Resolution 3691 - Laserfiche WebLink

U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc. SPU 17-91 and Variance 3-92 Page -6- 20. The City submitted that the p- -posal will not impact residentially zoned properties with shadows or other sunlight blockages. The visual impact should not be significant. 21. There will be no signs proposed on the project. 22. The City recommended that the Applicant submit a landscaping plan that will be in conformance and comply with the requirements of EMC 35.100. This plan will depict the size and location of rockeries, retaining walls, grades, and plantings. 23. The proposed 360 square foot maintenance/storage building will contain two air conditioning units which will be similar to HVAC units in office buildings. The noise from the air conditioning units will not affect adjacent properties due to distances from the monopole to the residences. 24. The Applicant submitted that all environmental impacts of the project had been addressed by the Everett City Council at a SEPA appeal. These include electromagnetic fields and any impacts resulting therefrom. The SEPA appeal, according to the City, adequately addressed these issues. 25. The Applicant submitted that visual impacts to the facility will be minimal. Because of the significant distance of the pole to other residences in the area and the landscaping in the area, the impacts should aesthetically be disruptive. To support its claim, the Applicant presented exhibits depicting visuals of the pole from outlining areas of the cemetery. 26. The Applicant submitted that the proposed cellular pole will be the third one in Everett. Currently, there is one on top of the Everett General Hospital and one in south Everett near the Boeing plant. The proposed site, which will be identified as the Port Gardner site, will be between the two existing poles and will serve the downtown area and the traffic on Interstate 5. The existing ridge separating Interstate 5 from the southern part of Everett effectively blocks signals, and, with the new pole, this area can be served. 27. The Applicant submitted that the height is the minimal height necessary to be effective. 28. The Applicant submitted that although there are some residences that will not be screened from the sight of the pole, the backdrop is to a highly commercial area, and the pole will have little, if any, increased impact on the site views at that point. 29. The Applicant submitted that the highest angle of the pole from viewing outside of the cemetery is 17%. The rise of the pole will be insignificant, according to the Applicant, from other views in the area.