I "In R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, C-1, and GO and in all other zones when the adjacent <br />2 property is zoned for residential use or occupied by a dwelling, hospital, <br />3 school, library, or nursing home, noise generating equipment shall be sound <br />4 buffered by means of baffling, barriers or other suitable means to reduce <br />5 sound level measured at the property line to 45 dba." (Emphasis added.) <br />6 A. Fifth Assignment of Error <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />The hearings officer concluded that EC 9.5750(7)(f) requires that the noise generating <br />equipment from the proposed telecommunications facilities be sound buffered to reduce the <br />sound level measured at the property line to 45 dBa. The hearings officer rejected <br />petitioner's assertion below that the 45 dBa limit applies to all noise measurable from the <br />subject property at the property line, including noise that is not generated by the <br />telecommunications equipment, and requires the city to deny the application if the <br />measureable noise level of all noise at the property line exceeds 45 dBa. Record 247. The <br />planning commission agreed with the hearings officer and adopted additional findings: <br />"The Planning Commission finds that the Hearings Official was correct in his <br />application of 45 dba standard, specific to the noise-generating <br />telecommunications equipment proposed in the application(s). The Planning <br />Commission also finds that the standard does not necessarily preclude noise- <br />generating telecommunications equipment when ambient noise may already <br />exceed 45 dba. * * * [T]his determination is supported by the plain text of EC <br />9.5750(7)(f). Further, this is supported by the context provided by EC <br />9.5750(6)(b)(5), which requires the applicant to submit `[d]ocumentation that <br />the ancillary facilities will not produce sound levels in excess of those <br />standards specified in subsection (7) of this section, or designs showing how <br />the sound is to effectively be muffled and reduced pursuant to those <br />standards." Record 10 (emphasis in original.) <br />In its fifth assignment of error, petitioner repeats its assertion made below that in applying <br />the EC 9.5750(7)(f) 45 dBa standard, the city must consider all noise from all sources, and <br />argues that the planning commission misconstrued applicable law in determining that the EC <br />9.5750(7)(f) noise standard only requires that the noise generated by the noise generating <br />equipment that is part of the proposed telecommunications facilities be considered. <br />Petitioner argues that the "plain language" of EC 9.5750(7)(f) requires measurement of all <br />Page 11 <br />