►
Description
If you would like to provide public comment when this meeting is live, please dial toll free 1-855-282-6330. The meeting access code is 146 001 2650##. Press *3 on your phone's keypad when you are ready to provide your comment; this will signal the hearing officer that you have raised your hand; the hearing officer will call on you based on the order that hands are raised. When you are done providing your comment, please press *3 again to lower your hand.
A
So
I
will
get
started,
then
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
juan
who
will
be
doing
some
instructions
for
those
of
you
who
are
here
as
a
first
time
participant
in
a
webex
land
use
hearing
welcome.
I
think
all
of
us
are
still
getting
used
to
the
process
and
we'll
try
to
make
this
as
painless
as
possible.
A
I'd
like
to
give
you
some
opening
comments
and
then,
very
briefly,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
the
technical
person
for
the
city
of
bend.
Who
will
talk
to
you
about
how
you
access
and
talk
to
me
and
how
you
participate
actively
in
the
meeting.
So
my
first
comments
are
that
I'm,
my
name
is
greg
frank.
I
am
a
hearings
officer
on
contract
with
the
city
of
bend.
A
Today
is
tuesday
july
14
2020
at
approximately
nine
o'clock
in
the
morning,
and
the
way
we're
doing
this
hearing
is
a
webex
platform
hearing
the
cases
that
we're
involved
with
today
are.
A
Pz20179Pz20180
and
pz20
zero
and
I'm
sure
someone
if
I,
if
I
made
a
mistake
on
those
numbers,
will
correct
me
and
then
I
will
make
sure
we're
on
the
correct
one.
A
This
is
a
case
that
involves
an
applicant
seeking
a
conditional
use
site
plan
and
and
alteration
and
review
for
the
approval
of
a
60-foot
tall
cell
tower
at
a
20-foot
by
20-foot
fenced
equipment
area
at
the
address
2625
northeast
butler
road.
So
those
are
my
opening
comments,
because
this
is
a
recording
hearing.
I
put
those
that
information
on
right
to
the
start
of
the
hearing,
I'm
going
to
be
giving
some
additional
instructions
shortly.
A
At
this
point
in
time,
I
would
ask
that
the
city
of
bend
technical
support,
give
information
to
those
who
are
participating
in
today's
hearing
some
instructions
on
how
they
get
involved
and
when
they
can
get
involved
and
what
the
screens
are
gonna.
Look
like
so
juan
it's
up
to
you
all.
B
B
We
will
be
using
the
hand-raised
functioning
webex
for
those
of
you
joining
us
via
phone.
Please
use
the
keypad
on
your
phone
and
dial
star
3.
To
raise
your
hand,
the
hearing
officer
will
call
on
you,
based
in
the
order
that
ray's
hands
are
received.
When
we
call
on
you,
we
will
make
reference
to
your
phone
numbers
area
code
and
prefix.
B
You
will
hear
two
beeps
to
signify
that
your
microphone
is
now
unmuted.
Please
provide
your
full
name
and
physical
address
and
then
state
your
comment
for
those
of
you
who
are
joining
us
via
webex.
Please
use
the
hand
raise
function
by
clicking
on
the
participants
icon
in
the
participants.
Pane,
look
at
the
bottom
right
corner
and
click
on
the
hand
icon
to
raise
your
hand
for
all
of
you,
whether
you
are
joining
us
by
phone
or
via
webex,
when
you
are
done
providing
your
comment.
B
Please
remember
to
lower
your
hand,
to
provide
fluidity
to
the
public
comment
piece
for
those
of
you
joining
us
via
webex.
You
can
lower
your
hand
by
clicking
on
that
hand
icon
when
you
are
done
for
those
of
you
joining
us
by
phone,
you
can
lower
your
hand
by
using
your
keypad
and
once
again
pressing
star
3.,
hey.
Are
there
any
other
questions
anything
else?
You
would
like
me
to
clarify
mr
frank.
A
No
thank
you
one,
just
one
of
the
few
times
in
the
hearing
that
I'm
gonna
ask.
If,
if
there
is
anyone
who
is
now
involved
in
this
hearing
by
telephone
or
webex,
does
anyone
have
any
questions
about
the
technical,
just
the
purely
technical
aspects
of
this
hearing.
B
We
we
have
one
question.
Mr
frank:
I
I
have
calling
user
with
five
for
one
three,
eight
nine,
I'm.
C
C
A
A
I
talk
way
too
long
and
they
want
to
talk
and-
and
I
fully
appreciate
that,
but
what
I'm
going
to
try
to
explain
to
you
is
how
these
hearings
work
and
for
most
of
you
who
are
participating
in
this
hearing,
you
don't
get
involved
a
lot
in
the
land
use
process
and
particularly
in
the
webex
platform
process,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
understand
both
what
the
order
of
things
are
and
what
your
rights
are,
and
maybe
even
your
obligations
so
bear
with
me
for
the
next
seven
eight
nine
minutes,
and
then
we
will
move
into
the
testimony
from
from
staff
applicant
and
any
opponents.
A
So
let
me
tell
you
first
who
I
am
my
my
name
is
greg
frank.
I
am
a
hearings
officer.
I've
been
doing
hearings
for
probably
the
last
17
18
years,
and
this
is,
I
think,
my
fourth
hearing
for
the
city
of
bend
under
the
contract.
A
I
am
aware
so
you
know,
of
who
verizon
wireless
is
the
applicant
or
at
least
a
participant
in
this
process,
but
I'm
not
familiar
with
either
selco
akumar
or
the
the
consultant
omn
o
m
investments.
Llc,
I
don't
know
those
people.
In
fact
I
don't
know
anybody
who
even
works
for
verizon.
A
A
I
have
had
no
contact
with
the
applicant,
the
applicant's
representatives
or
anyone
else
associated
with
this
case,
except
for
the
site
view
which
I'm
going
to
talk
about
shortly
and
the
staff,
and
that
is
involves
miss
kennedy
and
mr
alameda,
who
you've
already
heard
speak.
A
I
have
had
prior
contacts
with
the
staff
planner
for
the
city
of
penn,
heidi
kennedy,
she's,
a
senior
planner
and
she's
assigned
to
this
case.
My
contact
with
her
has
been
of
the
nature
of
one
of
two
things.
Number
one
is
she's
tried
to
help
me
as
far
as
scheduling
so
we
we
talked
about
calendars
scheduling.
A
Secondly,
is
she's
emailed
me
regarding
accessing
the
public
information
in
this
particular
case,
so
she's
done
those
two
things.
The
last
contact
I
had
with
her
was
this
morning,
and
she
told
she
just
confirmed
that
I
had
access
into
this
hearing,
and
obviously
I
do
so.
Those
are
the
contacts
that
I've
had
with
staff
and
no
other
contacts.
A
I
do
so
and
therefore
I
am
doing
site
views
and
a
site
view
is
when
I'm
in
my
car,
I
drive
to
the
property
that
that
is
the
subject
of
the
particular
application
at
hand,
and
I
drive
into
areas
that
I
consider
either
public
or
open
to
the
public
right,
and
so
I
did
that,
and
I
did
that
yesterday
afternoon
about
three
in
the
afternoon
I
observed
what
I
refer
to
as
a
subject
property,
which
is,
I
called
a
commercial
property
where
I
saw
a
dentist's
office
in
a
coffee,
kiosks
and
and
some
other
things
around
the
other
side.
A
I
drove
into
both
parking
lots
the
one
where
the
dentist's
office
was,
I
drove
into
the
one
where
the
gasoline
station
is,
and
so
that
I
actually
did.
I
did
not
get
out
of
my
car.
I
did
not
walk
the
site
and
look
at
it
in
great
detail.
A
I
can
tell
you
quite
clearly
that
I
saw
the
construction
on
the
roadway
and
looks
like
a
turnaround.
I
saw
where
I
believed
the
proposed
cell
tower
is
going
to
be
located
and
in
particular
for
those
of
you
who
are
neighbors.
I
observed
at
least
setting
up
above
where
my
car
was.
It
were
a
number
of
family
residences,
and
I
observed
the
proximity
of
those
residences
to
the
subject
property.
A
A
I
will
not
make
that
decision
until
I've
heard
everyone's
testimony
and
have
reviewed
the
public
file
and
considered
the
the
relevant
laws
rules
in
the
case
all
right.
So
that's
what
I
saw
on
the
site
view.
Let
me
tell
you
a
couple
more
things
about
what
I
know.
A
I
reviewed
the
staff
report,
which
I
believe
is
dated
july.
7Th
2020.,
I
am
familiar
with
staff,
believes
to
be,
and
I'm
going
to
use
a
couple
words
here
that
are
going
to
be
very
important
to
you.
I
observed
what
the
staff
believes
to
be
the
relevant
approval
criteria
and
what
staff
believes
to
be
the
relevant
evidence.
A
You
if
you
haven't
already
seen
the
staff
report,
may
access
the
staff
report
by
going
to
the
city
of
bend
website
and
then
open
e-plans
and
when
e-plans
does
open
search
for
the
the
case
number
that
that
I've,
given
you,
which
is
pz
at
least
one
of
them
pz
20-0179
once
you're
in
there,
then
there's
all
kinds
of
documents.
One
of
those
documents
is
staff
report.
A
The
other
thing
that
I
reviewed,
because
ms
kennedy
has
has
been
very
helpful
in
making
sure
that
I
was
aware
that
there
was
a
number
of
comments
received
by
neighborhood
interested
people.
Is
I've
reviewed
in
a
cursory
manner?
Many
of
the
submitted
comments?
In
fact,
I
think,
as
I
noted
this
morning
when
I
was
looking
at
it
again,
there
were
72
comments,
so
it's
quite
a
few
and
so
I've
I've
looked
at
those
in
a
cursory.
I
have
not
memorized
those.
A
So
I
want
you
to
tell
me
if,
in
fact,
you
have
a
comment
submitted
and
and
reference
those
and
that's
that's
helpful.
So
that's
what
I
know.
This
is
the
second
time
that
everyone
is
given
an
open
opportunity,
it's
kind
of
like
the
open
mic
event
at
your
local
establishment,
but
I'm
going
to
give
everyone
a
chance
in
just
a
sec
to
comment
and
that's
after
I
make
the
following
statement.
A
I
believe
that
I
have
no
bias,
no
prejudice
or
personal
interest
in
this
case
that
would
affect
this,
an
objective
to
say
me,
making
an
objective
decision.
In
the
case,
I
believe
I
am
qualified
to
preside
over
this
hearing
and
render
an
unbiased
and
objective
decision.
So
mr
almeida
take
a
check,
everybody
else.
That's
in
the
audience.
Would
you
please,
if
you
disagree,
if
you
say
that
I
should
not
hear
this
case.
A
A
B
E
Hello,
my
name
is
hello.
My
name
is
doug
griffin.
I
live
at
3162
northeast
nathan,
so
I
listened
to
what
you
had
to
say.
So
why
are
you
the
one
person
that
will
make
a
decision
on
this?
Why
is
this
not
a
panel
of
some
type?
Why
is
it
just
up
to
you.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
sir
good
question.
Actually
I
you
know,
I
I
think
in
all
the
time
I've
been
doing.
This
nobody's
ever
actually
asked
me
that,
but
I
will
tell
you.
The
answer
is
actually
quite
simple.
Is
this
is
a
my?
The
hearings
officer
process
is
used
by
the
city
of
bend
as
a
result
of
its
its
ordinances
and
and
its
its
code,
and
primarily
ben's
city
code.
A
If
you
look
at
ben
city
code,
4.1
800
and
I'm
just
giving
you
that
4.1
800
it
talks
about
the
hearing
process
and
the
quasi-judicial
hearing
process
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
that
in
any
great
detail.
The
response
to
you,
mr
griffin,
is
I'm
authorized
by
the
city
code
city
staff
planning
staff
have
have
they
have
a
series
of,
I
believe
three
or
four
hearings
officers
that
do
hearings
for
them
and
by
the
luck
of
the
draw-
and
I
believe,
that's
what
it
is.
B
E
And
is
this
binding
your
decision
or
can
we
take
this
to
court
if
we
don't
agree
with
your
decision.
F
This
is
heidi
kennedy
staff
planner
for
the
city
of
bend
in
as
referenced
earlier.
The
procedures
ordinance
does
allow
multiple
levels
of
appeals
at
different
stages.
There's
city
council
potential
appeals
and
also
there's
a
state
landing
board
of
appeals
process,
so
that
chapter
4.1
talks
about
the
the
steps
for
appealing
the
details
about
how
to
do
that.
Thank
you.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Let
me
proceed
then,
and
I
I
think
I'm
going
to
exceed
my
seven
to
nine
minutes
and
I
apologize
for
that.
Let
me
talk
to
you
about
the
hearing
process.
A
I
assure
you
that
everyone
who
wishes
to
speak
today
will
be
given
at
least
one
opportunity
to
speak.
There's
a
couple.
People
get
to
speak
twice
once
again
and
I'm
anticipating
the
question,
because
I
think
mr
griffin
has
asked
really
good
questions,
but
I'm
not
anticipating
what
he
might
be
asking
and
that
is
that
how
come
some
people
get
to
speak
once
and
and
some
people
get
to
speak
more
than
once.
A
Once
again
it
goes
back
to
the
the
code
which
I
referenced
before,
which
is
the
ben
city
code
4.1.800,
and
it's
actually
in
that
section.
But
there
are,
if
you
listen,
you
will
find
out
whether
you're
the
one
or
the
the
opportunity
to
speak
more
than
one
time
most
people
just
get
to
speak
one
time,
so
everyone
gets
to
speak
at
least
one
time,
I'm
not
going
to
put
time
limits
on
on
on
the
hearing
today
and
your
testimony.
A
But,
as
a
matter
of
courtesy,
I'm
going
to
mention
a
couple
things
number
one
is:
I
would
have
appreciated
it
if
you
would
limit
your
testimony
to
five
minutes,
but
it's
not
a
limit,
and
that
is
simply
because
most
of
us
can
get
to
what
we
need
to
get
to
in
the
five
minutes
or
if
you
need
to
be
more
specific,
I
will
talk
about
the
record
in
this
case
being
remain,
remained
open,
and
during
that
period
of
time
you
can
submit
even
more
precise
and
well
thought
out
statements
as
a
result
of
of
what
you
want
to
convey
to
me.
A
So
I'm
not
putting
time
limits,
but
I
I
request
that
you
keep
it
within
five
minutes.
Secondly,
is
with
respect
to
the
time
limit.
Is
that
if
you
speak
after
someone
else
has
said
something
that
you
agree
with
the
best
way
to
deal
with?
That
simply
say,
I
agree
with
so-and-so
who's
spoken
before
me.
A
The
reason
that
I
ask
that
is
number
one
is
is
that
all
of
us
have
have
things,
especially
you
have
things
that
you'd
like
to
do
with
the
rest
of
your
day,
but
secondly,
is
saying
something
twice
or
three
times
or
four
times
doesn't
make
whatever
you
said
either
more
true
or
less
true
yeah.
A
I
take
really
good
notes
and
if
somebody
said
something
I
wrote
it
down
and
it
I
don't
need
to
write
it
down
over
and
over
and
just
simply
because
somebody
said
something
more
than
one
time
does
not
make
it
more
or
less
true.
So
those
two
comments
relate
to
time
limits.
Here's
the
order
of
testimony
following
my
opening
comments,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
ms
kennedy,
who
will
give
the
staff
presentation
following
ms
kennedy.
The
applicant
will
be
given
an
opportunity
to
speak.
A
A
A
If
you
haven't
already
testified
in
favor,
neutral
or
in
opposition
and
still
want
to
tell
me
something
then
testify
during
the
opposition
testimony
I
I'll
be
able
to
distinguish,
I
hope
which
side
you're
on
and
and
the
point
that
you're
wishing
to
make
now
everyone
has
gotten
to
speak
one
time
so
far.
A
At
this
point
in
time,
I'm
going
to
ask,
I
would
ask
that
the
applicant
or
excuse
me
the
staff,
and
this
is
a
little
bit
different
than
what's
in
the
in
the
code,
but
the
staff
give
their
final
comments
and
then
finally,
the
applicant
will
be
given
an
opportunity
for
rebuttal.
A
Does
that
give
them
an
advantage,
and
it
may
be
true
that
that
could
be
considered
an
advantage,
but
the
applicant
has,
under
the
ben
city
code,
the
obligation
to
demonstrate
by
evidence
in
the
record
that
each
and
every
one
of
the
relevant
approval
criteria-
and
I
just
used
those
three
and
I'll
talk-
a
sec.
The
applicant
has
the
burden
to
show
that
each
and
every
one
of
the
relevant
approval
criteria
have
been
met.
A
A
So
before
you
sign
off
and
that's
the
way
I
look
at
it
on
these
series
before
you
sign
off,
do
yourself
a
favor,
take
a
couple
deep,
breaths
and
say:
have
I
covered
everything
that
I
really
want
to
cover
all
right?
So
that's
the
order
of
the
presentation.
Let
me
talk
about
those
three
words
relevant
approval
criteria,
because
those
of
you
who
do
not
do
land
use
cases
on
a
regular
basis.
A
Those
three
words
in
the
land
use
field
are
incredibly
important:
okay
and
to
me
they're
important,
and
what
decisions
that
I
make
in
this
particular
case.
The
phrase
relevant
approval
criteria
in
a
land
use
hearing
means
for
those
of
you
who
are
used
to
other
things.
It
means
rules
or
laws
that
apply
to
this
case.
So
if
I
say
relevant
approval
criteria,
those
are
the
laws
or
rules
that
apply.
A
A
You
must
tell
me
at
the
hearing,
if
you
believe
the
staff
included
too
many
or
not
enough
approval
criteria
or
whether
or
not
the
staff
correctly
interpreted
the
approval
criteria,
rephrase
the
staff
interpreted
the
relevant
laws
or
rules.
A
You
must
do
so
when
this
is
land
use
lost
stuff,
but
you
must
do
so
through
your
testimony
or
the
evidence
that
you
provide.
You
must
provide
me
with
sufficient
specificity,
that's
not
easy
to
say,
but
that's
the
term
sufficient
specificity
to
allow
me
and
other
participants
in
this
hearing
the
ability
to
address
your
specific
concerns.
A
Okay,
as
I
indicated,
the
burden
of
proof
is
on
the
applicant
I'm
going
to,
and
I
apologize
for
this
part,
but
I
can't
figure
out
a
way
to
put
it
in
my
own
terms.
So
I
read
this
from
the
benson
code.
There's
four
sections,
one
is
from
four
point:
one:
eight,
seven,
zero.
Eight
five
see
it
says
the
failure
to
raise
and
issued
accompanied
by
statements
or
evidence
sufficient
to
afford
the
hearing's
body
and
the
parties.
A
Secondly,
4.187086:
the
failure
of
the
applicant
to
raise
constitutional
or
other
issues
relating
to
proposed
conditions
of
approval
with
sufficient
specificity
to
allow
the
local
government
or
its
designee
to
respond
to
the
issue
precludes
an
action
for
damages
in
circuit
court.
End
of
quote
next
one
4.187087
says
an
issue
which
may
be
the
basis
for
an
appeal
to
the
land.
Use
board
of
appeals
shall
be
raised
no
later
than
the
close
of
the
record
at
the
following.
A
The
final
evidentiary
hearing
on
the
proposal
at
you
must
raise
it
prior
to
the
final
evidentiary
hearing
of
the
proposal
before
the
local
government.
Such
issues
shall
be
raised
and
accompanied
by
statements
or
evidence
sufficient
to
afford
the
city
council
planning,
commissioner
hearings
body
or
hearings
officer
and
the
parties
an
adequate
opportunity
to
respond
to
each
issue.
Finally,
any
objection
not
raised
prior
to
the
close
of
oral
testimony
is
waived.
A
All
parties,
alleging
procedural
defects,
shall
have
the
burden
of
proof
at
luba
as
to
whether
or
not
the
error
occurred,
and
whether
the
air
has
prejudiced
the
party's
substantial
rights
and
I'm
sorry,
I
had
to
read
those,
but
those
are
very
technical
and,
in
my
summary,
it
simply
means
you
need
to
bring
up
with
clarity.
A
What
your
issue
is
and
then
pretty
much.
You
need
to
be
able
to
tell
me
what
the
relevant
laws
or
rules
are,
that
your
rate
that
that
your
evidence
relates
to,
in
other
words,
the
relevant
approval
criteria.
My
final
comments
are
going
to
relate
to
the
closing
of
the
record
under
the
ben
city
code.
A
continuance
of
the
hearing
is
may
be
requested.
A
continuance
may
be
requested,
and,
if
you,
if
that
is,
that
request
is
made.
That
means
that
you
want
to
come
back
and
have
another
hearing.
A
In
other
words,
we
set
up
another
date
and
do
another
complete
hearing
at
this
level.
So
if
you
want
to
continue
hearing,
please
say
I
want
to
continue
to
hear
it.
I
have
discretion
under
the
bend
city,
count
ben
city
code
to
deny
a
request
for
a
continuance.
A
C
A
The
record
to
remain
open
to
submit
new
documents
into
the
record
after
the
close
closest
hearing.
Today,
you
need
to
make
that
request.
I'm
pretty
good
at
figuring
out
when
people
make
that
request,
you
don't
have
to
say
I
want
the
record
remain
open
under
the
code.
You
don't
have
to
say
that
just
say.
A
If
you
have
something
pressing
and
you
have
to
get
out
of
this
process
before
we've
completed
the
hearing
today,
you
need
to
talk
to
somebody
heard
the
hearing.
You
need
to
talk
to
miss
kennedy
or
you
may
you
need
to
go
back
and
listen
to
the
recording,
because
we
talk
about
the
logistics
at
the
end
of
the
hearing,
not
before
the
end
of
the
hearing.
So
please
do
that
under
the
density
or
my
contract
excuse
me
I'm
required
to
deliver
a
decision
on
my
case
within
21
days
of
the
close
of
the
record.
A
I
don't
know
when
the
record's
going
to
close.
If
nobody
asks
for
the
record
to
remain
open
today,
it
will
close
the
day
and
within
21
days.
I
will
issue
my
decision.
If
somebody
does
ask
for
the
record
to
remain
open
today,
then
I'm
obligated
to
keep
the
record
open
and
my
decision
will
be
due
21
days
from
that
date.
A
So
I'm
done,
I
will
be
pretty
quiet
for
the
most
of
the
time
other
than
calling
on
people.
Please
recall
that,
prior
to
your
testimony,
please
give
your
name
and
address
at
this
point
in
time.
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
miss
kennedy.
She
will
give
the
staff
presentation
following
the
staff
presentation,
I'd,
expect
the
applicant
or
atkins
representative
to
prepare
be
prepared
to
give
their
presentation.
F
Thank
you.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
record.
My
name
is
heidi
kennedy.
I'm
the
staff
planner
for
these
three
applications,
pz
20-017,
which
is
a
wireless
communication
facility
site
plan
for
a
60-foot
tall
cell
tower
camouflaged
to
look
like
a
pine
tree
and
a
20
by
20-foot
fenced
equipment
area
for
emergency
generator
at
the
base
of
the
tower.
F
Chapter
4.4
conditional
use
permits
standards,
include
chapter
2.2,
commercial,
zoning
districts,
chapter
3.1,
lot,
personal
block
design
and
access
and
circulation
chapter
3.2,
landscape,
tree
trees
and
fencing
and
walls.
Chapter
chapter
3.3
is
the
vehicle
parking
and
loading
and
bicycle
parking
chapter
chapter
3.4
is
the
public
improvement
standards
chapter
and
3.5
the
other
design
standards
chapter
the
procedures
used
when
setting
up
this
meeting
public
hearing
and
processing.
This
application
include
the
procedures,
chapter,
4.1,
development
review
and
procedures.
F
Upon
reviewing
those
criteria,
standards
in
the
in
the
procedures
that
are
outlined
in
the
development
code
staff
listed
the
recommendation.
The
hearings
officer
recommendation
on
page
starting
on
page
21
of
the
staff
report,
which
staff's
recommendation
is
that
the
hearings
officer
find
that
all
the
applicable
criteria
have
been
met,
with
the
exception
of
the
potential
negative
visual
impacts
due
to
fading
from
the
monopoly
branches.
F
Staff
recommends
that
the
long-term
maintenance
plan
identify
a
specific
date
or
an
age
that
all
of
the
tower
branches
will
be
replaced,
as
evidenced
by
weather
conditions
experienced
in
men.
Fading
appears
to
happen
between
years
five
and
six.
Based
on
the
one
example
I
referenced
earlier.
In
the
event,
the
applicant
is
able
to
provide
a
detailed
maintenance
plan
to
ensure
the
monoplane
will
not
reach
a
state
of
disrepair.
Over
time,
staff
recommends
the
following
conditions
of
approval.
F
A
All
right,
I
do
have
two
questions
and
they're
not
well
they're
asked
because
I
believe
that
I've
done
cell
tower
cases
a
couple
before
and
the
issues
always
come
up,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
those
who
are
testifying
have
an
opportunity
to
to
respond
to
what
are
the
relevant
approval
or
criteria
and-
and
I
was
re,
as
I
indicated
earlier-
I
was
reviewing
a
number
of
the
opposition
comments
this
morning
and
two
issues
which
are
not
unusual
for
cell
tower
cases
came
up.
A
One
is
value
reduction
of
a
property
as
a
result
of
approval
of
a
cell
tower,
and,
secondly,
our
health
related
issues
by
the
by
having
a
residence
in
proximity
to
a
cell
tower.
Miss
kennedy
miss
kennedy,
if
you
could,
if
you're
able
respond
to
those
two
issues,
so
that
folks,
in
the
audience,
have
an
understanding
at
least
what
staff
believes
are
the
answers
to
those
two
issues.
B
F
And
there
are
no
standards
or
criteria
in
the
bend
development
code
directly
related
to
property
values
with
regards
to
any
applications
for
solar
power
facilities,
and
that
would
be
the
answer
I
would
have
for
the
first
question
and
then.
F
The
chapter
3.7
which
hold
on
one
second,
let
me
pull
up
my
notes.
F
A
B
G
Thank
you,
mr
frank,
for
the
record
mike
connors
with
hathaway
larson
address
is
one
three
three
one
northwest
lovejoy
suite
950
portland
oregon
nine,
seven,
two
zero
nine
also
on
the
line
is
tammy
hamilton
with
acom
consulting
tammy
is
the
person
who
put
together
the
application
material
and
has
been
working
on
the
application
and
then
also
on
the
line
is
colleen
de
chaser,
who
is
a
verizon
representative
for
simplicity,
I'm
going
to
handle
the
presentation
on
our
side,
but
to
the
extent
that
you
have
any
questions,
tammy
or
colleen
are
available
to
answer
those
as
well
so
real
quickly.
G
What
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
a
proposal
for
a
60-foot
monopine
stealth
facility,
which
is
designed
to
look
like
a
pine
tree
under
the
city
of
bend
code.
It's
defined
as
a
moderate
visibility
facility,
because
the
monopine
is
a
stealth
design
that
is
intended
to
camouflage
and
minimize
the
visual
impact
of
the
facility.
C
G
An
antenna
tip
height
of
49
feet.
The
reason
for
the
additional
10
feet
is
to
put
a
top
on
the
tree,
so
it
looks
like
a
real
tree
as
opposed
to
a
tree
with
the
top
chopped
off,
so
in
actuality,
the
specific
height
that
we
need
for
this
particular
tower
is
49
feet,
but
the
additional
10
feet
is
for
the
top
on
the
monopine.
G
G
As
you
know,
from
your
site
visit,
the
property
is
commercially
zoned,
its
commercial
convenience
zone
and
their
existing
commercial
uses.
There,
gas
station
dentist
and
coffee
kiosk
and
in
the
zone
moderate
visibility.
Facilities
like
this
stealth
facility
are
permitted
outright,
but
the
reason
that
we
have
a
conditional
use
application
is
that
any
tower
that
exceeds
the
base
height
of
the
zone
is
required
to
go
through
conditional
use.
G
The
base
height
is
35
feet
and,
as
I
indicated
the
tower
here
is,
you
know,
50
feet
with
the
additional
10
feet
to
make
it
look
like
a
tree,
and
the
reason
for
that
is,
as
our
rf
engineer
indicated,
is
that
49
foot
antenna
height
limit
is
the
minimum
height
necessary
to
achieve
the
objectives
of
this
site
and
the
specific
site
will
be
in
the
southeast
corner
of
the
property
where,
if
you
may
have
seen
from
your
site
visit,
there's
a
number
of
existing
trees
and
mature
vegetation
and
the
purpose
for
putting
it
there
is
to
help
it
blend
in
more
being
modifying
it.
G
It
blends
in
and
is
more
of
a
camouflage
when
it's
surrounded
by
other
trees
and
vegetation.
The
particular
need
for
this
tower
is
what
the
industry
calls
a
capacity
tower.
There's
coverage
needs
and
capacity
needs
coverage,
needs
or
or
needs
that
people
are
more
familiar
with,
where
you
have
certain
areas
where
there
may
be
a
weak
signal
and
difficulty
getting
a
signal.
There.
G
There
are
three
facilities
in
the
surrounding
area
which
we
identify
as
high
desert
ambient
hospital,
and
those
systems
are
currently
overloaded.
So
there's
a
need
for
a
new
tower
here
and
it's
important
to
understand
that
that's
today's
existing
conditions.
It's
only
going
to
get
worse
in
the
future,
because,
as
ben
continues
to
grow,
there'll
be
more
users
and
also
there's
you
know.
G
Most
of
us
are
gravitating
more
towards
use
of
our
cell
phones
as
our
primary
or
exclusive
phone.
So
from
a
9-1-1
emergency
health
perspective,
you
know
often
times
people,
that's
their
only
way
to
call
9-1-1
and
we
need
to
make
sure
that
they're
not
in
a
position
where
we've
got
an
ability
to
accommodate
those
calls
and
also,
I
think,
more
recently,
with
the
kobe
19
situation.
G
You
have
more
people
who
are
working
from
home
or
spending
more
home
time
at
home
than
is
typically
the
case,
and
so
there's
a
growing
need
there
as
well
to
make
sure
that
we
can
accommodate
all
the
traffic
in
terms
of
the
process
for
locating
this
particular
site
that
this
has
been
a
a
project.
That's
been
in
the
works
for
for
several
years
to
try
to
find
a
site
to
accommodate
the
this
particular
tower
and
per
the
bend
code.
G
We
did
look
at
the
various
alternatives,
some
of
which,
quite
frankly
or
easier.
You
know
from
a
timing
and
cost
perspective
for
verizon
to
co-locate
on
a
facility,
because
the
time
and
expense
it
takes
to
locate
a
new
facility
and
go
through
these
public
hearings
make
it
a
more
difficult
option,
but
unfortunately
we
don't
have
any
co-location
options
that
can
accommodate
the
capacity
need
here.
There
is
an
existing
tower.
G
That's
1.32
miles
away
from
the
subject
site,
which
is
too
far
to
the
north,
and
it's
actually
too
far
to
one
of
the
existing
towers
that
we're
trying
to
offload
and
one
of
the
difficulties
you
have
when
you're
looking
to
offload
a
tower
is
it
needs
to
be
in
the
right
location.
It
can't
be
too
far.
Otherwise
the
signal
can't
transfer
and
if
it's
too
close
you'll
get
signal,
signal,
interference
and
that
particular
existing
tower
too
close
to
some
of
the
other
verizon
towers
and
would
create
some
interference.
G
We
did
evaluate
existing
structures
in
the
area.
None
of
them
are
tall
enough
to
accommodate
the
the
height
that
we
need
here
and
utility
poles.
Similarly,
they're
they're
not
tall
enough.
G
There
are
structural
issues
and
then
we
still
need
the
ability
to
locate
ground
equipment
and
there's
not
any
options
available
to
do
that
with
utility
poles
alternative
sites
we
evaluated
different
alternative
sites
and
the
standard
under
the
code
is
to
find
in
a
you
know,
evaluate
an
alternative
site
that
is
capable
of
meeting
the
same
service
objectives
and
is
will
provide
a
equal
or
lesser
visual
impact
and
there
just
aren't
any
sites
that
can
accommodate
our
capacity
service
objective
here
that
are
not
zoned
on
that
are
not
zone
residential.
G
This
is
really
the
only
commercial
zone
property
in
the
area
and
the
the
bin
code
there's
a
preference
towards
looking
for
non-residential
type
properties,
and
this
is
really
the
only
one
we
did
evaluate
the
mountain
view-
high
school
property,
because
that's
where
a
large
portion
of
the
data
traffic
is
and
part
of
what
we're
trying
to
accommodate
here,
but
the
facilities
manager
at
the
school
evaluated
that
issue
and
determined
that
school
is
not
interested
in
leasing
any
property.
G
We
also
based
on
some
comments.
I
took
a
look
at
the
forest
service
and
pine
nursery
property,
but
as
you'll
see
in
our
data
map
from
rrf
engineer,
those
profits
are
too
far
to
the
north
and
really
what
we
need
for
this
site
is
to
be
in
closer
proximity
to
the
high
school,
because
that's
the
area
where
there's
the
heavier
traffic
and
so
based
on
looking
at
all
the
available
properties.
The
proposed
site,
we
believe,
is
the
best
site
and
will
provide
the
least
visual
impacts
in
that
it's
it's,
you
know
commercially
zoned.
G
It's
got
mature
landscapes,
so
the
monopine
is
capable
of
blending
in
better
with
the
surrounding
area.
We
have
a
willing
landlord,
that's
willing
to
lose
property
to
us
and
that's
something
that
oftentimes
people
overlook.
Not
everybody
wants
to
allow
a
wireless
tower
on
their
property,
and
in
this
case
we
have
a
property
that
is
willing
and
also
it's
large
enough
to
meet
the
setback
requirements.
G
You
know
we
understand
that
there
are
surrounding
residential
areas
and
per
the
code,
we're
required
to
meet,
to
set
back
to
be
equal
to
or
greater
than,
the
height
of
the
tower
which
which
we're
able
to
do
here.
G
Most
of
the
other
properties
that
would
be
available
in
order
to
to
meet
our
our
objective
for
this
site
would
be
residentially
zoned
and
it
wouldn't.
H
G
Possible
for
us
to
meet
the
setback
requirements
in
terms
of
the
approval
criteria,
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
all
of
them,
because
I
think
that
will
take
too
long,
but
hopefully,
you've
had
an
opportunity
to
read
through
the
application
narrative
as
well
as
the
staff
report.
I
think
both
do
a
good
job
of
addressing
and
explaining
why
our
proposal
meets
the
approval
criteria.
Just
a
couple
things
to
note,
as
I
indicated
earlier,
this
is
a
permitted
use
in
this
particular
zone.
G
The
only
reason
that
we're
we're
doing
a
conditional
use
is
because
we
exceed
the
35
foot
height
limit
and
mr
frank,
I
know
you've
dealt
with
some
of
these
wireless
tower
applications
and,
as
you
probably
know
from
your
experience,
it's
very
unusual
to
find
a
tower.
That's
35,
feet
or
lower,
and
so
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
we're
needing
the
additional
height
and
having
to
go
through
the
conditional
use
process.
G
We
meet
all
the
technical
and
objective
standards,
you
know:
setback
parking,
landscape,
lighting,
noise,
etc,
and
I
think
those
are
addressed
in
the
application,
as
well
as
the
alternative
sites
or
co-location
criteria,
and
I
won't
repeat
that
I
just
stressed
that
a
bit
ago
in
terms
of
visual
impacts,
I
think
it's
important
to
emphasize
that
what
what
the
code
requires
is
not
that
we
avoid
or
eliminate
any
visual
impact,
it's
that
we
mitigate
and
that
we
mitigate
to
the
extent
reasonable
or
practicable,
and
so
I
think,
that's
an
important
standard.
G
You
know
to
highlight
here
because
you
know
again,
we
understand
that
the
facility
will
be
visible
to
the
surrounding
areas.
It's
not
possible
under
current
technology
to
avoid
any
visual
impact,
but
we
believe
in
this
case
that
we
have
mitigated
the
visual
impacts,
the
surrounding
area,
to
the
greatest
extent
practicable,
which
is
the
code
standard.
G
In
that
you
know
the
the
tower
is
the
minimum
height
necessary
for
objective
it's
a
monopine
stealth
and
in
this
particular
area,
it's
an
ideal
candidate
for
a
monopine
stealth
because
of
the
surrounding
trees
and
mature
vegetation,
which
will
help
it
blend
in
better.
There's
also
some
screening
that
will
be
provided
by
the
existing
buildings
on
the
site,
at
least
around
the
lower
end
base
of
it,
and
it's
a
commercial
zone
property
with
existing
commercial
uses,
so
that.
C
G
I
do
want
to
address
the
staff
recommendation
for
the
maintenance
plan
and
just
note
a
couple
things
and
then
propose
what
we
think
would
be
the
condition
that
you
should
adopt
to
address
it.
First
of
all,
staffs
concerns
which
we
understand
and
certainly
seem
reasonable,
are
based
on
a
existing
tower
at
bend
river
mall
road.
The
important
thing
to
understand
is:
is
that
although
verizon
is
has
antennas
on
that
tower,
that
is
not
a
verizon
owned
tower.
G
And
so
while
we,
what
we
understand
you
know
staff's
concerns
about
some
of
the
fading
on
that
facility
and
the
need
to
make
sure
that
that
doesn't
happen
here.
I
think
it's
important
to
note:
that's
not
what
the
type
of
tower
the
manufacturer
that
we're
going
to
be
using
and
to
the
extent
that
there
is
many
fading.
That's
really
a
crown
castle
issue,
not
verizon.
G
When
verizon
owns
the
tower
which
they
will
in
this
case,
then
we
have
sole
control
on
our
ability
to
manage
that
tower
and,
as
you
can
appreciate,
given
how
many
towers
and
facilities
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
accommodate
all
our
customers,
we
have
a
strong
incentive
to
make
sure
that
we're
maintaining
a
good
product
and
the
city
views
that
as
well
as
that,
would
affect
future
future
proposals
in
our
application.
It
also
appears
in
the
staff
report.
G
G
That
being
said,
we
did
check
with
the
manufacturer
to
get
some
additional
information
about
what
they
recommend
in
terms
of
timing
of
when
to
do
the
kind
of
maintenance,
and
they
didn't
have
any
specific
time
frame
in
which
they
made
that
recommendation
and
looking
at
some
of
our
existing
facilities.
You
know
the
ones
that
are
in
then
the
same
same
environment.
You
know
the
the
oldest
one.
G
We
have,
I
believe,
is
two
to
three
years
old,
so
we
don't
have
a
good
example
of
when
this
type
of
tower
is
going
to
need
replacement
tran
branches
or
some
additional
coloration
to
to
avoid
the
fading.
G
And
so
we
believe
the
condition
that
you
should
impose
that
verizon
is
is
offering
is
that
we
will
agree
to
do
a
biannual
inspection
of
the
tower
meaning
twice
per
year.
Every
six
months
inspect
the
tower
to
ensure
that
the
branches
intended
antenna
socks,
the
the
coloring,
is
still
sufficient
and
if
not
we'll
make
the
necessary
upgrades
or
repairs
to
ensure
that
it
is
well
maintained
and
the
reason
that
we
believe
that
this
approach
is
better
than
what
staff
had
suggested
and
into
you
know,
staff's
defense.
G
I
think
they
were
partially
saying
we're
not
really
sure
either
what
the
time
frame
is,
but
looking
at
that
bend
mall
example
or
looking
at
five
to
six
years.
We
think,
rather
than
picking
an
arbitrary
time
frame
and
again,
because
we
don't
have
any
basis
to
know
whether
five
six
years
or
any
other
time
frame
is
the
right
time
frame.
We
think
our
approach
is
better.
G
This
condition
will
ensure
that
we're
regularly
maintaining
it
and
because
it's
a
condition
of
approval,
provide
the
city,
some
enforcement
mechanism,
so
that
if
the
city
feels
that
the
tower
is
not
being
sufficiently
maintained,
they
can
rely
on
that
condition
to
say
that
we're
required
to
comply
with
that
condition
and
do
the
maintenance.
So
that's
our
proposal
on
addressing
the
maintenance
issue
and
then
real
quickly.
I'm
just
going
to
go
over
some
of
the
highlight
comments
that
I
saw
from
the
public
two
of
which
you
noted
and
give
you
our
perspective
on
those
issues.
G
There
were,
you
know,
a
fair
number
of
comments
about
property
values
and,
as
was
indicated,
the
citiban
code
doesn't
have
a
code
provision
in
which
reduction
in
property
values
is
a
relevant
criteria
and
there's
some
specific
case
law
that
relates
to
wireless
towers
and
the
one
of
the
key
cases
is
hill
versus
city
of
portland,
66,
oregon,
luba
250,
and
what
that
case
stands
for.
The
proposition
is
that,
in
particular,
with
wireless
towers,
the
absence
of
a
code
provision
or
approval
criteria
that
requires
consideration
of
property
values
precludes
the
jurisdiction
from
considering
it.
G
Case
law
lubricates
law
that,
even
if
it
is
relevant,
the
evidence
needs
to
be
specific
to
the
site,
not
sort
of
general
evidence
of
general
impacts
of
wireless
towers,
and
I
don't
think
we
have
any
specific
evidence
here.
Second
issue
that
you
asked
about.
Mr
frank:
was
that
what's
the
health
effects-
and
I
think
you
know,
as
heidi
indicated-
it's
you
know
not
relevant
under
the
criteria
and
also
it's
preempted
by
the
federal
telecommunications
act.
I
know.
Sometimes
people
get
frustrated
with
that
with
that
answer.
G
But
the
reason
for
that
is
that
you
know
health
impacts
a
very
complicated
type
of
issue
and
which
was
dealt
with
at
the
federal
level.
G
After
you
know
extensive
process,
all
parties
were
able
to
introduce
evidence
with
the
idea
that
we
need
to
have
a
national
standard,
because
otherwise
wireless
carriers
would
not
be
able
to
have
a
single
standard
that
they
could
use
and
would
be
subject
to
each
jurisdiction's
individual
standard
and
each
jurisdiction
or
someone
like
you
as
a
hearings
officer
trying
to
make
a
very
you
know,
complicated
decision
with
high
degree
of
science
and
technology
that
you
may
not
have
a
background
for
but
bottom
line.
G
There
is
that
federal
law
precludes
a
local
jurisdiction
from
considering
the
health
impacts.
So
long
as
we
can
demonstrate
that
we
comply
with
the
fcc
emission
standards.
G
We
provided
a
report
by
andrew
thatcher
that
addresses
that
issue,
and
the
conclusion
of
his
report
is
is
that
this
facility
will
be
at
seven
percent
of
the
public
exposure
limit.
So
it's
way
below
the
federal
limit.
That's
established
by
the
fcc,
saw
some
comments
related
to
the
tower's
proximity
to
a
residential
zone
in
school.
G
As
we
indicated
really
in
terms
of
our
ability
to
meet
our
objectives
for
this
site,
there
were
no
other
sites,
other
than
residentially
zoned
sites
and
the
the
the
benzone
development
code
doesn't
preclude,
citing
one
of
these
towers
adjacent
to
residential
properties.
What
it
does
do
is
it
requires
that
we,
as
I
indicated
earlier,
need
to
set
back
equal
to
or
greater
than
height
of
the
tower
from
any
adjacent
residential
properties,
which
we've
done
here.
G
Setbacks
of
70
feet
with
the
tower
that's
60
feet,
and
so
you
know
again,
we
comply
with
the
code,
there's
nothing
that
precludes
us
from
sighting
out
on
this
side,
not
standing
the
proximity
to
those
uses,
visibility,
aesthetics
came
up.
I
think
I
addressed
that
before
in
terms
of
the
standard
being
to
mitigate
or
minimize
the
impacts
which
we
believe
we've
done
with
the
minimum
height
stealth
design
in
a
site
that
will
help
blend
in
better
and
provide
additional
screening,
and
so
with
that.
Those
are
the
major
points
that
I
saw
from
the
public
comments.
G
But
again,
if
you
look
through
both
the
the
application
narrative
as
well
as
the
staff
report,
we've
addressed.
All
of
the
approval
criteria.
We
believe
we
comply
and
request
that
you
approve
the
application
subject
to
staff's
conditions
of
approval,
with
the
one
variation
of
the
maintenance
plan
being
a
requirement
that
we
do
a
bi-annual
inspection
of
the
tower
and
do
appropriate
maintenance
to
address
any
broken
branches,
fading,
etc,
and
with
that.
That
concludes
my
comments
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have.
A
I
have
no
questions
this
time.
I
may
have
them
during
your
opportunity
for
rebuttal.
I
thank
you.
Is
there
someone
else
you
wish
to
have
speak
on
behalf
of
the
applicant.
G
Yeah,
I
guess
I'll
just
ask
whether
tammy
colleen
is
there
anything
that
you
want
to
add
to
our
testimony.
This
is
colleen
duchasser.
I
do
not
have
anything
to
add
at
this
time.
A
Thank
you,
mr
connors.
Is
there
anyone
in
the
audience
who
wish
to
speak
in
support
of
in
favor
of
the
application?
B
A
B
We
do
have
one
person
this
time,
five,
four
one,
three
one,
eight.
I
am
going
to
go
ahead
and
unmute.
You
you'll
hear
two
beeps,
please
proceed.
Okay,
if.
I
I
My
comments
are
relevant
to
the
public
meeting
section
of
the
code
4.1.215
the
meeting
on
january
7th.
I
was
notified
that
there
would
be
a
public
meeting
and.
I
It
really
surprised
me
that
it
was
a
what
I
would
call
a
open
house
format.
There
was
a
greeter
I
did
sign
in,
but
the
greeter
misrepresented
the
height
of
the
project.
She
said
it
was
a
50-foot
tower
and
I
pointed
out
that
the
notification
I
had
called
it
a
60-foot
monopine
and
she
had
to
go,
ask
someone
she
gave
her
first
name
as
sandy.
By
the
way
I
didn't
know
her
affiliation
or
her
last
name.
I
And
by
the
way,
a
lot
of
these
comments,
I
did
correspond
with
heidi
kennedy
after
the
meeting
to
let
her
know,
I
thought
this
was
an
irregular
meeting,
so
I
did
sign
in
there
were
three
stations
with
information
and
there
was
no
single
presentation
for
the
group.
I
see
that
the
the
code,
this
call-out
presentation
at
a
public
meeting-
and
I
think
that
was
very
loosely
meet
that
definition,
but
it
was
really
not
a
presentation
and
in
front
of
the
whole
group.
I
There
was
like
I
said
these
three
stations
and
we
were
welcome
to
converse
with
these
three
people
representing
different
aspects
of
the
project.
I
We
were
always
able
to
ask
them
to
tell
us
what
they
wanted
us
to
know.
We
could
ask
them
any
questions
we
had
for
clarify
clarification,
but
it
was
not
done
in
a
in
an
open
format
where
everyone
could
hear
the
same
information
at
the
same
time.
So
I'd
say
because
of
people
coming
and
going
at
each
of
the
stations.
I
In
the
e-plans
I
did
see
that
there
was
two
documents:
verification
of
public
and
neighborhood
association,
meeting
and
applicants,
verification
of
compliance
with
city
of
bend
development
code.
These
are
documents
that
I
normally
at
a
pre
at
a
pre-application
meeting
will
have
presented
to
me
to
sign
off
on.
I
did
not.
I
asked
at
each
of
these
three
locations.
I
If
they
had
paperwork,
they
wanted
me
to
sign
and
they
were
innocent.
They
did
not
know
what
I
was
talking
about,
or
they
did
not
have
it
so
in
the
e-plans.
Now
I
see
the
forms
are
there.
My
signature
is
not
on
it.
They
did
note
that
I
was
in
attendance,
but
that
I
did
not
sign
and
then
I
objected
to
the
format
of
the
meeting.
So
I
did
that's
factual.
I
I
did
tell
them
that
I
did
not
understand
this
to
meet
the
norms
of
a
public
meeting,
but
the
forms
were
not
given
to
me
to
sign.
They
were
not.
They
were
not
available
during
the
meeting
that
I
was
there.
I
I
A
Thank
you
just
for
your
information,
ms
ellwood.
I
I
reviewed
a
document
provided
by
the
consulting
firm
dated
december
9
2019.
The
reason
that
I
mentioned,
that
is
it
rough.
It
has
attached
those.
A
I
believe
the
two
forms
that
you
were
talking
about
as
well
as
an
attendance
roster
I
do
have,
and
I'm
going
to
give
you
one
additional
opportunity
to
respond
on
this.
I
do
have
in
front
of
me
ben
city
code
4.1.215,
which
is
the
public
meeting
requirement
and
if
there's
anything
with
respect
to
that
particular
section
of
the
code
that
you'd
like
me
to
to
take
notice
of
I'm
going
to
give
you
an
opportunity
to
talk
about
that
right.
J
I
The
presentation
at
the
public
meeting
must
include
the
following,
so
I
just
I'm
questioning
whether
there
actually
was
a
presentation
also
there's
an
opera
section,
six,
an
opportunity
for
the
public
to
provide
comments,
and
that
was
actually
that
did
occur.
But
it
wasn't
in
response
to
a
unified
presentation.
A
Thank
you.
Anyone
else
wishing
to
testify
in
the
neutral
section
of
this
hearing.
B
A
Okay,
my
guess
is
that
there's
probably
let's
just
keep
you
on
the
line.
Okay,
my
guess
is:
there's
probably
not
another
neutral
person,
but
there
may
be
a
couple
in
opposition.
I'm
assuming
you're
in
the
opposition
section
of
the
testimony.
A
K
Ahead,
sir
yeah
I'm
in
opposition
of
the
cell
tower-
and
I
want
to
start
by
saying-
I
really
appreciate
all
the
amount
of
details
not
only
for
ms
kennedy
putting
together
her
staff
report,
but
also
the
narrative
that
the
team
put
together
on
the
thornhill
project.
I
just
wanted
to
start
by
by
stating
bend
development
code
3.73.
K
It
says,
except
for
type
1
applications.
The
applicant
must
include
analysis
of
alternative
sites
facility
within
the
inside,
outside
of
the
city
and
they're
capable
of
meeting
the
same
service
objectives
as
a
preferred
site
with
equivalent
or
lesser
visual
impact.
If
a
new
tower
is
proposed,
the
applicant
must
demonstrate
the
need
for
a
new
tower
and
why
the
alternative
locations
cannot
be
used
to
meet
the
identified
service
objectives.
K
K
The
proposed
location
needs
to
be
close
to
mountain
view,
high
school
as
possible,
since
that
demand
has
come
from
high
school
now.
Listen,
I
understand
there
is
a
demand
coming
from
that
house-
there's-
probably
1500
cell
phones
that
show
up
during
that
day
out
there.
But
my
question
comes
back
to
the
thornhill
density
map
that
got
submitted.
It
was
shown
over
a
four-day
period
in
february
of
2020,
which
we
know
is
pre-coveted
times,
but
they
didn't
state
the
time
they
didn't
state
that
the
date
that
it
was
going
in
there.
K
K
K
Also,
regarding
that
the
alternative
site
analysis
again
on
page
10
of
the
staff
report
that
talks
about
hey
needing
it
for
the
for
the
high
school
out
there?
What
were
the
other
locations
that
were
potentially
looked
at
I'm
concerned
that
this
was
a
commercial
space
that
fit
the
that
fit
the
requirements
that
they
needed
to?
They
got
approval
from
the
person
that
owns
the
lot
and
they
just
went
with
that
option
did
not
really
look
at
anything
else.
K
I'm
interested
to
know
what
other
potential
venues
are
there.
We
do
have
a
very
large
park
in
pine
nursery
with
lots
of
open
space
out
there,
I'm
sure
something
could
have
been
facilitated
there.
There's
the
forest
service
department,
they
have
a
bone
yard
where
they
store
facilities.
They
have
things
that
have
400
square
feet
of
space,
potentially
get
used.
Again.
I
don't
own
those
lots.
I
don't
know
the
story
behind
that,
but
without
having
that
outlined
in
detail
why
these
other
venues
aren't
options.
I
find
it
hard
to
believe
that
this
is.
K
The
only
solution
is
to
put
this
thing
within
75
feet
of
residential
property,
since
you
are
requesting
the
use
of
a
conditional
use
perimeter
especially
used
permit.
To
put
this
thing
in,
I
think
we
should
look
at
every
possible
scenario
before
we
decide
to
put
something
as
a
blatant
eyesore
as
a
cell
tower
in
people's
backyards.
K
Referring
to
negative
visual
impact,
I
have
visited
all
the
other
cell
towers
in
the
area
out
there,
the
one
that's
next
to
big
sky,
I
visited
several
other
cell
towers,
the
one
that's
at
the
bend
river
mall
and
these
are
not
conducive
with
what
you'd
expect
in
and
around
a
residential
area.
K
Not
only
are
they
extremely
tall,
it's
over
60
feet,
tall
or
60
feet
tall.
This
one
is
going
to
be
presented
here,
that's
going
to
have
a
huge
radius
for
everybody
in
that
area.
To
see
I
mean
I
can
see
this
from
my
house.
I
have
people
that
live
next
door
to
me
that
it's
going
to
be
right
in
there,
literally
in
the
front
view
from
right
out
the
door
out
there.
So,
to
tell
me
that
this
isn't
going
to
affect
my
property
value,
I
mean
that
is
just
an
asinine
comment.
K
You
go
out
and
buy
a
house.
Are
you
going
to
be
purchasing
a
house
right
next
to
a
cell
tower?
Are
you
going
to
try
to
find
someplace,
that's
away
from
a
cell
tower,
obviously
price
location
or
all
things
that
are
going
to
be
brought
in
there,
but
why
should
we
be
subjected
to
a
giant
cell
tower
in
our
front
yard?
We
all
know
that
that's
not
going
to
have
great
resale
for
us,
so
I
don't
like
that
from
that
standpoint
out
there,
but
also
images
were
submitted.
K
I'm
looking
at
the
staff
report
that
heidi
kennedy
put
together,
I'm
on
page
seven.
These
are
showing
monopolies
again.
This
is
not
the
same
contractor
that
is
interested
in
putting
the
cell
tower
in
at
the
thornhill
resident,
but
this
is
a
similar
cell
tower.
K
This
is
a
cell
tower
that
is
a
monopine,
that's
hidden
with
these
fake
branches,
which
is
quite
honestly
an
insult
to
us
because
they
don't
look
anything
like
a
pine
tree
and
my
question
to
the
to
the
consultant
would
be
you
submitted
a
picture
of
what
your
tower
would
look
like
in
your
narrative
and
it's
just
clearly
a
cell
tower.
Excuse
me
a
pine
tree
that
has
been
photoshopped
into
the
picture
and
it's
not
actually
what
the
cell
tower
would
look
like.
K
K
Looking
at
the
staff
report,
as
I
scroll
down
to
page
eight
of
22
here,
and
it
shows
the
monopine
that
is
a
distressed,
looking
monopine,
that's
currently
at
the
bend
river
mall
and
it
does
have
new
cell
socks
or
whatever,
whatever
we
call
these
cell
tower
socks
that
go
over
the
top
of
there.
So
these
are
green,
but
everything
else
around
it
is
dead
and
decaying.
Now
I
did
visit
this
cell
tower
yesterday.
K
It
doesn't
look
as
bad
as
it
is
in
this
image
if
you
will
in
person,
but
it
certainly
looks
like
lipstick
on
a
pig.
If
you
ask
me,
with
these
green
socks,
put
a
top
something
that
does
not
look
like
a
cell
tower.
So
this
is
a
blatant
eyesore
right
in
the
backyard
of
many
residents
out
here
which
will
bring
down
the
property
values
whether
the
reports
or
studies
have
shown
or
not.
It's
just
general.
K
You
know
it's
obvious
everybody's
gonna
be
able
to
notice
this
stuff
so
based
on
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
any
other
information
out
there.
We
know
this
is
gonna,
have
a
negative
impact
on
us.
I
I
truly
a
proponent
of
this
and
and
oppose
the
the
installation
of
this
thornhill
tower.
Thank
you.
B
Yes,
next
we
have
609
558
you'll,
hear
two
beeps.
Please
please
proceed.
H
A
Let's
both
take
two
breaths
and
then
because
they
won't
interrupt
each
other
and
then
give
me
your
last
name
spelling.
Please.
H
H
The
national
institute
for
science
law
and
public
policy
found
that
94
of
home
buyers
of
those
surveyed
are
less
interested
and
would
pay
less
for
a
property
located
near
a
cell
tower
or
antenna.
Obviously,
that's
impartial,
unbiased
research,
but
I
think
if
any
of
us
asked
ourselves
the
question
would
we
do
the
same?
H
I
think
it
would
be
a
representation
of
self-interest
in
this
case
to
say
that
we
wouldn't
be
bothered
by
it.
In
addition
to
that,
there
is
a
published
report
called
the
impact
of
cell
phone
towers
on
house
prices
and
residential
neighborhoods.
You
can
actually
google
that
exact
text
and
you
can
find
that
study
and
this
study
found
that
buyers
would
pay
as
much
as
20
less
as
determined
at
the
time
by
an
opinion
survey
in
addition
to
a
sales
price
analysis.
H
H
The
process
leading
up
to
attending
decision
has
essentially
cornered
a
lot
of
us
as
home
buyers
into
this
feeling
of
corporate
interest
versus
public
interest,
and
I
know
myself
had
I
known
that
this
was
something
on
the
horizon
to
put
within
this
community.
I
would
have
not
bought
this
home.
H
There's
just
no
question
that
I
would
have
done
it.
I
would
have
bought
somewhere
else
and
for
those
of
us
who
live
in
bend-
and
I
know
that
members
of
the
representative
party
and
the
applicant-
they
don't
live
here
and
it's
different.
It's
just
different
when
you
live
somewhere.
The
context
is
different.
How
things
affect
you?
How
decisions
affect
you
are
different
and
the
realities
of
what's
at
stake
are
different
as
well.
H
H
That
needs
to
be
done
because
had
they
audited
or
considered
the
community
interest
in
this
going
in
as
a
part
of
their
report,
I
don't
even
think
we'd
be
having
this
hearing,
because
they
know
that
there's
such
strong
opposition
to
its
construction
that
it'd
be
hard
for
them
to
walk
with
the
conclusion
that
yeah,
the
neighborhood
doesn't
mind
that
this
is
something
on
the
horizon.
H
No,
that's
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
F
C
D
I'd
like
to
begin
by
as
it's
just
a
matter
of
housekeeping,
I
submitted
a
letter
this
morning
and
I
just
want
to
make
certain
it's
become
a
part
of
the
record
for
this
hearing.
A
I'm
going
to
ask
miss
kennedy
because
I
reviewed
the
e-plans
record,
probably
about
seven
seven
thirty
this
morning,
so
I'm
not
sure
I'm
trying
to
pull
it
up
real,
quick.
D
I
don't
think
I
I
don't
think
it
probably
hit
her
office
until
8
45.
A
F
We
have
I've,
I
was
able
to
upload.
While
I
was
at
the
very
last
minute
two
applications
or
two
emails.
I
received
right
before
the
meeting
and
they
are
uploaded
to
all
three
applications.
D
Okay,
go
ahead,
mrs
carl.
Second,
I
would
like
to
pretty
much
ditto
everything
that
jeff
rhodes
had
to
say,
and
I'd
like
to
place
specific
emphasis
on
the
fact
that
the
photographer's
renditions
in
the.
D
I
also
noticed
in
the
document
that
it
says
and
I'm
trying
to
find
it
here.
I
thought
I
wasn't
going
to
be
up
next,
but
that
this
is
going
to
the
the
new
or
the
the
type
of
monopine
that
they're
proposing
is
going
to
completely
obscure
all
antennas
wires.
D
That
requires
more
than
simply
substantial
adherence
to
that
promise
that
there
would
be
some
kind
of
a
penalty
if
you
will,
if
they
don't
comply
with
that,
because
then
the
tower
has
to
come
down,
because
this
is
a
bit.
That's
a
big
thing
to
put
into
a
document
to
say
that
all
the
antennas
all
the
wires.
D
D
D
The
last
thing-
and
I
don't
know
if
we're
going
to
have
it
an
opportunity
to
talk
about
this
at
the
end,
I
think
we
probably
will,
but
I'm
I'm
leaning
towards
requesting
the
record
to
remain
open
for
a
few
days.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
trouble
with
the
shot
clock
for
the
fcc
shot
clock,
nor
with
the
oregon
review
period,
looks
to
me
like
right
now
we're
on
day
26
of
the
oregon
and
48
of
the
150
for
the
shot
clock,
and
I'm
keeping
that
in
mind.
D
I
I'm
considering
that
that
might
be
a
good
thing
to
do
with
this
application
after
this
meeting-
and
I
think
that's
it.
A
Let
me
just
in
this
is
one
of
those
things
where
we
can't
be
half
in
and
half
out,
you're
you're
either
going
to
be
requesting
the
record
to
remain
open
or
you're,
not.
A
Know-
and
I
apologize,
I
thought
I
thought
I'd
covered-
that
better
and
apparent.
Obviously
I
didn't
I
during
testimony
is:
is
when
most
people
ask
and-
and
they
ask
isn't
so
much
just
an
ask-
it
is,
and
I'm
not
trying
to
be
negative
to
any
side
it's
more
of
a
demand,
because
once
they
make
that
demand,
it's
it's.
It's
a
done
deal
it's
it's
the
bell's
wrong.
A
If
somebody
asks
the
record
rule
remain
open,
if
no
one
asks
then
the
record
will
not
remain
open,
and
it's
highly
unusual
for
me
to
on
my
own
motion
or
decision
to
to
ask
people
to
come
back
and
talk
about
that
at
the
end.
So
from
that
perspective,
I
apologize
that
you,
if
you
want
that
request
to
be
made,
I'm
asking
you
make
it
now.
D
A
That's
correct:
do
you
mind
if
I
and
I
apologize
to
both
the
applicant
and
anyone
else
as
well
as
ms
kennedy,
but
I
can
I'm
willing
to
ask
on
your
behalf
whether
or
not
a
21
day
actually
be
42
days
if
42
days,
which
would
include
the
open
record
period
as
well
as
as
my
decision-making
time?
Is
that
going
to
put
us
in
jeopardy
of
violating
either
the
the
counties
when
I
or
the
city's
120-day
clock
or
the
federal
shop
clock,
miss
kennedy.
A
I'm
sorry
how
tight
on
I'm
just
going
to
rephrase
it?
How
tight
are
we
on
the
shot
clock
and
the
and
the
city's
time
clock.
F
A
Okay
and
thank
you,
miss
kennedy
that
was
based
on
the
review
of
the
staff
report
showed
plenty
of
time,
at
least
for
me,
to
make
a
decision
whether
or
not
there's
an
additional
appeal
to
the
city
council
or
whatever,
I'm
not
even
going
to
get
into
that.
So
I'm
going
back
to
you
miss
carl.
A
A
Well,
typically,
what
I
find
to
be
the
fairest
is,
I
keep
the
record
open
for
seven
days
for
new
evidence,
seven
days
for
responsive
evidence
and
seven
days
for
the
applicant
and
under
at
least
the
the
state
law
for
the
which
which
respects
the
the
city
is
the
final.
I
don't
believe
the
final
seven
day
rebuttal
period
counts
against
the
shot
clock.
Mr
connor
will
certainly
correct
me
on
that.
If
I'm
wrong.
A
That's
where
I
came
up
with
it.
That's
where
I
came
up
with
the
21
days,
and
that
was
just
I
was
trying
to
look
at
a
worst
case
scenario.
If
it
takes
me
21
days
to
do
my
decision
and
the
record
was
open
for
21
days.
I
still
don't
think
just
to
my
initial
observation
that
we're
we're
pushing
the
shock
clock
issue.
D
D
I
I
believe
I
I'm
going
to
withdraw
that.
I
just
had
further
thought
about
it
with
the
amount
that
I
put
into
the
record
this
morning,
I
I'm
going
to
withdraw
that
request.
Okay,.
A
I
respect
that
and
I'm
glad
we
had
the
discussion
for
those.
C
A
It
can
be
quite
serious
for
a
city
to
take
longer
than
the
state
allows
it,
or
the
federal
government
allows
it
to
make
a
decision
and
the
consequences
are
not
typically
beneficial
to
the
opposition,
but
that's
just
a
general
statement,
so
I
appreciate
very
much
miss
carl's
knowledge
as
as
well
as
her
her
concerns.
So
no
request
for
the
record
to
remain
open
has
been
made
at
this
time.
Anything
else
miss
carl.
D
There
is,
there
was
one
thing
that
I'd
forgotten
that
I
want
to
bring
to
your
attention.
I
I
put
it
into
my
letter
today,
but
just
it's
something
that
I
think
should
be
discussed,
and
that
is
one
of
the
people
brought
up
earlier
that
and
I
think
it
was.
I
think
it
was
my
mr
connors
that
this
the
need
for
a
tower
at
this
particular
site
is
based
on
the
need
generated
by
the
high
school
and
in.
D
D
D
The
only
reference
to
the
high
school
is
in
a
letter
that
was
respond
that
the
applicant
submitted
in
response
to
the
city's,
deeming
the
application
incomplete,
and
at
that
time
they
stated
that
it
was
due
to
needing
to
offload
some
things
because
the
high
school
of
the
demand
of
the
high
school
and
even
talked
about
if
it
could
get
closer
to
the
high
school.
That
would
be
great.
D
D
How
did
helen
henry
pages
is
in
this
document
that
they
submitted
about
40
pages
or
so,
and
that's
where
it's
all
related
to
activity
along
the
butler
market?
Road.
That's
the
last
comment.
I
have.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
comments.
Is
there
anyone
else
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition.
B
Yes,
we
do
have
a
few.
More
mr
frank,
with
your
permission,
I
would
like
to
we
had
some
members
of
the
public
joining
us
after
we
provided
instructions.
Is
it
okay,
if
I
remind
everyone
how
to
raise
their
hand?
Please
do
yes,
hello,
everyone
for
those
of
you
who
join
us
late
today.
I
would
like
to
remind
you
that
use.
Please
use
your
keypad
on
your
phone
and
dial
start
three.
B
We
will
call
on
your
phone
numbers
area
code
and
prefix.
You
will
hear
two
beeps
and
that
will
signify
that
you
are
unmuted.
Please
provide
us
with
your
full
name
and
physical
address.
Once
you
are
done,
providing
your
comment,
we
ask
that
you
once
again
press
star
3
to
lower
your
hand.
Now
I
will
proceed
with
the
next
person
in
line
here.
I
have
541
306.
I
E
I
know
you
talked
about
trying
not
to
repeat
what
other
people
have
said,
but
so
I
will
try
not
to
do
that,
but
first
off
I
live
in
hunters
highland
I
bought
here
because
of
we
are
a
homeowners
association.
We
have.
We
have
certain
rules
which
were
appealing
to
me
when
I
bought
this
property.
E
Also
because
I
come
from
a
place
that
had
spokane
I
mean
I
was
born
and
raised
in
redmond,
but
anyway
I
lived
in
spokane
where
we
had
ice
storms
had
power
go
out,
for
you
know
almost
a
week,
so
underground
power
was
really
important
to
me.
We
don't
have
any
power
lines
in
our
neighborhood.
We
actually
do
not
have
even
any
street
lights,
so
the
new
roundabout.
E
We
will
have
our
first
street
light
in
the
neighborhood,
and
so
it's
really
important
in
the
hunters
highland
that
we
have
rules
and
we
bought
here
for
a
long
duration.
E
You
know
for
for
profit
and
to
have
something
like
this
decided
and
I
understand
we're
in
a
coba
19
situation,
but
this
is
a
very
serious
situation
and
then
I
kind
of
object
to
this
phone
process
because
I
don't
think
every
neighbor
has
a
have,
has
the
opportunity
then
to
testify
and
because
this
is
something
that
once
it's
decided
it's
here
to
stay,
and
so
this
is
for
a
long
period
of
time,
and
so
it's
very
serious
and
I
find
it
highly
unlikely
that
that
power-
I
guess
it's
75
feet
from
the
house
there
on
the
corner
of
jill
and
butler
market,
and
that's
all
I'm
going
to
say
about
that,
but
I
and
then
the
site
location.
E
I
do
find
it
highly
unlikely
that
just
one
year
ago,
I
can
see
why
verizon
didn't
request
this
a
year
ago,
because
the
property
right
across
from
the
store
was
for
sale
and
it
was
for
sale
for
a
long
time.
It
would
have
been
a
perfect
place
for
their
their
site,
this
corner
all
to
itself,
but
no,
no
somebody
else
bought
it.
Obviously
it
wasn't
them,
and
so
we
have
a
little
convenience
store
in
our
neighborhood,
and
that
is
for
convenience.
It's
a
it's!
A
commercial
store,
it's
not
for
power
alliance.
It's
not
for.
E
For
verizon
transmission
lines,
this
is
something
this
is
where
we
live,
and
this
is
where
we
raise
our
kids
and
health
is
important
to
us,
but
anyway,
and
then
the
problem
is
that
it's
going
to
be
a
pine
tree
and
there's
not
a
pine
tree
on
the
property.
There's
all
juniper
trees-
and
this
is
where
we
live.
It's
juniper
and
so
a
pine
tree
is
going
to
look
very
awkward
next
to
a
whole
bunch
of
juniper
trees.
E
So
anyway,
and
then
the
other
thing,
I
really
have
a
hard
thing:
understanding
is
the
site
location
now
the
school.
This
is
gonna,
obviously
work
out
great
for
them,
so
they
have
a
lot
of
property.
They
could
build
the
thing
in
the
back
of
the
school
where
it
wouldn't
be
an
eyesore
and
it's
going
to
benefit
them.
They
said
no
and
then
the
city
that
owns
the
park.
They
said
no,
but
now
this
is
on
us,
so
they've
decided
that
well,
we'll
just
put
it
in
this
location.
E
E
and
then
the
willingness
landlord
I
used
to
be
a
landlord,
of
course
he's
going
to
say
yes
now,
I've
had
renters
that
all
my
other
tenants
hated
them
the
landlord's
going
to
make
money.
So
of
course,
he's
going
to
say
yes,
so
he
shouldn't
even
have
a
say
in
this
okay
and
then
I'm
sorry,
it's
it's
very.
E
This
is
a
very
serious
time,
we're
in
a
very
serious
pandemic
and
again
I
do
want
to
object
to
the
type
of
leading
we
have.
I
don't
think
that
it's
fair
for
the
rest
of
the
neighbors,
and
I
think
that
that
this
thing
should
stay
open,
because
there
is
some
more
evidence.
I
think
that
we
should
be
able
to
submit,
or
for
us
to
at
least
be
able
to
look
at,
and
I
hope
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
that
that
question
is
asked.
That's
all
I
have
to
say.
A
All
right,
mr
griffin
you're
pointing
out
as
as
did
your
preceding
person,
who
testified,
perhaps
something
that
I
didn't
explain
as
clearly
as
as
I
should
have,
and
that's
why
I
took
so
much
time
with
miss
curl's
question
about
keeping
the
record
open.
Is
that
the
record
there's
not
going
to
be
a
discussion
at
the
end
of
this
hearing
about
whether
or
not
the
record
will
remain
open?
A
E
Well,
I
don't
have
all
the
evidence
and
I
would
like
to
hear
what
other
people
have
to
say.
First
and
before
I
make
a
decision.
E
Well,
the
way
you
describe
it,
I
don't
understand
the
shot
clock
there
again.
I
don't
have
all
the
information,
and
this
is
a
very
serious
matter
and
we're
doing
it
over
a
phone.
So
when
you
start
putting
restrictions
like
that
on
it,
I
I
just
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
know
what
the
shot
clock
is.
I
don't
know
there
again
how
this
works.
I
know
that
verizon
has
had
years
and
years
to
do
to
think
about
this
and
then
you're
putting
a
time
limit
on
it.
A
E
Not
the
one
what
and
what
does
it
say
in
a
meeting
where
it
has
to
be
via
phone
now
we're
in
a
covet
situation
like
this
is
very,
very
important.
A
Mr
griffin,
I'm
going
to
ask
you,
stop
right
there,
I'm
going
to
tell
you
that
from
my
understanding
and
miss
kennedy,
you
are
certainly
invited
at
this
point
in
time
to
to
respond
to
the
reason
and
the
authority
for
holding
a
webex
platform
hearing.
It
seemed
to
me
I've
seen
it.
I
just
don't.
Have
it
sitting
right
in
front
of
me
and
you
may
respond
to
that
later.
If
you'd
like.
A
Okay,
I'm
going
to
go
out
of
order
just
a
little
bit
because
there
there
apparently
is
and-
and
I'm
not
sure
quite
why.
But
there
is
apparently
some
confusion
and
or
concern
being
expressed
with
respect
to
these
clocks,
and
there
is
at
least
one
way
that
I
can
avoid
any
timing
issues.
And
so
mr
connor,
I'm
assuming
you're
still
around.
A
Yeah,
okay,
I'm
glad
I
woke
you
back
up
all
right.
A
You
could
make
my
life
a
whole
lot
easier
here
and
I
don't
know
what
your
project
timing
is
on
this
product
on
this
particular
one.
But
if
you
would
agree
to
request
the
record
remain
open,
I
can
keep
it
for
seven
and
seven
if
you
like
so
technically
your
your
your
your
client
is
extending
this
process
potentially
by
seven
days.
Could
I
get
your
permission?
Well
actually,
could
I
get
you
to
request?
The
record
remain
open
for
a
seven
and
seven
period.
G
Yes,
mr
frank,
we
would
like
to
ask
that
the
record
be
left
open.
I
guess
I
would
propose
that
777,
which
would
be
you
know,
seven
days
for
new
evidence
a
seven
day
period
for
any
rebuttal
evidence
limited
to
responses
to
new
evidence
submitted
during
the
first
seven
days,
and
then
we
would
ask
an
opportunity
for
a
closing
argument
on
the
third
seven
day
and,
as
you
indicated
by
that
being
our
request,
that
would
allow
for
an
extension
of
the
120-150
day,
shot
clocks.
A
I
appreciate
that
you
know
and,
and
that's
the
end
of
the
conversation
I'm
going
to
have
with
you
at
this
point
in
time-
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
mr
griffin,
mr
mayday,
could
you
put
mr
griffin
back
on
the
line,
or
can
he
get
back
on
hello
yeah,
mr
griffin?
You
there?
A
A
Mr
connors
has
now
requested
the
record
remain
open,
so
you
don't
have
to
do
that
all
right,
and
so,
at
the
end
of
the
hearing
I
will
be
talking
about
the
logistics
of
the
open
record
period
in
which
you
can
submit,
as
well
as
anyone
else
may
submit
evidence
into
the
public
record
in
this
case,
of
which
I
can
consider
in
in
making
my
decision.
Do
you
understand
that.
E
Yes,
and
is
there
a
way
that
we
can
ask
for
evidence
like
the
first
gentleman
talked
about?
Was
the
site
locations.
A
A
This
isn't
like
a
courtroom
where
I
can
actually
issue
an
order
that
somebody
produce
a
document
or
or
subpoena
a
witness.
I
can't
do
that,
but
your
request
is
so
noted
and
I
think
mr
connor
connors
has
been
put
on
notice
as
well
as
the
the
applicant's
team,
the
kind
of
information
that
both
mr
rhodes
and
you
have
made
in
this
case.
H
Comment,
oh
yeah,
this
is
justin
bronson
again
I
apologize.
I
don't
remember
raising
my
hand
a
second
time.
Oh.
B
H
H
But
I
would
like
to
echo
really
quick:
doug
is
a
neighbor
of
mine
and
he's
actually
really
right
across
the
street
from
where
my
family
lives,
and
I
would
like
to
echo
what
he
said
as
far
as
you
know:
interest
in
the
community
interest
in
the
neighborhood
investments,
the
property.
All
of
that
our
neighborhood
is
what
some
suburban
neighborhoods
you
have.
Properties
are
owned
by
individuals
who
don't
live
here
and
they're
rented
out.
H
That
is
not
an
abnormality
to
central
oregon,
since
it
is
a
destination
market,
you
do
get
outside
investors
that
buy
property
and
then
rent
to
short-term
tenants,
but
for
I've
been
here
for
10
years.
I
know
doug's
been
here
for
longer
than
that,
if
not
right
around
the
same
time
period
and
the
majority,
maybe
man
95,
of
the
property
owners
within
our
neighborhood,
who
are
directly
arguably
the
most
proximate
to
the
proposed
site.
H
For
this
tower,
we've
we've
invested
with
the
interest
that
this
property
would
actually
grow
in
value,
long
term
that
has
kind
of
been
under
some
attack.
If
you
will
different
changes
to
the
market
financial
uncertainty,
things
like
that
regarding
covid
and
even
with
financial
crisis
about
10
years
ago,
different
things
anyways,
our
our
investment
into
this
community
is
a
long-term
stake.
It's
a
long-term
investment,
and
I
just
want
to
echo
what
doug
said
that
the
other
parties
involved.
H
This
is
a
this-
is
a
momentary
thing
for
them.
This
is
a
this
is
a
decision
on
a
small
timeline.
I
know
maybe
they've
been
working
on
it
for
a
few
years,
but
it's
it's
a
part
of
their
job.
It's
a
part
of
their
work
for
the
applicant.
It's
a
part
of
their
growth
strategy
for
their
business
model.
I
work
professionally
in
grant
consulting.
So
I
understand
the
applicant's
interests
in
this
are
purely
financial.
H
I
totally
see
that
and
I
get
that,
but
the
financial
interest
is
coming
at
the
compromise
and
at
the
expense
of
those
who
live
here,
and
I
personally
don't
believe
in
philosophy
that
financial
gain
should
come
at
the
detriment
of
others.
A
Thank
you,
sir,
and
for
those
of
you,
I
let
mr
bronson
continue
with
that.
Despite
the
fact
that
he's
already
testified,
I
appreciate
his
testimony,
but
I'm
not
going
to
be
having
others
testify
more
than
one
time
that
that
are
not
in
the
group
of
that
I've
talked
about
proceeding
mr
omega.
Let's
get
somebody
for
the
first
time.
B
All
right
we
have
541
923
you'll,
hear
two
beeps.
Please.
B
L
L
L
Okay,
hi,
I
am
colleen,
I
am
employed
by
bluefish,
dental
and
orthodontics
the
owner
of
that
building.
Dr
catherine
claus
is
currently
the
patient,
so
I'm
stepping
in
for
her,
and
we
are
just
wanting
to
first
of
all
mirror
and
agree
with
what
everyone
has
said
before
us.
We
don't
have
a
vested
interest
financially
as
far
as
homes,
because
we
don't
live
in
that
area.
We
do
have
the
business
there
at
bluefish
dental.
So
we
are.
L
We
basically
share
a
parking
lot
with
the
subject
property,
so
our
concerns
are
similar
to
what
everyone
else's
is
concerning
health
and
the
visibility
of
the
tower
and
how
it
looks
in
the
neighborhood
and
then
additionally,
which
other
people
haven't
spoken
about
that
probably
don't
relate
to
them
is
with
us
in
our
area.
In
that
parking
lot.
We
share
that
parking
lot
with
the
coffee,
kiosk
the
grocery
store
in
front
of
us,
a
bluefish
dental
ourselves,
and
then
the
businesses
that
are
in
front
of
us,
which
would
be
like
a.
C
L
Salon
a
gun
shop,
I
believe,
and
big
o
bagel,
so
we
all
share
that
parking
lot
in
the
back
and
there
are
a
lot
of
delivery
trucks
that
come
into
that
area
and
they're
big
they're
semi
trucks
that
come
in
to
deliver
and
have
a
hard
time
with
all
the
people
parking
back
there
getting
turned
around.
So
I
had
a
couple
of
questions.
I
couldn't
tell
in
the
paperwork
that
we
got
in
the
mail
concerning
this
conditional
use
permit
if
that
enclosure
and
that
cell
tower
takes
away
at
all
from
our
parking
lot.
L
Okay,
that
would
be
helpful.
So
that's
a
concern,
but
bottom
line
is:
you
know,
we're
in
the
back
of
a
parking
lot
of
a
grocery
store,
so
it
already
isn't
the
most
scenic
area
to
have
your
business
facing.
So
that's
a
concern
that
now
we're
going
to
add
a
cell
phone
tower.
That's
going
to
look
completely
out
of
place
along
with
this
big
fence
and
the
space.
All
of
that
that's
included.
We
also
have
a
lot
of
traffic
in
that
parking
lot
from
the
high
school.
L
You
know
when
covet
isn't
happening
and
they're
actually
going
to
high
school.
We
have
a
lot
of
kids
coming
through
there
at
lunch
time
before
and
after
school
and
hanging
out.
So
I
would
just
also
be
concerned
about
any
safety
issues
with
having
lots
of
high
school
students
in
in
and
around
that
area,
where
that
cell
phone
tower
is
going
to
be
we're
at
pediatric
office
so
also
again
concerned
about
health
concerns.
L
I
heard
you
talk
about
that
that
doesn't
really
matter
as
long
as
the
federal
guidelines
are
met,
but
it's
still
a
concern
for
us.
We
are
a
pediatric
practice,
so
we
see
all
kids
in
our
office
and,
of
course,
trinity
lucent
was
right
across
the
street
as
well.
So
those
are
mainly
our
concerns
about
the
the
cell
phone
charm.
Just
checking
my
notes,
yep,
that's
it!
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
ma'am.
I
appreciate
your
testimony,
mr
almeida.
B
M
M
If
I
can
proceed,
thank
you
thank
you,
so
I
I
just
want
to.
Unfortunately,
I
don't
have
any
additional
evidence
to
submit.
M
I
do
want
to
echo
the
evidence
and
the
community
concerns
that
have
been
expressed
very
eloquently
by
a
number
of
previous
callers,
specifically
the
the
potential
for
property
value
losses
for
health
risks
that
are
unknown,
of
course,
and
and
then
also
add
to
some
of
the
comments
that
have
been
made
about
really
the
mismatch
of
the
the
height
of
this
structure
to
to
all
surrounding
areas
which,
of
course,
will
both
contribute
to
the
visual
impacts,
the
community
character
and,
of
course,
the
the
property
values
it's
for.
M
M
I
think
the
the
one
thing
that
I
would
add
is
related
to
the
to
the
the
what
I'll
call
this
disproportionate
distribution
of
the
risks
and
benefits
here.
Clearly,
the
benefits
will
entirely
accrue
to
the
the
property
owners
into
verizon,
whereas
all
of
the
risks
and
the
burden
of
potential
risk
both
the
property,
values
and
and
and
health
risks-
and
you
know
other
factors
that
have
been
well
articulated
all
of
those
are
being
born
by
the
residents
and
the
businesses
in
this
area.
M
Of
course,
the
to
I
understand,
or
what
I've
heard
at
least,
is
that
there
are
some
land
use,
state
and
federal
laws
that
require
a
some
level
of
evidence
and
substantiation
for
these
types
of
risks,
both
market-based
and
health
based
and
yet
we're
the
ones
as
the
property
owners
and
the
people
who
live
and
work
in
this
neighborhood
who
who
are
most
burdened
by
that
or
most
impacted,
because
we
cannot.
M
We
don't
have
the
resources,
of
course,
to
pull
together
a
full
40,
50,
60,
000
market
study
health
study
specific
to
this
project.
M
So
to
me
you
know
in
the
in
the
in
the
I
guess
what
I
would
say
is
you
know,
given
these
risks
and
this
disproportionate
sharing
of
the
risks
to
the
residents
and
the
and
the
the
other
businesses
in
the
area.
I
would
encourage
the
city
to
to
err
on
the
side
of
caution
and
to
side
in
favor
of
those
who
have
to
bear
those
risks,
whether
or
not
the
the
full
technical
and
scientific
and
market
evidence
can
be
submitted.
M
Otherwise,
so
that's
my
comment
and
again
I
reiterate
everything
else
that
has
been
said
by
all
of
the
other
people
submitting
evidence.
Thank
you.
A
Sir,
I
appreciate
your
testimony
very
much
very
well
said
next
person,
mr
alameda.
B
I
do
not
see
anybody
else
who
is
new.
Mr
frank,.
A
Okay,
at
this
point
in
time,
if
you
have
not
spoken,
have
not
spoken
and
wish
to
provide
me
with
some
testimony
or
evidence,
could
you
make
sure
you
raise
your
hand
or
whatever
is
necessary?
It's
if
you're
on
the
telephone,
star
3
if
you're
on
webex
raise
your
hand.
This
is
kind
of
like
going
once
going
twice
we're
in
the
auction
period,
where
we're
just
about
ready
to
accept
a
bid.
B
J
Hi,
my
name
is
barbara
and
I
live
at
21310,
northeast
brooklyn
court
and
I'm
in
direct
opposition
with
this
cell
tower
and
my
children
do
go
to
trinity
librarian
school
and
there
have
been
a
lot
of
risks
involved.
These
cell
towers,
and
I
want
to
know
if
mountain
view
high
school,
is
requesting
for
this
stock
tower
for
their
school.
Why
are
they
putting
it
closer
like
directly
across
the
street,
from
the
school,
where
I
have
two
children
who
attend
there
and
they're
putting
everybody's
health
at
risk,
people
who
are
directly
looked
behind
them?
J
He
has
an
attorney
by
the
name
of
daphna
and
jasmine
tackover
is
her
name
and
she's,
provided
a
lot
of
evidence
for
the
health
issues
that
have
come
about
even
in
oregon
in
the
state
of
oregon,
and
I
tried
to
download
the
the
information
that
she
had
provided,
but
it's
no
longer
available.
J
Somebody
removed
it
and
it's
just
creepy
what
goes
on
with
the
cell
tower
usage
and
with
the
help
they
can
have
issues
from
cancer
to
to
autoimmune
diseases.
There's
so
many
things
that
can
happen
to
different
children
depends
on
their
their
bodies
and
what
they
can
tolerate,
and
so
my
concerns
and
the
reason
why
I
oppose
it
is
because
this
attorney
has
proven
with
evidence
and
yet
people
who
want
to
have
installed
in
the
wireless
community.
J
I
can
understand
their
need
for
it,
but
why
do
you
want
to
install
this
where
there's
a
neighborhood
where
there's
businesses
and
a
school
that
goes
from
kindergarten
to
12th
grade?
I
just
I'm
really
concerned
about
that,
and
I
think
it's
not.
I
don't
think
it's
acceptable.
I
mean
I
just
don't
see
why
they
can't
put
it
somewhere
else.
Like
you
know,
mountain
view,
high
school.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
This
would
be
the
time
and
place
for
miss
kennedy
to
provide
me
any
excuse,
ms
kennedy,
to
provide
any
final
comments.
A
G
Yes,
thank
you
miss
frank
again
for
the
record.
Mike
connor
is
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant.
G
As
indicated
earlier,
we
you
know
did
request
that
the
record
be
left
open,
so
we'll
address
some
of
the
questions
in
particular
miss
curls
letter,
which
we
haven't
had
an
opportunity
to
review
because
it
was
submitted
shortly
before
the
hearing,
but
we
will
address
some
of
those
in
further
detail,
but
I
did
want
to
take
this
opportunity
to
just
address
a
few
issues
that
came
up
in
the
comments,
so
you
can
have
our
perspective.
G
First
of
all,
there
were
a
couple
of
procedural
objections
that
were
raised
with
respect
to
the
neighborhood
meeting,
as
well
as
the
use
of
a
telephonic
hearing
on
the
neighborhood
meeting.
I
think
you
pinpointed
the
key
issue
and
that
is
there's
a
specific
code
requirement.
G
4.1.215,
we
complied
with
that
that
particular
provision
does
not
require
a
certain
type
of
neighborhood
meeting
and
it
is
our
common
practice
to
use
the
open
house
type,
meaning
because
we
find
that
that
allows
for
more
opportunity
for
a
wider
variety
of
people
to
be
able
to
ask
questions,
have
more
one-on-one
conversations
and
get
more
specific
information
versus
a
presentation
which
some
people
don't
feel
comfortable.
Speaking
at
or
some
people
tend
to
dominate
those
particular
conversations,
and
that
is
consistent
with
the
city
code
requirements
for
neighborhood
meetings.
G
In
terms
of
this
telephonic
process.
I
don't
believe
that
there's
a
legal
basis
for
objecting
to
it.
As
you
probably
know.
Mr
frank,
these
telephonic
hearings,
both
land
use
and
other
administrative
and
court
hearings,
are
taking
place
all
across
the
state
and
I'm
sure
the
country
because
of
the
covet
19
situation,
shelter
in
and
I'm
not
aware
of
any
legal
basis.
That
will
require
that
we
wait
until
the
covenanting
situation
is
resolved
so
that
we
can
do
in
person.
G
Nor
do
I
believe,
it's
necessary,
because
really
the
procedural
rights
that
people
are
entitled
to
is
an
opportunity
to
hear
from
the
parties.
In
this
proceeding,
hear
from
you
testify
ask
questions
etc,
and
I
believe
that
this
forum
allows
for
that,
and
so
therefore
we
don't
believe
that
there's
any
procedural
objection
there
in
terms
of
there
was
some
testimony
about
you
know:
do
we
really
need
it,
and
why
are
we
placing
this
in
a
densely
populated
area?
I
think
it
was
mr
rhodes
who
asked
that.
G
Well
that
kind
of
answers
the
question,
because
it's
a
capacity
site,
meaning
that
the
greater
amount
of
data
traffic
that
there
is
the
more
there
is
need
to
be
able
to
ensure
that
we
have
towers
to
accommodate
when
a
system
gets
overload.
That's
precisely
why
we
need
a
tower
in
this
area
and
in
terms
of
the
need.
G
You
know
that
comes
up
oftentimes
and
in
these
hearings
people
will
question
whether-
and
we
believe
that
you
know
we
submitted
evidence
to
demonstrate
there
is
a
need,
but
I
always
like
to
just
kind
of
put
it
in
practical
terms,
and
that
is
there
would
be
no
reason
that
we
would
be
going
through
this
process,
which
is
expensive,
which
takes
quite
a
bit
of
time
and,
quite
frankly,
you
know
any
kind
of
proposal
like
this
is
going
to
attract
some
community
objection
or
opposition.
Those
are
customers
or
potential
customers
of
ours.
G
Verizon
really
has
no
incentive
to
do
this
other
than
to
make
sure
that
we
can
accommodate
all
the
needs
of
the
community
and
address
the
capacity
efficiency
we
have,
but
again
we're
we're,
not
relying
on
that
statement.
We're
relying
on
our
evidence
in
the
record
to
that
shows
the
need,
including
the
propagation
maps
which
clearly
show
that
there's
a
deficiency
here.
Sometimes
it's
helpful.
I
find
to
kind
of
frame
it
that
way.
So
people
can
understand
you
know
again.
G
There
would
be
no
reason,
we'd
be
going
through
this
process
if
there
wasn't
truly
a
need
for
a
facility
to
accommodate
the
capacity
deficiency
in
terms
of
some
of
the
alternate
sites
that
we
looked
at.
I
think
I
addressed
that
before,
but
there
was
some
specific
testimony
about
the
pine
nursery
forest
services
department,
et
cetera.
We
did
look
at
that
and,
as
our
rf
engineer
indicated
in
the
density
map,
some
middle,
the
problem
with
that
is
that
those
sites
are
too
far
to
the
north.
G
I
did
want
to
clarify
one
thing:
I'm
sorry,
I
didn't
get
barbara's
last
name,
but
the
last
person
who
testified
you
know
it
suggested
that
if
the
mountain
view
high
school
is
asking
for
this,
they
should
accommodate
the
tower
they're,
not
asking
for
it.
It's
not
a
specific
property
owner
user.
G
That's
asking
for
it's
based
on
our
internal
data,
and
you
know
customer
complaints
that
we
receive
in
general
that
identifies
that
there's
a
deficiency
and
then
we
investigate
it
and
based
on
that
investigation,
determine
whether
there's
a
need
how
to
how
to
address
that
need.
The
reference
to
the
high
school
was
merely
that.
G
That's
the
area
where
there's
the
high
school
and
surrounding
area
where
there's
the
highest
demand
of
traffic
and
that's
the
primary
sort
of
objective
that
we're
looking
at
ensuring
that
is
covered
in
this,
and
by
going
further
to
the
north,
like
the
pine
nursery
or
forest
services
department
property,
that's
going
to
not
enable
us
to
be
able
to
offload
the
traffic
in
that
high
high
use
area
in
terms
of
the
visual
impacts.
G
There
was
some
testimony
about
the
use
of
the
monopine
stealth
facility,
whether
it's
the
best
use
here
and
again
we're
we're
subject
to
the
standards
in
the
in
the
city
band
development
code
and
the
code
specifically
requires
carriers
to
use
these
stealth
facilities
as
a
preference.
G
So
we're
following
the
code,
although
we
do
believe
particularly
in
this
location
with
the
other
trees
and
mature
vegetation,
that
it's
a
prime
location
for
this
type
of
facility,
this
design
of
stealth
facility.
But
it
really
is
the
bend
code
that
determines
and
encourages
us
to
to
do
that
in
terms
of
some
of
the
photos.
There
was
some
some
question
about
that.
We
did
provide
a
picture
of
a
real
tower.
That's
the
same
type
of
tower
we're
using
in
page
18
of
our
application.
G
So
that's
an
actual
tower,
so
we
did
provide
that
in
terms
of
the
photo
sim
that
we
provided
again,
the
bin
code
requires
us
to
provide
photo
sims
and
what
has
been
it
is.
The
tower
is
photoshopped
into
that
photo
that
mr
rhodes
was
referring
to,
which
is
required.
That's
what
a
photo
sim
is
you
take
a
photo
of
the
existing
area
and
then
photo.
You
know,
create
a
photo
simulation
by
photoshopping,
a
picture
of
the
tower
into
that
photo.
G
We
confirmed,
while
we
were
in
this
hearing
with
the
company
that
did
the
photo
sims
for
this,
that
that
is
an
actual
picture
of
the
monopine.
It
is
not
an.
It
is
not
an
actual
pine
tree,
it
is
the
monopine,
so
that
photosim
is
in
fact
an
accurate
reflection
or
simulation
of
what
it
would
look
like
and
that's
required
under
the
code.
G
There
was
a
question
about
the
light:
how
tall
the
light
is,
and
I
just
want
to
clarify
this-
is
not
a
tower.
That's
going
to
require
any
sort
of
aviation
related
lighting
at
the
top
of
the
tower,
which
is
far
more
visible,
but
lighting
is
really
more
for
when
the
technician
is
in
doing
their
maintenance
to
have
a
light
to
be
able
to
see
what
they're
doing
and
that
lights,
six
foot
and
projects
downward
for
the
city
code
requirement.
G
I
won't
repeat
in
terms
of
you
know:
you
heard
some
testimony
about
the
property
value
health
effects.
You
heard
some
testimony
about,
you
know,
benefits
versus
risk,
etc,
and
I
think
I
address
the
first
two
issues
and
the
latter
issue
really
is
similar,
and
that
is
you
know.
As
you
know.
Mr
frank,
I
don't
need
to
be
lecturing
on
this,
but
I
think
it's
helpful
just
for
people
to
to
understand
that
you
know
when
we
go
in
with
an
application.
G
The
city
establishes
the
standards,
we're
required
to
meet
those
and
provide
evidence
to
meet
those,
but
we
don't.
We
don't
create
the
standards,
we're
just
required
to
follow
them,
and
so
I
think,
a
lot
of
concerns
that
people
raise
you
know
may
be
more
about
the
standards
as
opposed
to
what
we're
proposing,
because
you
know
it
is
allowed
use
in
the
zone.
G
It
does
require
us
to
try
to
look
towards
non-residential
properties,
and
you
know
we
have
a
need
in
this
particular
area
a
lot
of
times
I
hear
in
these
applications
people
you
know
understandably
say
why?
Don't
you
put
it
somewhere
else?
Where
there's
not
very
many
people
around
well,
that
was
true
and
sort
of
the
first
wave
of
these
wireless
hours,
but
as
we've
increased,
the
population
increase
use
of
wireless
devices
and
increase
the
type
of
data
flow
as
a
result
of
how
we
use
those
wireless
devices.
G
Now,
carriers
are
required
to
start
infilling
in
some
of
those
more
densely
populated
areas
to
make
sure
that
everyone
can
be
accommodated
and
that's
why.
In
this
case,
it's
a
capacity
and
it
makes
it
difficult
for
carriers,
because
it's
just
not
technologically
possible
to
put
towers
in
remote
locations.
G
If
anything,
I
think,
they're
more
rigorous,
and
so
in
that
case
you
know
we,
you
know
again
did
the
best.
We
could
to
try
to
find
the
best
site
and
satisfy
the
code,
and
we
believe
that
we've
done
that,
and
so
with
that.
That
concludes
my
rebuttal
and
we
will
address
some
of
the
issues
further
in
the
open
record
process
as
well,
and
I'm
of
course
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have
at
this
time,
though,.
A
I
appreciate
all
the
testimony
that's
been
received
by
all
persons
involved
that
includes
mr
connors,
on
behalf
of
the
applicant,
the
the
staff
representatives
kennedy
and
all
those
speaking,
either
neutral
or
or
in
in
opposition.
A
A
I
want
to
just
reiterate
that
I
am
a
decision
maker
in
a
quasi-judicial
hearing,
that's
required
to
follow
the
rules
and
the
rules
and
laws,
in
other
words
the
relevant
approval
criteria,
in
effect
at
the
time
of
this
case,
and
so
I'm
not
here
and
do
not
have
the
authority
or
the
power
to
change
in
mr
connor's
language,
the
standards,
I
can't
add
standards,
I
can't
delete
standards,
I
can't
even
modify
standards.
A
My
job
is
to
take
a
look
at
what
and
make
the
decision
as
to
what
relevant
standards
apply
and
then
look
at
the
evidence
to
see
whether
or
not
the
applicant
has
met
its
burden
of
proof
to
show
that
those
standards
have
been
met.
So
when
I
make
my
decision,
that's
what
I'm
going
to
try
to
do
my
best,
no
one's
perfect,
but
I'm
going
to
do
my
best.
A
I
will
read
what
you
provide
in
to
the
record
whether
or
not
it's
already
been
submitted
or
is
submitted
during
the
open
record
period,
and
I
will
consider
that
in
making
my
decisions.
So
if
you
have
a
pencil
and
paper
handy
or
some
other
way
to
take
notes,
here's
here's
the
schedule
that
we're
going
to
follow
in
as
far
as
the
open
record
period
and
I'm
going
to
try
to
be
really
clear
about
the
first
two
time
periods
and
what's
supposed
to
do
during
those
time
periods,
all
right.
A
A
Anyone
may
submit
new
evidence
evidence
into
the
record
a
document
into
the
record
by
5
pm
on
july,
21st,
2020
and
just
before
I
do
the
make
that
statement.
I
just
want
to
double
check
with
with
miss
kennedy,
because
I'm
going
to
talk
to
her.
Just
briefly
with
the
rest
of
you,
it's
five
o'clock
still
the
time.
That's
the
bewitching
hour.
A
Okay,
so
what
time
do
you
want
me
to
close
the
record
for
new
evidence.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
right,
so
I
stand
corrected.
The
record
for
new
evidence
will
close
at
4
00
p.m.
On
july,
21st
2020
is
a
record
for
rebuttal
evidence
and
I'll
talk
about
that
in
a
sec
closes
at
4
p.m.
A
On
july
28
2020
and
I'm
going
to
come
back
to
that
and
the
record
for
applicant
and
applicant.
Only
final
argument
will
close
at
4pm
august
4th.
A
A
A
A
Final
argument
and
or
rebuttal
restricts
what's
in
that
is
in
any
submitted
during
that
week,
and
it
does
not
include
any
new
evidence.
A
Mr
connors
has,
I
believe,
heard
this
spiel
before,
but
I
will
tell
you,
mr
connors,
that
if
I
see
any
new
evidence
during
the
final
argument
rebuttal
week
submission
what
I
do
with
it,
even
though
that
it
goes
on
to
the
public
record
at
the
city
bin.
What
I
do
it
is,
I
put
it
in
a
brown
envelope
and
don't
read
it
so
my
caution
to
you
is
that
you
be
very
careful
that
anything
that
you're
doing
in
that
is
final
argument,
as
defined
in
the
statute
and
nothing
beyond.
A
Some
of
you
may
think
that
you
send
it
directly
to
me
not
true
some
of
it
may
you
some
of
you
may
think
that
you
might
have
to
send
it
to
the
applicant
or
the
opposition.
That's
very
nice
of
you,
but
not
necessary.
The
information
is
to
be
sent
to
the
city
of
ben
miss
kennedy.
Would
you
tell
them
how
they
do
that.
F
Yes,
please
please
email
me
directly,
as
a
lot
of
people
have
already
been
doing.
My
contact
information
is
on
the
notice
or
on
our
city
bend
website.
F
Also,
our
office
hours
are
monday
through
friday
from
nine
to
four
and
that's
the
permit
center,
but
it
is
closed
due
to
the
local
state
of
emergency,
but
there
is
a
phone
number
on
the
door
of
city
hall
that
you
can
call
during
our
office
hours
and
there's
a
few
people
in
the
building
who
will
come
out
and
they
can
date
stamp.
Your
information.
F
If
you
have
something
to
hand
in-
and
I
will,
I
will-
scan
that
and
upload
that
to
the
eplans
file
as
soon
as
I'm
able
and
those
are
the
two
options
to
email
me
or
to
deliver
something
city
hall
during
the
office
hours
from
nine
to
four,
when
we
do
have
bodies
that
are
available
to
take
in
information-
and
that's
all
I
have
thank
you.
A
B
Yes,
mr
frank,
I
still
see
hands
from
earlier,
so
at
this
point,
what
I
would
like
to
ask
from
everyone
is
to
lower
your
hands
by
pressing
start
three
and
then,
if
you
have
a
questions
regarding
mr
frank's
comments,
please
walk
ahead
and
raise
your
hand
by
pressing
star
three.
So
I'm
gonna.
A
Okay
said:
put
your
hands
down.
If
you
would
please,
if
you're
on
telephone
star
three
put
your
hands
down
and
then
I'm
gonna
wait
like
10
or
15
seconds
and
then
put
your
hand
back
up.
If
you
have
a
question
regarding
how
you
get
information
into
the
public
record
during
the
first
record
period,
which
ends
on
the
21st,
the
second
record
period,
which
ends
on
the
28th
and
the
third
record
period
which
ends
on
the
4th,
does
anybody
have
any
questions
about
how
you
get
information
into
the
record?
Mr
almeida.
B
K
Go
ahead,
please,
this
is
jeff
rhodes,
hey
submitting
large
documents.
Is
that
something
that
can
be
done
over
dropbox
or
is
that
something
the
city
was
not
able
to
access,
and
should
everything
be
considered
usable
if
it's
attacked
it's
an
attachment?
If
I,
for
example,
if
I
took
images
or
something
along
those
lines,
I
wanted
to
include
an
attachment,
but
yet
it
was
too
large
for
the
city
to
receive,
because
you
use
dropbox.
A
Miss
kennedy:
could
you
respond
to
that
place
because
I
honestly
don't
know
the
answer.
F
A
B
D
A
F
This
is
my
first
public
hearing
with
the
webex
hearings
officer
juan.
Is
that
able
to
be
upload?
That's
not
able
to
be
uploaded
e-plans,
but
we
do
have
a
youtube
video,
that's
going
right
now
for
it,
and
so
that
should
be
able
to
be
located.
B
Interesting,
I
I
am
playing.
It
live
right
now,
just
to
make
sure
that
it's
working
and
it
has
been
working
throughout
the
meeting.
However,
heidi
for
your
questions,
what
I
will
do
once
webex
is
done,
formatting
that
recording,
I
will
send
you
a
link
and
a
password
to
access
that
recording
so
that
you
can
upload
that
to
e-plans
and
then
yeah.
You
are
correct.
B
The
mp4s
that
are
produced
by
webex
will
not
be
able
to
be
uploaded
to
e-plans,
but
you
can
publish
that
link
and
password
and
the
recording
will
be
transcribed
and
closed
captioned
and
also,
if
you
want
to
just
republish,
that
youtube
link
the
youtube
video
will
be
available
for
replay.
You
know
on
demand
at
any
time
after
the
meeting
as
well,
so.
F
A
B
Next,
I
have
five
four
one:
three,
oh
six,
go
ahead
after
the
two
beeps.
Please.
A
We're
all
still
getting
used
to
this,
mr
griffin,
so
it's
there's
no
need
for
an
apology.
Anyone
else.
B
J
It,
yes,
I
didn't
have
my
hand
up.
I
don't
know
why
it
went
up.
A
There
has
to
be
a
little
bit
of
smile
going
on
here,
because
it's
it
is
a
new
process,
so
anyone
else's
hand
up.
Please.
A
All
right,
I
want
to
thank
you
all
for
participating
and
I'm
only
going
to
make
one
final
comment,
and
I
and
and
this
comes
as
a
sincere
comment
from
me-
no
one
prefers
to
have
in-person
hearings
more
than
I
do,
because
it
allows
me,
as
the
hearings
officer
to
look
you
in
the
eye
when
you're
testifying
and
I
get
I
it
just.
A
It
feels
this
much
more
personal,
but
I
will
tell
you
having
having
done
this
for
a
really
long
time,
probably
done
500
land
use
hearings
that
probably
the
most
often
comment
that
I
receive
at
land
use
hearings
in
person,
particularly
daytime
land
use.
Hearing
soft
hearings
is
that
having
a
daytime
land
use
hearing
precludes
the
opportunity
for
many
persons
to
participate
and
as
much
as
I
m,
I
prefer
the
in-person
hearing
process,
because
it's
it's
much
more
personal.
A
Quite
honestly,
I
I'm
I'm
becoming
aware
that
the
participation
level
and
the
opportunity
for
participation
levels
such
as
the
person
at
the
dentist's
office,
who
was
at
work,
trying
to
do
two
different
things
which
you
couldn't
have
done
in
an
in-person
hearing.
I'm
starting
to
believe
that
perhaps
this
gives
even
more
people
an
opportunity
rather
than
less
to
to
fully
enact
and
actively
participate
in
these
hearings.
A
So
I
just
want
to
thank
you
all
for
for
for
this
process.
The
record,
as
I
indicated,
will
remain
open
for
new
evidence
until
july
21st
4
p.m.
Ms
kennedy
has
given
you
two
options:
email
or
hand
in
things
by
four
o'clock.
The
rebuttal
evidence
is
open
until
july
28
at
four
o'clock,
same
methods
and
miss
miss
honors.
You
have
until
august
4th
at
four
o'clock
to
submit
your
final
rebuttal.
I'm
going
to
use
this
as
an
opportunity
to
say
thank
you
for
all
participating.