As City requirements regarding radio frequency emissions are consistent with the Federal <br />Communications Act of 199fi, and the issue of noise impacts is sufficiently addressed through <br />other telecommunications requirements, staff recommends that the Planning Commission <br />affirm the Hearings Official's decision with regard to Northgreen Property Appeal Issue 9. <br />Northgreen Property Appeal Issue 10 <br />Alternative SitesAnalysis- EC 9.5750 <br />The Hearings Official addresses this issue on pages 29-31 of the decision pages fig-71 of the <br />record}. The appellant asserts that the decision did not adequately discuss the applicant's lack <br />of substantial evidence regardingthisanalysis. <br />The Hearings Official notes that the standard at EC 9.57507}does not address how many <br />alternative sites should be analyzed or provide further guidance. The Hearings Official provides <br />two pages of findings addressing this issue and discusses am Oregon Court of Appeals casein <br />.relation to this issue. The Hearings Official correctly concluded that while the evidence <br />provided in regards to this analysis was"minimal"there is no requirement that the applicant <br />select an alternative site and as such, in this case the basic requirement had been met. <br />As such, staff recommends that the Planning Commission affirm the Hearings Official's decision <br />with regard to Northgreen Property Appeal Issue 14. <br />Northgreen Property Appeal Issue 11 <br />Minimal Off~Site Im acts - EC 9.832012 ~ p ~ <br />The Hearings Official addresses this issue on pages 42-43 of the decision pages 82-83 of the <br />record}.The appellant asserts that this criterion was not met, especially in regards to noise <br />impacts. <br />The Hearings Official provides findingsthat addresstraffic, noise, stormwater, environmental <br />quality, RF emissions and aesthetic impacts. The Hearings Official incorporated EC 9.57507}~f} <br />by reference in regards to noise, and part of the Hearings Official's approach was to require <br />undergrounding of the ancillary facilities. As discussed above, undergrounding the ancillary <br />facilities may alter the current application so substantially that a new application is needed, and <br />the feasibility of the related approval condition may not be based on adequate evidence in the <br />record. <br />As such, staff recommends that the Planning Commission's determination under this issue <br />should follow the related outcome upon deliberations, regarding Northgreen Property Appeal <br />Issue 3. <br />8 <br />PC Agenda -Page 8 <br />