Laserfiche WebLink
,, � . <br /> Finding: The control station will be mounted on an existing telecom equipment platform <br /> and would be screened from view by exisdng vegetation, landscaping and the existing <br /> warehouse building on the site. The pole-top units, due to their size and location, do not <br /> require screcning. <br /> Conclusivn: Gxisting vegetation on and adjacent to the site is sufficient to provide <br /> screening of the control station. <br /> 8. The generation of nuisance irritants such as noise,smoke,dust,odor,glare, visual <br /> biight or other undesirable impacts. <br /> Finding: 'Th;. proposed facility would be unmanned and would not emit any known he�lth <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 impacts <br /> are anticipated as a result of the proposal. <br /> 9. Consistency with the �oals and policies of the Everett Comprehensive Plan for the area <br /> and land use designation in whic6 the property is located. <br /> Finding: The site is designated 5.4, Office and Industrial Park on the City of EveretYs <br /> Comprehensive Plan map. The Comprehensive Plan contains a policy that encourages co- <br /> location of utilities, where possible, in order to minimize environmental disturbance. Both <br /> the control station and the pole top units would be co-located on existing <br /> telecommunications and utility structures. <br /> Conclusion: The use is consistent with the Comprehe-isive Plan. <br /> 10. Compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance and other Clty,State and Federal I <br /> reguFations. <br /> Finding: All necessary building and associated permits must be obtained for the proposal � <br /> prior to construction. <br /> Conclusion: The proposal will comply with the provisions of the City's Zoning Code and <br /> the applicant must obtain any required State and/or Federal permits, <br /> 11. Accessi6ility 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 /> 3�� <br />