Eugene
Residents Employ Law Firm to Oppose 75-ft Cell Tower in
Neighborhood
EUGENE,
Oregon (June 15, 2011) - Oakway Neighbors, a group of families living
in the vicinity of Oakway Road and Cal Young Road, have engaged the
Law Office of Bill Kloos, PC, to prevent AT&T from installing a
75-foot cell tower within their neighborhood. The tower would be
located less than 200 feet away from some homes and would be the
first such installation allowed inside an R1 residential zone in
Eugene.
The proposed site of the tower can be seen at
http://tinyurl.com/oakwaycelltower.
A
public hearing was held today to allow citizens to present
information and arguments to the official who will make the decision.
The week before the hearing the official had already received the
City Land Use department’s report recommending that
installation proceed. The report is available for public review at
http://tinyurl.com/oakwaycelltowercityrec.
During
the hearing, lawyers for Oakway Neighbors and G Group, a real estate
company owning apartments adjacent to the proposed tower site,
presented cases against the installation. Acoustics engineer Arthur
Noxon and the Cal Young Neighborhood Association also provided
testimony against installing the tower. Approximately 50 people from
the Oakway neighborhood also attended and spoke out against the
tower. Many also submitted written opposition. A statement of concern
regarding the health risks posed by cell towers was also read and
placed into the record.
The hearing record remains open until
Wednesday, June 22, 2011, to allow submission of additional materials
and rebuttals. The decision to approve or deny the installation is
expected by Thursday, July, 21, 2011.
The situation for the
Oakway Neighbors community began in June 2010 at a quietly publicized
meeting held at the proposed site of the cell tower, the Oakway Golf
Course owned by John P. Hammer. According to AT&T, Mr. Hammer was
the only landowner within the community who would agree to allow a
tower and had property meeting their installation’s large
physical requirements.
Many of the attendees only heard of the
proposal and meeting by word-of-mouth. Also, a number people in the
nearby neighborhood said they had not been notified of AT&T’s
plans to erect a tower next to their homes.
During the meeting
questions and suggestions were raised about possible alternatives to
AT&T’s proposal. AT&T’s claimed to be unable to
engineer another solution to the company’s transmission
problems. Many meeting participants were unconvinced, noting other
wireless providers were able to deliver service to the neighborhood
without such an intrusive installation. AT&T’s response was
that it didn’t use technology the other providers had.
Several
objections were also raised, ranging from the disruption of the
community’s environment by a 7-story structure and its adjunct
equipment to the rising evidence of adverse health effects related to
exposure to cell tower radiation.
After this initial meeting,
AT&T reported general community support for the tower in its
filed application to the City of Eugene, ignoring the fact was that
only a small fraction of people from the neighborhood had attended
and that strong opposition to the placement of the tower was voiced
by various community members during the meeting.
According to
officials, the city will render its decision based solely on current
local land use and federal telecommunications laws. This still
excludes any consideration of the mounting body of evidence -
experimental, epidemiological, and directly reported - showing
adverse health effects associated with cell tower emissions.
This
exclusion of health effects from consideration is due to the Federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996, in which Congress, heavily lobbied by
the telecommunications industry, banned such consideration. The
recent landmark decision by IARC classifying radiofrequency radiation
as a group 2B carcinogen has yet not prompted the much needed
overturning of this legislation.
Oakway Neighbors hopes that
their testimony will be given the respectful and responsible
consideration it deserves so that a cell tower will not be sited so
close to their homes, thereby keeping their families safe and the
neighborhood landscape unmarred. They also note it is the
responsibility of their elected representatives and government to
place the citizenry’s interest first, not mechanically apply
laws or overlook established neighborhood standards for the sake of
business interests or civil process convenience over that of public
safety, especially in matters as important as children’s and
families’ health.
Those who wish to support Oakway
Neighbors in their efforts are encouraged to contact them at
<oakwayneighbors@gmail.com>.
Local
TV Coverage of Eugene Cell Tower Opposition
Beau
Informant: Martin
Weatherall
[
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=celltower+radiation
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=celltower+radiation
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=wireless+provider
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=wireless+provider
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=telecommunications+industry
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=telecommunications+industry
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=AT%26T
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=exposure
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=exposure
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=health+effect
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=health+effect
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=carcinogen
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=carcinogen
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=neighborhood
http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/search?q=IARC
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=IARC
]