conditional use process may proceed and approval may be <br />granted for the proposal as submitted, subject to FAA approval. <br />If FAA approval requires any changes to the proposal as initially <br />approved, then that initial approval shall be void. A new <br />application will need to be submitted, reviewed and approved <br />through an additional site review or conditional use process. No <br />development permit application shall be submitted without <br />documents demonstrating FAA review and approval and Oregon <br />Department of Aviation review. <br />The applicant has submitted letters from the FAA (June 28, 2010) and Oregon Department of <br />Aviation (June 17, 2011) indicating approval. This criterion is met. <br />(c) Site Review and Conditional Use Permit Applications. In addition to the <br />application requirements specified in paragraph (b) above, applications <br />for site review or conditional use permits also shall include the <br />following information: <br />1. A visual study containing, at a minimum, a graphic simulation <br />showing the appearance of the proposed tower, antennas, and <br />ancillary facilities from at least 5 points within a 3 mile radius. <br />Such points shall be chosen by the provider with review and <br />approval by the planning director to ensure that various <br />potential views are represented. <br />The applicant has provided a photo simulation showing the appearance of the proposed tower <br />from 9 different views. These points were evaluated during application completeness review <br />and were found to represent various potential views as required. <br />2. Documentation that alternative sites within a radius of at least <br />2000 feet have been considered and have been determined to <br />be technologically unfeasible or unavailable. For site reviews, <br />alternative sites zoned C-4,1-1,1-2, and 1-3 must be considered. <br />For conditional use permits, alternative sites zoned PL, C-2, C-3, <br />C-4,1-1,1-2,1-3 and S-WS must be considered. <br />The applicant notes that several other spaces were considered but were unfeasible or not <br />available (see pages 16 and 17 of the applicant's written statement). There are no sites zoned <br />C-2, C-3, C-4, 1-1,1-2, 1-3 or S-WS within 2000 feet. There is one PL zoned parcel within that <br />distance owned by the School District (Sheldon High School). The written statement notes the <br />school district was not interested in leasing to AT&T. The written statement addresses other <br />alternative sites (even outside 2000 feet) and confirms that they are either unfeasible or <br />unavailable. <br />Hearing Official Decision (PDT 10-2, CU 11-1) 29 <br />