Laserfiche WebLink
Finding: There presently is no landscaping or screening around the tow, hase or around <br />the ground -mounted equipment, even though this was a condition of approval for the <br />existing monopole (Condition #3, SPU #97-004). This condition required planting of <br />additional evergreen trees around the site perimeter. <br />Conclusion: The applicant/owner shall install additional evergreen trees in compliance <br />with Condition #3 of the Hewing Examiuer's Decision dated May 15, 1998. <br />8. The generation of nuisance irritants such as noise, smoke, dust, odor, glare, visual <br />blight or other undesirable Impacts. <br />Finding: The proposed facility is unmanned and would not emit any known health <br />hazards, toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion or hazardous materials. <br />Conclusion: No noise, smoke, dust, odor, glare, visual blight or other undesirable <br />imparts are anticipated as a result of the proposal. <br />9. Consistency with the goals and policies of the Everett General Plan for the area and <br />land use designation in which the property Is located. <br />Finding: The site is designated 2,0, Parks/Open Space on the City of Everett's <br />Comprehensive Plan map. The Comprehensive Plan contains a policy mat encourages <br />co -location of utilities, where possible, in order to minimize environmental disturbance. <br />There arc other antenna facilities located on the existing monopole, as authorized by the <br />Hearing Examiner's decision for that facility. <br />Conclusion: The use is consistent with the General Plan. <br />10. Compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance and other City, State and Federal <br />regulations. <br />Finding: All necessary building and associated permits must be obtained for the <br />proposal prior to construction. <br />Conclusion: The proposal will comply with the provisions of the City's Zoning Code <br />and the applicant must obtain any required State and/or Fedcral permits. <br />11. Accessibility to public transit, and traffic reduction measures proposed by the <br />applicant to reduce dependence of the proposed use on the automobile. <br />Finding: The facility is unmanned. <br />Conclusion: Criterion is not applicable. <br />SPU SPECIFIC EVALUATION CRITERIA: <br />