EC 9.8090(1): The proposal is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and <br />applicable refinement plans. <br />The findings above in regards to the PUD criteria at EC 9.8320(1) and (2) which address applicable <br />provisions of the Metro Plan and the Willakenzie Area Plan (WAP), are incorporated herein by <br />reference as demonstration of compliance with this criterion. <br />Based on the incorporated findings, the proposal is found to be consistent with the Metro Plan, and <br />Wiilakenzie Area Plan (WAP) as required. <br />EC 9.8090(21: The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposal are <br />reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the livability or appropriate <br />development of surrounding property, as they relate to the, following factors: <br />(a) The proposed building(s) mass and scale are physically suitable for the type and <br />density of use being proposed. <br />This subsection addresses compatibility and livability issues by ensuring that proposed buildings are <br />sized appropriately for their use. In this case the proposed use is for a cell tower'not.a building as that <br />term is defined in EC 9.0500 and used in subsection (a). While the criterion is not applicable, it is <br />noted that the applicant's proposal incorporates the use of a 75-foot mono-pole instead of a lattice <br />tower. The applicant has also provided elevations of the proposal on Sheet A-2 of the application. <br />Given that the proposed facility meets the telecommunications standards at EC 9.5750 in regards to <br />location and height, the proposed mass and scale are suitable for the use proposed which is a <br />telecommunications facility. <br />Given the above findings, the proposed mass and scale are physically suitable for the type of use being <br />proposed, consistent with this criterion. The findings presented on pages 8 and 9 of the applicant's <br />written statement for this criterion are acceptable as they relate to the physical suitability of the <br />proposed tower, as well as existing and proposed screening. <br />(b) The proposed structures, parking lots, outdoor use areas or other site <br />improvements which could cause substantial off-site impacts such as noise, glare <br />and odors are oriented away from nearby residential uses and/or are adequately <br />mitigated through other design techniques, such as screening and increased <br />setbacks. <br />This criterion addresses site improvements which could cause substantial. off-site impacts such as <br />noise, glare, and odors. The subject site is surrounded by low-density and medium density residential <br />development to the east, west and north and the golf course to the south. Off-site impacts could <br />come from four apparent sources: noise from the ancillary facilities, glare from lighting, <br />electromagnetic exposure and visual impacts from the ancillary-facilities and tower. <br />Noise -Telecommunications standards at EC 9.5750 require that noise generating equipment shalt be <br />sound-buffered by means of baffling; barriers, or other suitable means to reduce sound level _ <br />Staff Report <br />(PDT 10-2 & CU 11-1) June 2011 32 <br />HO Agenda - Page t <br />