As noted above, the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with EC 9.5750(7)(f) <br />concerning noise reduction. Although the criteria for a variance do not expressly state that an <br />applicant may obtain a variance upon finding that the applicant can meet the noise standard <br />with facilities above ground, the hearing official believes this is a permissible reading of the <br />subsection (9)(c).5 The link works as such: Subsection (9)(c) allows a variance to the <br />undergrounding requirement of subsection (8). Subsection (8) requires tower equipment to <br />meet the noise reduction standard (subsection (7)(f)), but then allows a variance pursuant to <br />subsection (9). Hence, although there is no express reference in subsection (9)(c) directly to <br />subsection (7)(f), subsection (8) creates that link.6 <br />The hearing official also notes that Mr. Noxon's analysis of reflection of noise from the building <br />immediately south of the tower demonstrates that the configuration of the site (i.e., the siting <br />of the tower equipment in relation to the building) is part of what makes the proposal fail the <br />noise standard. For this reason, the configuration of the site does not obviate the need for <br />complying with subsection (8), which as noted above, requires compliance with subsection <br />(7)(f), the noise reduction standard. To the contrary, it is the configuration of the site that in <br />part creates the need for undergrounding. <br />The hearing official does not address the proposed landscaping or presence of mature trees as <br />screening for the above ground equipment because those are moot points. Screening for the <br />tower is discussed above in response to EC 9.8320(3). <br />The hearing official denies the applicant's request for a variance to place the tower equipment <br />above ground. <br />(10) Removal of Facilities. <br />(a) All transmission towers and antennas shall be removed by the person <br />who constructed the facility, by the person who operates the facility, or <br />by the property owner, within 6 months of the time that the facilities <br />have ceased being used to transmit, receive or relay voice and data <br />signals to or from wireless communication devices. The city manager <br />may grant a 6-month extension where a written request has been filed, <br />within the initial 6-month period, to reuse the tower or antennas. <br />(b) If a transmission tower is located within an R-1, PL, C-1 or GO zone, the <br />provisions of subparagraph (a) also shall apply to the tower <br />substructure and all above ground ancillary facilities. <br />(c) The city may require the posting of an open ended bond before <br />development permit issuance to insure removal of the transmission <br />tower, substructure or antennas after the facility no longer is being <br />used. <br />5 Of course, the request for a variance would also need to meet the stealth design, proposed <br />landscaping, configuration or presence of mature trees factors as well. <br />6 This might be something else the City wants to put on its list of technical fixes to the code. <br />Hearing Official Decision (PDT 10-2, CU 11-1) 41 <br />