Public Comments: Hearing Ex. 2 - Friends of Amazon Creek Submittal

inconsistent simulations, the proposed monopine would be an anomaly in the neighborhood, reduce views and aesthetics, and degrade desirable features of the neighborhood. As such, Friends believe that the landscaping palette, which must include the proposed monopine, is not compatible with nearby landscaping. (f) Noise Reduction. In R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, C-1, and GO and in all other zones when the adjacent property is zoned for residential use or occupied by a dwelling, hostpial, school, library, or nursing home, noise generating equipement shall be sound-buffered by means of baffling, barriers, or other suitable means to reduce the 45 dBa. According to the attached noise reports (exhibits E, F, G), the applicant simply cannot ensure satisfaction of the 45 dBa noise standard or + 10 dBA limitation found in OAR 340-035- 0035(1)(b)(B). As noted above and in the attached noise reports repeatedly underestimates the noise generated from the equipment. Finally, the applicant has made no effort to demonstrate that collocation is feasible when accounting for additional noise- generating equipment. This would render the requirement for collocation (including the purpose statement) a nullity, and, therefore, the Hearings Official should avoid an interpretation that renders provisions o (g) Status of Location. No permit may be issued for the location of a new telecommunications facility within an R-1 or C-1 zone unless the lot on which it is to be placed is vacant or developed with a non-residential use at the time the permit application is submitted. This restriction does not apply within other zones. Though the church is surrounded by residential uses, the property itself is developed with - t an assistant pastor or other individual was using the church as a residence. Therefore, the proposed use cannot be located on the property. 14