I The planning commission agreed with the hearings official. Record 18. <br />2 In its second assignment of error, petitioner argues that the city's findings are <br />3 inadequate and there is not substantial evidence in the record to support the city's conclusion <br />4 that EC 9.8320(13) is met, where the top 25 feet of the tower will not be screened. Petitioner <br />5 argues that the evidence in the record demonstrates that the tower's location in a residential <br />6 neighborhood and its height are not "reasonably compatible and harmonious" with the <br />7 neighborhood. <br />8 Although the findings quoted above could be clearer, we understand the hearings <br />9 officer to have concluded that the proposed tower is reasonably compatible and harmonious <br />10 with the neighborhood where it meets the objective standards set out in the EC for <br />11 telecommunications towers, and where the tower will be screened from view while still <br />12 allowing the tower to function as intended. We cannot say that those findings are inadequate <br />13 or represent an erroneous interpretation and application of EC 9.8320(13). We also do not <br />14 think that the evidence cited by petitioner in support of its argument that the tower is not <br />15 compatible with the neighborhood is so overwhelming that a reasonable person could not <br />16 find that the tower is compatible, particularly given the inherently subjective nature of the <br />17 criterion. Olson v. City of Springfield, 56 Or LUBA 229, 237 (2008). <br />18 Finally, petitioner argues that the city failed to address its argument that the fact that <br />19 the EC allows telecommunications towers as conditional uses in the R-1 zone does not mean <br />20 that the proposed tower complies with EC 9.8320(13). The findings quoted above as well as <br />21 the planning commission's findings that agree with the hearings officer respond to that <br />22 argument. <br />23 The second and fourth assignments of error are denied. <br />24 THIRD AND FIFTH ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR <br />25 EC 9.5750 imposes special siting requirements and procedures for <br />26 telecommunications facilities. EC 9.5750(7)(f) provides: <br />Page 10 <br />