Laserfiche WebLink
5. CompaNbility of propoaed structures and improvementa wtth surtounding <br /> properties, Includinp the size, helght, location, setback and aRangement ot all <br /> proposed bulidings and facllitles, especially as they relate to Iight and ahadow <br /> impacts on more senaitive land uses and less intensive zones. <br /> Findinas: The proposed monopole will be half the height of the exist(ng tower and wlll <br /> have no guy wires supporting (t. The existfng tower has guy wires that extend inio lwo <br /> comers of the property and into a nefghboring property across the street. No other <br /> buildings are proposed. The site is surrounding by residences that are limited to 28 feet <br /> height. <br /> Conclusion: The reduction in height and the removal of guy wires will result in the <br /> communfcation facility to be more compatible with the surrounding properties. <br /> 6. The number, aize and locatlon of aigns, especially as they relate to more senaitive <br /> land uses. <br /> Findina: Sign Category D applies in the R-2 zone. This allows up to a 32 square foot <br /> freestand(ng sign per each street frontage. <br /> Conclusion: No signs are proposed. <br /> 7. The landscaping, b��Rering and screening of buildtngs, parking, loading and atorage <br /> areas, eapecially as they relate to more sensltive land uses. <br /> Findino: Landscape Category B applies in the R-2 zone. Category B requfres a ten foot <br /> wide landscape strip with one tree for every 30 feet in length and 10 shrubs every 20 feet <br /> in length along the street (rontage. The number of shrubs can be reduced by 75% if lawn <br /> is provided. Subsection 35.030.8 requires alterations of existing uses to compiy with the j <br /> landscape requirements oF the zoning code if the value o(the new canstructlon is equal to <br /> or greater than 35% of the assessed value of the existing slructure. Trees exist along the <br /> street frontages except at the northwest corner of the site. There are minimal amounts of <br /> shrubs. <br /> Conclusion: Additional trees and shrubs will be required around the perimeter of the site <br /> except along the alley. <br /> 8. The generation of nuisance Irritants such as noise, smoke, dust, odor, glare, vlaual <br /> blight or other undesirable Impacts. <br /> r"indino: The propused structure is not expecled to generate nuisance irritants, other than <br /> noise and dust during construction. <br /> Conclusion: The proposed monopole should not result in nuisance impacts. <br /> 9. Consistency with the goals and policies of the Everett Generel Plan for the area and <br /> land use designation in which the property Is located. <br /> Findina: The Everett General Plan designates this area as 1.3, "Single-Family Detached, <br /> 10-12 dwellings per gross acre." The Comprehensive Plan contains policy language <br /> pertaining to above ground utilities. Il states that the City shall `...promote officient use of <br /> land and minimize environmental disturbance by requiring colocation of utilities whenever <br /> possible and appropriate." <br /> EXHIBIT #�_ <br /> PAGE��F� <br />