />evaluation for the County Board and can supply you with a copy as well. <br />Please read the attached and Mr. Monroe's email. I have worked for years in, mainly, Lane and Lincoln Counties and <br />their cities and towns. While cell phones are a fact of life and a personal choice, living in the shadow (literally and <br />figuratively) 24 hours a day, seven days a week is not a choice for neighbors. The facilities, then, are a fact of life, and <br />their appropriate siting is critical. Thank you for holding a work session on the very important issue. <br />Regards, <br />Mona Linstromberg <br />Tidewater, OR 97390 <br />From: Rusty Monroe <br />Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 10:29 AM <br />To: Pete.Sorenson(J~co.lane.or.us <br />Subject: Cell Tower regulations <br />Dear Commissioner Sorenson: <br />I received a plea from a Lane County resident who is familiar with our work assisting local governments in the area of <br />regulating cell towers and wireless facilities (including the development of ordinances). She asked me to contact you <br />as an expert in the field who is known for "telling truth to power". Let me start by saying there is no charge to clients for <br />ordinance/regulations related work, so you can put aside any concern about cost for now. Attached please find an <br />`Overview' of our organization and if you'd like to talk, call me at the number below at your convenience. Also, I don't <br />