Laserfiche WebLink
. � ( ,� ( <br /> I <br /> 3. The impact of traffic generated by the proposed use ore the surrounding area, <br /> pedestrian circulation and public safety; and Uie ability of tlhe proponent to mitigate <br /> such poteniial impacts. <br /> Finding: The proposal may generate some minimal traffic associ.�ted with the initial <br /> installation and set-up. However, once the facility is operating, no on-going traffic will <br /> be generated,otherthan occasional maintenance visits. <br /> Condusionr There will be no adverse traffic impacts generated by the proposal. <br /> 4. The provision of adequate off•street parking,on-site cirr.ulation,and site access. <br /> Finding: No permanent on-site pazking is required for the propos:il. S�ince the <br /> mechanical equipinent installation woald be located within an existing,garage of a <br /> nonconforming building, the dcsi�ti and location of the equipment will need to be:such <br /> that the existing pazking within th�garage is not displaced. <br /> Conclusion: The equipment installadon within the garage at 2301 Colby shall be <br /> designed and constructed so as to not displace the pazking within the gaza,ge. This <br /> informstion shall Ue verified at the time of submittal for building permit. <br /> 5. Compatibility of proposerf structures and improvements with surrounding <br /> properties, including the size,heigh:. locatiun,setback and arrangement of all <br /> proposed buildings a�nd facilities,especially as they relate to light and shadow <br /> impacts on more sensitive land uses and less intensive zones. <br /> Finding: The project will involve replacing an existing,40' utility pole with a new, 60' ! <br /> utility pole. The new pole would have antennas mounted at the top and would have cable <br /> conduits extending up the length of the pole to the antennas. Besides being raller, the <br /> new pole would be bulkier due to the antennas and caUling. The applicant provided <br /> photographs with an artist's depiction of the new pole with the antennas ;r�fer ro <br /> application documents in file). However, the overall impact on adjacent properties would <br /> be minimized by the fact that the proposed pole replaces an existing pole and the <br /> placement of the associated equipment cabinet within an enclosed building. <br /> Conclusion: In order to minimize visual impacts on surrounding properties, the antennas <br /> and cable conduit must be painted to match the color of the power pole. <br /> 6. The number,size and location of signs,especially as they reiate to more sensitive <br />� land uses. <br /> I'inding: No signage is proposed. <br /> Conclusion: Not applicable. <br /> �6 <br />