My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8215 BROADWAY 2016-01-01 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
BROADWAY
>
8215
>
8215 BROADWAY 2016-01-01 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/19/2017 9:48:43 PM
Creation date
1/24/2017 10:40:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
BROADWAY
Street Number
8215
Imported From Microfiche
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
131
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
at such a height is necessary to adequately ssrve the needs of the public <br />for the proposed utility or communications service. <br />(I) The Planning Director may require review by an expert third party. <br />21. Because the proposal is within 200 feet of a gateway corridor, it is <br />subject to the Review Process III - Special Property Use Permit. The <br />F+pplicant has provided an analysis of other existing monopoles and <br />building sites that can potentially accommodate additional antennas. <br />The analysis concluded that for technological reasons it is not possible tc <br />utiiize som�a of the nearby propenies or tower sites. InGuded in the <br />reason� fr,r not being able to use those sites were: the buildings were too <br />low in height (the Peoples Storage building); there were power poles that <br />would intertere with the wireless communication; and, the tower would be <br />too far removed from the cell area to provide adequate service (the 2502 <br />Madison Street tower). The Appiicant also provided other sites that do <br />not appear to be effective. (exhibits 4& 5, Olson testimony) <br />22. The Applicant submitted that the proposed height of 59 feet for the <br />monopole is the minimum necessary to satisfy its ability to meet the <br />demands of increased services. If the monopoie were constructed at a <br />lower site, the antenna would be blocked by trees and structures and the <br />freeway overpass. At its current proposed site, the monopole wiil be one <br />of the lowest facilities in Everett. (exhibit 1, Olson tesfimony) <br />23. The building setback requirement for C-1 zones is ten feet for rear lot <br />setbacks. The Applicant has proposed a setback of ten feet along the <br />rear lot line and ten feet along the side lot line. The setback standards <br />for the zone are satisfied. (exhibit 1 J <br />Jurisdiction: The Hearing Examiner of the City of Everett has jurisdictional <br />authoriry to hold a hearing and to issue the decision. That authorit}� is set farth <br />in EMC 2.23.120. Based on the above Findings of Fact, the Hearing Examiner <br />enters the following Conclusions: <br />CONCLUSIONS <br />The Applicant requested approval of a Special Property Use Permit for <br />the construction of a 59 foot high steel monopole that will support <br />wireless communication antennas. In addition, the project invoives the <br />construction of an equipment shelter and security fencing. TY�e project <br />will occur at 8215 Broadway Avenue, Everett, Washington. (finding 1) <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.