towers. While the fact that there are a multitude of poles and wires throughout the neighborhood <br />does not necessarily mean that the proposed mono-pine is reasonably compatible, it does help <br />establish a baseline visual impact that the proposed mono-pine can be compared to. <br />The applicant also proposes to provide landscaping mitigation to screen the proposed <br />mono-pine form surrounding properties. The applicant and staff discussed possible landscaping <br />mitigation for the proposed mono-pine, and ultimately staff has recommended a number of <br />stringent conditions of approval should the CUP be approved.' Among other things, the mitigation <br />would require the applicant to hire a licensed landscape architect firm to develop a comprehensive <br />screening plan. The applicant would have to plant six 20-foot trees around the base of the proposed <br />mono-pine. The trees would be anticipated to be 30-feet tall after five years and 40-feet tall after <br />10 years. The landscape architect would have to work with the adjacent property owners to the <br />east, north, and west who are closest to the proposed location. Large evergreen trees would have <br />to be planted around the mono-pine, trees would have to be planted in close proximity to the <br />adjacent property lines in areas agreed to by the neighbor, the landscaping would have to be <br />inspected and approved by the City before any building permits could be issued, watering and <br />maintenance of the landscaping would be the obligation of the church or the applicant, and all of <br />the costs of such mitigation would be borne by the applicant. The applicant has agreed to all the <br />proposed conditions of approval.' <br />For most of the neighborhood, there would not be much of a visual impact from the <br />proposed mono-pine. The neighborhood has a large number of existing utility poles and wires, the <br />views of the proposed mono-pine is at least partially screened by existing buildings and trees, the <br />proposed mono-pine looks similar to existing trees, and the proposed landscaping further mitigates <br />the visual effects of the proposed mono-pine. While the proposed mono-pine would certainly be <br />visible, it would hardly dominate or overwhelm the neighborhood. With the proposed landscaping <br />mitigation, I would have little difficulty finding that the proposed mono-pine would be reasonably <br />compatible with most of the surrounding properties. <br />A number of the mitigation provisions were based on conditions from the Northgreen case. <br />9 The applicant's only objection is to the conditions of approval requiring any temporary emergency generators <br />brought to the site to meet the 45 dBa noise standards. As the applicant explains, OAR 340-035-0035(a) exempts <br />e]mergency equipment not operated on a regular or scheduled basis" from the noise requirements. I agree with the <br />applicant that the emergency equipment need not be subject to the noise regulations. In any event, emergency <br />situations would be such a rare and fleeting occurrence that they would not affect whether the proposed mono-pine <br />would be reasonably compatible with the surrounding properties. <br />Hearings Official Decision (CU 14-4) 13 <br />258