Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA97-006
i . 1___ly / 1:4;A ;'`.r :l am'`, /' _ L iz• / I - �, •.....„,... 0 I ,� ;. - -•__ Asa. Di L.Lin �+� i 3 `t 0 • I • ss� I , r O ���� i:::'i - d r> 1 I b /: •.a F '•I r-- z .3 C = D = a NE 50TH , ' T 1 ! .: /.: . �" ,. .'i' -,-, 1 CORPORATE - S • , / /.." .... .,.... al\ z t\, r - Lu F:• j� -Lk 1' B) �i M ?4 D5 Alt\kTEL __ ....., o__, __ i li' P iti- `,�-- '� IG0=60 _- - ca) 67 (\CA Y Y UN1 ICATIDALS Q• / __-Too I - I l 'I._ /.:-. ! _ v,« of �' { S2 ,i4/ ml (A)? • ;:/7. ��. � ~ I __ -- -- ° I I S.P. I75007 - -- , / -- 1v N SST IDd�a�Z `/ II I- -��- - �� ,Z-; _ =-= Q l3 .: 131 i W01 , , LLI I-- =� /` c, Q �� ` O CC > _Ice _" Ir • s (2) I� �W - i ------ -------o K£KKY DAL E�SNrIRC-�IkO 5�41: /';i b�' S.P 052 86 N I S.P 675043 ,- poiyr::: r:: • ;� �z ---- -- �� L (B) TI' 1--- _ - /..... >'.v'J�'% �I NI f-- 1 , ti. --( I �'L( , W 0 LOC.) acx) 300 Lidia /::'; ;: y ' 1S.P182082 m I NI \1 0 12:1 , ��/ � i I Q /`:' /...' 1]':' ti� 165 16` - 33C 1 u,_ t'p i :ao I 33C` 1.�i rr I ;3 27C ,�!;: .J ' , _ • __ �i ��� SE 76TH , .ST J I SG��-� 1f - g00/ NI 1 1L� �(•� /�, n o3.IF'1� 124.9G 9 - ! w &' 33�4ui� u- 'Sc Izo ' . fr' N1 .moo 15 �I .n, ,. I ccT ('� Q '_� 'n: Wu1 ,OOBCr ,f e' 8 I 1,1�•�� �� �(n,,r� DETAIL- �,/�A/ cc '. .•/...:' vy_-/ '. rJ 14, �-I -F", • aP 13' `� �y. 17.8 `�)t7.°Z I[I.5 _o I I`fLi(7f7 11U.�tJ V�I��L Y�i o' d [ sI 1L 6✓ i4 1- 1 CI L raj u+ 1G •d. •• • li ., �.�. L 1 ? 4n1� 2 c IwT o W ?,[,O L------ f� l S�T `O I (n ~ I I 1 I ^. 1 17 nce.r(a 3i 0 I 74.26 - S� 3 5.53 I i ITR.' .`,.(2) l i 16S Ian �• ,!`�` U c o' I^ �b Q , o. •8 20 Cn Q 5 L �4h T1 6 I% o �D • v . :F ., un r "' .I 2 45.F;1591 6> h Q' <ci �••. 1-• C 15s I� �:o/t'✓ri<, irw .- .01 ? " 't 4 01 5 `.. - --------1 LAND USE • 34" V/ { �� _ :.I _ i 137.Ri tv 'i3 - ---i 0 H IY! ' Al,,..:,�.. S s r 76TH ;;PL. u '� - Gl� CAiNW1ERG�L �4127F.�21AL - J ,� �,\, aa3r l\31 W 75 N Mom' 5 - -1-3-1 k mul-ff-rAfi'IILI (NEWCASTLE) - ? r - 2ii. �- >{ 13398� 68OT! ! 7 3° .-. - _ 1E= `/�' i ' �l 9545 1256i �TBItl6 j ;.. ------� �;I r ,o '69.65 Y �2� 1 2'i uI ._ I 1 g IZ {Z.13 �� ___ _ jM co co . ., 1 ✓ i 5-55^' �: (� �/ =• I J ..r,;.°105 s nl 1 ^ �y/.�{ • 1 i5 .92 'j = 6' • zr l 1 Er ' /04E 4 55 ry- 'I I t ! F I 1' t 5.6E1 �: y\� 2 I I Z7o ;: IQ T - W s /' 27 SE: G 77Tf �� _PL.s a * .a . ; 75 Q :66:5 f ;I`` N, Q i5' .., E6 ,� N 65.04 i b5� _ f.� _ 33o I _134 �ZI I J 6: 3 �S b;n,i:o'`. ml ~ 4�L 5, �� �z 03 z�I Z- ... 0 �o I S.P 4?5069 Q �• o: of • o 77B Lr'!LP 7,c6 RL.E.5ENTON t � e:' _ of 28 0l 25 -1 3D - I? Is a 15 co;, m;LL:;i ?29 D C w� Lr-!so_-✓+ �0.. 162.4 .n 142.56 1 9: 55 Cs. 526i . 113.39 104 _ I .30�- _ u,f r_ •�� -__ 12;; ... 330 I I84 I3 0".. , - 134 I ..,...,....:::,...j.:::-....--': '''' m---8---,' nL-- I , W i ,� .:. • ,... . -,t.,,, ...,74 . '°7 i 1 , EL --, ; 1'3 : R__1.....1 . , i 2 017 . .,. , : ! 9$4 ill. lIIlI� c ��� -B3/8 Ig1!:...)-tff.ill. pI - <r18 In • p 873 y•. - 1 IC 1 79 2.0 ,L ..� .:2:15 ID \ _ i i" a- i T 5nI_k 4 3 165 W O v ------If3 I, , 4,,�� ���1:li . \v� ?1ZI i I Q mI ` ��� C)(3) I : 1j53 ::�\ \ `1 ' e. I „ I I ,-S.E. 79TH=ST. r ( ks L et L: \ :r n , 2 27! I I - -- ------- -I11� NIv -1-- c > a 7qQ j V 784 $ ��'C/�� ��V • ,,1-- ..',.- \C, , : ,..., ., if. '-/ .0 _ S P 011-87 - D • 6 5� i . ' N ` ijm1 r' , ;r �''6 ' 4. 79/j ' = 2 a_ir•• 7q5/ �jj/'L��/ �' i J 1s1 c /%% •.\ �3L� al ?z - F open ` I� 1. Ci �4,. Z -I I I _i/ \1 o V{vF J �1.______.a,,..,,.,., ,I $Q�_ ,I . - G9' 1 _ - -250 - - - - 33G- 61' -- I, . �* 1,, ,mr y� Z 1 �Jsi 130 IOC C J 3D ONINNbjd�Zdw'lion ,, 1 1661 Q .1 1 R lil8oa, i j 1 '2IR mnr-- TIT. mpg se; a 41ees oI Zia . ----b— e' Ci ' i wig PPP- Imola A limp ran pre I na ' III �r �li��E 1 iv 1���E itgi (... A .1 Till iI1 2 s a ax���b °6Yi!x 1IN 1$ o011QB 111 "A 1 . 1 f i i 1 1 1 ril inli erg t/1 f y @!om 1 , O 1 1 1 1 v ! �? ell• . • OM il d� 4�.s�i !MI e Z Z ' . .. s _ 1 v 1 IIHI a m Q p a co i co N a 11 N X 1 •1 v t g two 0: co 111111 N5PXi ',gill Erli tdi'IP m oN : I i E a §f a T ` T :.:.: ,...3 kid r_ I ,a IIIIIIIP I :: w� g� L li n a I _ _ 7 . 7 --Y---=-- __ -- --=--- -- ---- -- —_=----- -- -- -- -- --=-- Xrdi V. ----- - - - ----- - - - - --- l ,I SBOB LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. SURE/P00 CM.��,r �����.r I Q R KIRKLAND,WASHINGTON 98033 206-603-3222 11 1 It Mal 1 SM3 -II -m II. 1 i n01>1O/MAW TOW R4. I])R.®MK MOMS a m R .DIM tall am]m / d! 4�' 1 I/ 1 II 1 TOM OMIT ROOM U Tl[m 1].Tm.hso.n.] I mM'.OnOSZ I SO U FOOL.(.t>I0 .. L Q C. TOM) Il 1 .. WOWrc a ) I i Or Au I • , I WV. ri 4 =MS POWCr L. :>a;; K▪M▪ 0 1.0 inn o▪mI omn I CoT.p)sw]lwrt 0 Q 0 O Ij TOOL MVO girl 1 nlarta IT KO.omw op..la coo. 1 O II loin .�Or Ado.ONUS I Q V I > no.to Mora NO low N ana o mro voz norm Mai SP. 1 1 e.orwm lows. sum M�r ./lt NO nna - ImOc r.c]C. R , • SOAR TOO.ErWACO I Toro ♦ M•d! II . MOW Im twar.c Op.own 1 meta o now I I Il . SOAK Tao.Or ALL EEE I UM Mara. I,'I II A MM.. 1 1 A . �1 / I si I.r- \ - I 11111101MINUNWO MIME II 1 r I i \ CM.1 SOT MOM unc•( A ]ArM���w�s.w1]df 1 . I ` Mp101WOQ�2-+ 1 I )I w roan Q '� .I F — -----mil i------ -- --- -� .r P, '�]1 1280 IS QM V. CZ 177 1 II Waage. COS.cm o.s 11 IRA II I.a.1 I 1 II SITE PLAN I 1 womnuc� IWV warp I o r r y' >r w• . e C-1 Iwant.WIC RAN I SCALE NC-t•-01 I 1 ti m I I �� . . I- 7 a s rt...assort soa w smnc sas.a sw¢/ins • u Ins 01 ssssc O0 �� 5808 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. SUITE/400 • KIRKLAND.WASHINGTON 98033 • 206-803-3222 . I I II:// f,,,, , , ,, Ai . . z, .. .. .„,/, Amman 1.t,r4=Irtn: .vow . wmsR sumac LLWOI no/ YAL aryr.1•_0I T MI IIALONG`° M. TM 1011 IrlIrrINIIIIIIM 4.111• [• V a• Ate• ` MI• (3)PROM=Cass wmwa CM KW ;• �. 1.4MI( I I Itauioro WAS ,vw�.� ROM( .op> caw wows msmc*la WWOIt i Z-4 17/ Q O 1*x� I f- ill ll VW J L T!S K 4.TN ST. Oa [ck 11Esrtw..L NOBS „n d 0 I MO IDA I 2 v cp r . BUILDING OVERALL ROOF LOCATION 0 111,1. A-1 • 1 MM.moor RAN SCALE T/N-1.-0.12 1-- I I P7 07 WIDOWDI moi¢rm ONM.O. {l/} N IA Moro.Mr ga^1iO•S T m Mxnr 7 5808 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. rwinast I SUITE/100 I I I / 4 KIRKLAND,WASHINGTON 98033 206-803-3222 I ,, .i 1 1 1 I M i omnc noI MAA. S tiN ,.. ,:L. ..,.............„......................................r...... OM.M N MIX G6MIc lwLM uVf ' `n6 0f IBWS[0 i(1LLl Os�O1 Iull • NOM O11.M01 SUIL: 3p1••.1•-V I 1 SOJM OIW1Oi - WAG J/Jr-1'-0 1 S III I 3M.1 MG SO rl ! — ! ! 1.=::: Inra� 111''.1'r 11;':1;1 ;;1; , `.".nil 01111 n . I•_ ! RT Kn OLW1011 ---' wr-r-c 1] (OMONIAINUMIND IMAM 1 gI� wwoe�z� 11m D 2 1 6 ITU MC WM ST. O Kim....ems USA zz CC ' '' 11' I I ! z 1 L), .o.. ti, ,thy;,1 r EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS .c a IMPOSED MGM ru.1.n MOM _MP LW'.M'o 1 STAGS m/in A-2 1 UsT OLUT= K AM 3/Jr-1•-7 !. I a m 'I I - CIT' OF RENTON �♦ fit. ..LL Hearing Examiner r Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman May 6, 1997 q1 DO(� -*a Mr. Howard Seelig 4, � �� Mr. Martin Seelig /L c9> P.O. Box 1925 {Pj� Bellevue, WA 98009 4i Re: Request for Reconsideration of Appeal of Administrative Conditional Use for Nextel Communications Facility File No. LUA-97-90C,AAD a28 Gentlemen: This office has reviewed your request for reconsideration. A re-examination of the existing record does not demonstrate that the decision should either be reversed or modified, nor does the existing record invite the submission of any additional evidence as suggested by the request for reconsideration. The opportunity to demonstrate error was provided at the original public hearing. As noted,the record did not reflect sufficient evidence which would permit a change to the decision given in the original Report and Decision dated April 8, 1997. If you are not satisfied with this determination, you may appeal to Superior Court as outlined in the original decision. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:mm cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Mayor's Executive Assistant Larry Warren, City Attorney Gregg Zimmermann,PB/PW Administrator Mark Pywell, Project Manager Parties of Record LAvi_e %tJ All cOL4� 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2593 61)This paper contains 50°0 recycled material,20`o post consumer Seelig Family Properties ttElvED April 21, 1997 Mr.Fred Kaufman APR 2 2 199T Hearing Examiner City of Renton (Ty Of RENTON 200 Mill Avenue, South HEARING EXAM NER Renton,WA 98005 Re: Reconsideration of Decision on Appeal of LUA-97-006 ACU Dear Mr.Kaufman, Please accept this letter as our written request for reconsideration of the above referenced appeal as afforded in the decision of April 8, 1997.. Reconsideration is requested based upon the following: 1. Expert testimony of Mr.Martin Seelig,a licensed real estate broker in Washington State,was not adequately considered regarding devaluation of appellant's property adjacent to the proposed site. No consideration has been given to property devaluation stemming from"perceived radiation hazards"by the general public. Such perceptions have a distinct effect on property values regardless of the bipolar scientific opinions voiced in current ongoing national debates. The radiation debates rage on and so does the"perception"of danger,and thus the devaluation of our property continues. 2. Mitigation for the devaluation mentioned above can be achieved through the City of Renton adding special requirements to the Administrative Conditional Use Land Use Action of February 17, 1997. These special requirements are: a. Require the applicant,at appellant's option and subject to appellant's prior approval,to place non-RF-conducting flags on the proposed whip antennas so as to give them the appearance of flag poles. b. The antennas shall be updated at such time as new technology is available which will reduce visual impacts. c. No modifications which increase visual impacts from existing antennas or antennas under subject conditional use application be allowed. Further,no more antennas will be allowed on the subject Shurgard group of buildings or related land. d. Shurgard shall,to extent allowed under present easements for access applicable to said Shurgard site,allow appellant or their successors to use said easements for access to and from the appellant's adjacent property. At your earliest convenience we will attend a Reconsideration hearing and amplify upon the above. Consistent with this letter request in response to your April 8, 1997 Report and Decision letter,we assume we have not eroded the twenty day time period for any appeal to the Superior Court of Washington of King County. If in fact,the Superior Court"appeal clock"is running concurrent with the fourteen day"reconsideration clock",please notify us immediately. Respectfully submitted, /161-1j4-4d."` =CP-P-A'/ /4 .., Howard L. Seelig Martin A. Seelig Phone: 206-454-0885 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1925 Street Address: 1309 114th SE,Suite 107 Fax: 206-451-8203 Bellevue,WA 98009 Bellevue,WA 98009 astsi e Oulu i . EDITORIAL BOARD Peter A.Horvitz,Publisher • • Barbara Morgan,Editor . Craig Groshart,Editorial Page Editor °pinion Mary Ballantine,Community Representative Dorin Schuler,Community Representative •• ' a • Published by King County Journal Newspapers • Tuesday, A�rii'22,199(�- • • Letters `:•, 'CELL .TOWERS Time nowto comment on this growing concern There is currently an ordinance - before the King County Council that - . is being pushed by the cellular indus- try concerning the construction of cellular towers.It is Communications Ordinance 96-938 and it would allow cellular towers to be built within 100 feet of any residence without asking for public comment. if approved, these towers could be built in our neighborhood regardless of public opposition.The Growth Management • Committee is currently accepting public comment through tomorrow. Our Juanita neighborhood is being "subjected to just such a tower.Sprint •Spectrum has leased land to build a 100 foot cellular tower with up to 12- panel antennae and a 4-foot microwave dish.Located adjacent to the tower would be five-self con- tained cabinets, each 5 feet high.by 2.5 feet square.The surrounding area is all residential except for an auto 'repair business that was there before •::the land was re-zoned. Sprint doesn't care if it tuin4 our view, lowers our property value or even ?the`liealth concerns/'on microwave emissions. Our elected officials don't seem to care either. Royce=L.=Timothy— - - —_ — - --• Bothell -5411.1b SEL-66g April 8, 1997 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON nPMENT PLANNInfr, REPORT AND DECISION OF RENTn', APPELLANT: Howard Seelig • APR W;8 1997 Martin Seelig File No.: LUA97-028,AAD L.IL6 WED LOCATION: 1755 NE 48th SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal of Administrative Conditional Use for installation of communication antennas by Nextel Communications Facility PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellant's written request for a hearing and examining the available information on file,the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the March 25, 1997 hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,March 25, 1997,at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the appeal, Exhibit No.2: Letter to Hearing Examiner from proof of posting and publication, and other Tom Donnelly dated March 25, 1997 documentation pertinent to the appeal. Exhibit No.3: Series of photographs Exhibit No.4: Memorandum from Long Range Planning Parties are: Appellants,Howard Seelig and Martin Seelig P.O.Box 1925 Bellevue,Washington 98009 Representing the City of Renton Mark Pywell 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 • Representing the applicant David Hall 1920 E. Calhoun Seattle, WA 98112 Howard Seelig Martin Seelig Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 2 • The Examiner explained that the hearing was an administrative appeal held pursuant to brdinances 3071 and 3809,and was the only administrative review to occur on the matter. The matter may be submitted back to the Examiner for reconsideration if the parties are not satisfied with the decision. The appeal by writ of review is to Superior Court. He stated that the appellant had the burden of demonstrating that the City's action was erroneous,and would have to show clear and convincing evidence that the City's determination was incorrect. At that point the City could respond, if they chose to do so. The applicant to this proceeding would also be given an opportunity to respond. Howard Seelig,one of the appellants, stated that they had submitted written descriptions of the reason for their appeal, and added additional points. There are currently three sets of antennas from three different companies which could mechanically and electronically work for more than one company. There is a policy that states that the same structure should be used for more than one utility. He stated that there are radiation hazards associated with the antennas that have not been scientifically evaluated in total,but there is known hazard from radiation. Appellants have the adjacent property and do plan to use it so that radiation hazards would adversely affect them. There is considerable economic benefit to whoever allows his or her property to be used for these antennas, so there is no question that their neighbors are motivated. Appellants' outlook is that there is no question they are a detriment to their property and the policy of the City of Renton of equitably sharing in the burden of these things should be applied in this case. They are bearing the entire burden of antennas for their neighborhood,and the proposal here is to add yet further. Martin Seelig, an appellant herein, stated that regarding the use of a particular property involved in a neighborhood business,these antennas are definitely for more regional use. He also stated that the antenna themselves can be put inside buildings. It might require reconstruction of the building,but in terms of being electronically feasible, it can be done. It might be more costly,but certainly there is economic benefit to be derived by Shurgard from the antenna companies. Mark Pywell,on behalf of the City,stated that this facility is exempt from SEPA;therefore,the City's review rights are limited to existing ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan(CP). At the pre-application stage the long range planning section did review the project and declared it to be consistent with the CP and specific to policies in regards to the siting and location of telecommunication facilities,and the allocation of existing structures and towers. Staff reviewed the administrative conditional use permit and found it to be consistent with the CP and City zoning. It is considered a medium utility which means that as an administrative conditional use permit it is allgwable within the area and the site where this is being located. Regarding possible radiation from this facility,at this time there is no quantifiable data on this in regards to the electromagnetic field. There have been a number of studies,but they have come out on both sides of the issue. The City has no policies nor any ordinance addressing that. The City in reviewing the administrative conditional permit did look at the aesthetic impacts and the protection of health and safety and found that this facility and the use of an existing site was consistent with its policies in spreading the towers out through the neighborhood. Staff supports the location of this facility within the existing site as a means of limiting their impact upon the entire neighborhood. The majority of this facility and the mechanical equipment that is associated with these antennas would be located inside the building and that only the antennas themselves are being attached to the roof of the structure. This again will limit to the extent possible the impact of this facility. Staff has in the past looked at sharing a structure between different utilities,but it is a sharing of the structure, not the antenna or signaling device itself. City has looked at requiring or encouraging the co-location on a Howard Seelig Martin Seelig ' Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 3 single.tower of more than one antenna.. With some of the utility.providers there has been acceptance of that • issue; others have resisted it and indicated that they need up to 50 foot vertical separation from their particular antennas to the next antenna. David Hall,attorney for the applicant, stated that the alternative for Nextel if it is not allowed to co-locate on this building,would be to construct a separate support tower to mount these same three omni-directional whip antennas. It would have to be in the same general area,probably still visible from the appellants' property. In the site selection process,the area is narrowed down to a fairly small area based on topography and other physical barriers so that the antennas can communicate with other facilities in the system by line of sight. That is an absolute physical constraint on these facilities. They have to be able to communicate with the user's handsets and with other towers or antennas on a line of sight basis,which is why it is not possible to locate the facility inside the building. The support equipment is located entirely within the building,with only the antennas and the small mounting structures on top of the building. For that same reason the ability to screen the actual antennas is fairly limited. These omni-directional whip antennas are three inches in diameter and 12 feet tall. Unlike some of the panels that are already on top of the building,these whip antennas will not be very visible. Regarding radiation hazards, Mr. Hall,stated that that entire area has been preempted by federal law,the Telecommunications Act of 1996,vesting complete authority to regulate telecommunications facility based on alleged health or environmental effects with the FCC. The FCC has promulgated standards based on generally accepted standards,primarily the ANSI standards. Studies have shown that the power density created by this type of facility, is just orders of magnitude below the.threshold that would allow even the FCC to regulate them. These facilities,unlike some other types of transmission facilities such as radio and TV towers,operate at extremely low power levels and in a range of the electromagnetic spectrum more or less between 800 and 900 megahertz. ' The appellants mention that this is really a regional use and it certainly is a regional system. Those regional benefits should be weighed in this process,but for our purposes this particular site is also a very local use. It would provide enhanced coverage to a very localized area. The reason that it is being placed here is to provide adequate coverage along the I-405 corridor and the Kennydale area. In fact it is a requirement of Nextel's FCC license that they do provide what is called seamless coverage and this site will go a long ways towards providing coverage on a very local level. Tom Donnelly,Matthews Land Company,50 116th Avenue,#120,Bellevue,Washington 98004, spoke as a consultant to Nextel Communications in seeking the approval of this conditional use permit. Nextel Communications is a nation-wide telecommunications service provider and provides a communications service called an enhanced specialized mobile radio facility,ESMR for short. This facility is a mobile radio that you typically see cell phone users using on the highway and grocery stores or wherever. It goes far beyond that, however,and it also includes paging services. It also includes capability of the conventional two-way walkie- talkie system which would enable one user to communicate with 5, 10, 50 or more people at one time. In this sense it allows for the direct communications of multiple individuals in a variety of situations. It combines several uses into one. The method used to evaluate the locations for this service is based on several criteria. Not only is this a regional system, it is a nation-wide system. Each system is based on an integrated cell that has to be linked with others. The cells are mandated by the FCC to provide seamless coverage across a certain region. Several factors looked at are elevation to obtain good distribution of the signal,uninterrupted t Howard Seelig Martin Seelig Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 4 coverage,and also to check for obstructions so that even if the height is good,there must.not be other buildings, trees or other features in the way to obstruct the signal. When examining the feasibility of the site,Mr: Donnelly stated that they look for features which will minimize environmental impacts that may occur through construction and they look for features that will minimize impacts on the community through the aesthetic impacts of building the equipment. Where at all possible they have a priority to locate facilities on existing structures. In summary, Mr. Donnelly reiterated that this project is a benefit to the community through providing excellent expanded communication services to individuals,businesses and,governmental agencies. This can be accomplished in a way which is beneficial to the community and their concerns by minimizing visual impact, and it is also a benefit in terms of minimizing environmental damage through the construction of other uses. James Gibson, 13310 79th Place NE,Kirkland,Washington 98034,testified as a realtor for the applicant. He stated that he had inspected the proposed site for the facility and did see the three existing antennas on the structure. After looking at the surrounding neighborhood and the proposed facility within that district,he stated that the proposed facility is compatible due to it being predominantly commercial in nature. The surrounding uses are basically commercial, retail centers;there are multi-family developments to the northeast and to the south of the proposed facility. Mr. Gibson stated that in general the highest impact upon the area is the proximity of the facility and the surrounding area to the I-405 corridor. The noise from the freeway has a greater impact upon property values than a cell tower facility which does not stick up and raise attention the way a freeway does.Over all there is no market evidence that would indicate that a cell tower would have an impact upon the surrounding property values,given the fact there are three antennas already there. It has become a part of the accepted surrounding community. Closing arguments were then presented by Howard Seelig and David Hall, and their comments reiterated their previous statements. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The hearing closed at 10:19 a.m. FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS &DECISION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The appellants,Howard L. Seelig and Martin A. Seelig,hereinafter appellants,filed an appeal of an administrative determination approving a conditional use permit for Nextel Communications, hereinafter Nextel,for a series of transceiving antennas(File No.ACU-097-006). 2. The administrative conditional use permit, if ultimately approved,would allow Nextel,the underlying applicant,to construct an array of three(3)antennas on the roof of a mini-storage complex located at 1755 NE 48th Street in the City of Renton. The site is at the extreme north end of the City just east of Lake Washington Boulevard and I-405. a. Howard Seelig Martin Seelig Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 5 2. The appellants own property that.is immediately east of Where the antennas'•will be located. They allege that the proliferation of antennas on the roof of this adjacent structure is impairing their property value and may in some fashion jeopardize the health and safety of people who might be located on the appellants' property. 3. The challenged Conditional Use Permit would permit the installation of an antenna array on the roof of an existing building. The proposed antennas support cellular or digital communications systems including phone and pager services. The building on which they would be erected already supports a series of antennas from other cellular phone providers. The record reflects that there are three series of antennas on top of the building. 4. The appellants allege that the proliferation of antennas on the building is unsightly and will reduce their property value. They did not introduce any evidence of devaluation. 5. The appellants also allege that these antennas can produce adverse impacts on health through the generation of electromagnetic fields. They did not introduce any evidence of adverse health impacts. 6. The record reflects that the applicant will be meeting federal standards for any electromagnetic emissions and the ANSI standards. The threshold power is very low. Even the synergistic affects have been considered when the other antennas are coupled together with proposed antennas or the impacts of signals reflected off surrounding topography or structures. 7. A real estate agent reviewed the proposal,the site and surrounding area and the zoning. He concluded that the noise from I-405 would have the most impact on property values. There is no evidence that these antennas would lessen property values and the fact that there are already three sets would substantially diminish or dilute the economic consequences, if any,of this additional set. 8. Staff issued an approval of the Administrative Conditional Use. In general,they found the proposed complex compatible with the surrounding area since the only exterior evidence are three 12 foot tall,3 inch diameter antennas that look like poles. All supporting equipment will be contained within the building complex within storage lockers. 9. The appellants also argued that the,co-locational criteria should require the use of the same antenna structure rather than merely locating all of these antennas on the same building creating a visual blight. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The appellants have the burden of demonstrating that the Administrative Conditional Use decision was either in error,or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions,or was arbitrary and capricious(Section 4-3011(B)(1)(b). The appellants have,failed to demonstrate that the decision should be modified or reversed. The decision is affirmed. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision,when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious(Northern Pacific Transport Co.v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission,69 Wn.2d 472,478(1966)). ). Howard Seelig • Martin Seelig Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 6 3. - An action is likewise clearly erroneous when,although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing body,on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn.2d 255,259(1969)). 4. The appellants have failed to demonstrate that the decision was founded upon anything but a fair review of the conditional use provisions as it pertains to the proposed use. The appellants have failed to demonstrate with cogent evidence that a mistake was made. 5. The appellants did not introduce any documentation or other hard evidence regarding the proposed use. Anecdotal evidence is insufficient to convince this office that a mistake has been committed. Nothing in the co-locational criteria requires antennas to share the same physical post or column or tower. While this office might agree that the proliferation of antennas is not very aesthetic,that is not enough to reverse the decision below. 6. Since the burden of demonstrating error is on the appellants,this office can reach no other conclusion but that staff made the correct determination. The decision below must be affirmed. DECISION: The appeal is denied. ORDERED THIS 8th day of April, 1997. ..hajL- Y FRED J.KA �-- N HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMI 11.ED THIS 8th day of April, 1997 to the parties of record: Howard Seelig Mark Pywell . David Hall Martin Seelig 200 Mill Avenue South 1920 E.Calhoun P.O. Box 1925 Renton,WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98112 Bellevue,WA 98009 Tom Donnelly James Gibson Matthews Land Company 13310 79th Place NE 50 116th Avenue,#120 Kirkland,WA 98034 Bellevue, WA 98004 ' A Howard Seelig Martin Seelig Appeal of Nextel Communications Systems File No.: LUA97-028,AAD April 8, 1997 Page 7 TRANSMITTED THIS 8th day of April, 1997 to the following: • Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman,Plan/Bldg/PW Administrator Members,Renton Planning Commission Jim Hanson,Development Services Director Art Larson,Fire Marshal Mike Kattermann,Technical Services Director Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney James Chandler,Building Official Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington,Mayor's Executive Assistant Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler South County Journal Pursuant to Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m..April 22. 1997. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact,error in judgment,or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant,and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. Appeal of the Examiner's decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 11, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within twenty (20) days from the date of the decision. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. • ?a ; AAA() Seelig Family Properties March 6, 1997 Fred Kaufman CITY OF RENTON Hearing Examiner City of Renton MAR 0 61997 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Re: Appeal of LUA-97-006 ACU Dear Mr. Kaufman: We own the adjacent property to the east of the subject property, and we wish to file an appeal to the above referenced application. Specific areas of objection are identified in the following Ietter. The record should show that our property is not intended to be permanently undeveloped and we request that this fact be taken into consideration. Especially considering pending highly desirable development on the opposite side of I-405, our property has considerable potential for us as well as the City of Renton. If the adjacent owners had been less hasty they probablyld be thinking of development different from warehouses at this time. We have expended substantial money for architectural and engineering studies in anticipation of development of our property and recently had preconstruction conferences with Renton Officials. We submit a photo to show the existing antennas, as this information may have been omitted earlier. The photo shows that there are 15 separate antennas now installed. The proposal is, as well as we can read the tiny writing, to install 3 more antennas, each one 12-1/2 feet tall. This appears to be as tall as any existing and maybe taller. The 55 foot dimension proposed appears to be measured from the highest point on the steeply sloped adjacent ground, which seems inconsistent with Building Codes. We wish to refer to Planning Policies of Renton which recognize the unsightly nature of utilities such as the subject antennas. These Policies contain intelligent measures to accomplish a reasonable and equitable balance between the aesthetic detriments associated with achieving a functional utility and the adverse effects on adjacent properties. From the"City of Renton Utilities Element" (attached) "The Utilities Element defines how to minimize the detrimental impacts of utility improvements on surrounding development." The policies of the Utilities Element should apply to the subject situation, and to our property as surrounding development, since our development is pending. "It(the Utilities Element) asks that the costs of improvement should be distributed in an equitable manner." Our property is already bearing at least its fair share of the cost burden because of existing antennas (as shown in the photo) and their devaluing effect on our Phone: 206-454-0885 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1925 Street Address: 1309 114th SE, Suite 107 Fax: 206-451-8203 Bellevue, WA Bellevue, WA 98009 98009 property. Adding still more unsightly antennas would go far beyond an equitable distribution of costs. The Phone Company can surely find alternative sites, although their costs may increase. But it is not equitable for us to bear the cost of devaluing our property again and again every time some phone company wants a cheap antenna site, in disregard of Renton policy. Objective U-A "Provide an adequate level of utilities consistent with land use." There are already enough antennas on the roof to meet the standard of adequacy. More are not needed to meet the standard of adequacy. Policy U-5 "Encourage the appropriate siting of all utility systems in a manner that reasonably minimizes impacts on adjacent land use." A few antennas here and there are"lost in the shuffle." Concentrations of antennas, such as on the subject roof, change the character of the appearance of the building. As can be seen in the photo, no other nearby building has a concentration of antennas like the subject warehouse at the present time, and the pending proposal would substantially add to the number.of antennas. Approval for installation of more antennas as proposed would not reasonably minimize the impacts, consistent with Renton policy, except if the sole reason is to minimize costs for the Phone Company. Creating a building roofline profile that looks like an antenna utility station does not minimize the impact of antennas. "Discussion" (at the end of Utilities Element) "Policies are designed to insure that utility services are constructed in a manner which reasonably mitigates the impacts on adjacent land uses." This places additional emphasis on U-5 (please see preceding). Policy 101 "Require that cellular communication structures and towers be sensitively sited and designed to diminish impacts and collocated on existing towers and structures wherever possible and practical." As the photo shows,the existing number of antennas has already changed the character of the warehouses. Conventional warehouses do not have the number of antennas that exist at this time, nor do conventional buildings in the photo or elsewhere. More antennas would only make the warehouses look very much more strange. There is no way that making the warehouses look like antenna bases, as they do, could be consistent with the requirement for sensitive siting. It is unlikely that collocating of different Phone Companies on existing antennas is possible and practical. We hereby request that the proposal to install more antennas(LUA-97-006 ACU)be denied. Respectfully Submitted, • -� Cl 721 Cc.�,�1� A Se e-'4 c HOWARD L. SE LIG MARTIN A. SEELIG GUO-G( (-'1'4JJ (\CIV I I.JIV LC,/ JV'..J,I-Lnl`I CJ):7 1'YJ I. 1 im\ U +-J • CITV OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT • Summary: The Utilities Element guides future utility service within the greater Renton area. It helps ensure that adequate utilities will be available to both existing and new development. It also ensures that utility improvements will be used to help implement the Comprehensive Plan and will be phased according to community priorities. The Utilities Element indicates how utility improvements can be used to maintain equitable levels of service, guarantee public health and safety and serve new development in a timely manner. In addition,the Utilities Element-ds efine how minimize the detrimental impacts of utility improvements on surrounding development as well as the community as a whole. the-Utilities Elements looks to promote efficiency jn-the provision or improvement of_service wherever appropriate and feasible. In addition, it asks that th costs of improvements sh d be difttribut in an a uitable_manner. Be and the city's existing �� p .�. � c -._-----� y y boundaries, the Utilities Element fosters coordination with regional and adjacent utility systems. It also guides the provision of services to areas outside of the City but within the City's planning area especially in cases of annexation. The City of Renton provides water, wastewater and stormwater utility services for citizens residing within the city limits and by agreement with other purveyors for some areas located outside of the City's boundaries. Renton cotittactfi with a private hauler for collection of solid waste and residential recycling. Other utility services which affect the City and are discussed within this Draft Background Report•include: cable television, conventional telephone, fiber optic cable systems,cellular telephone service, natural gas, petroleum products, and electricity. (See the Annexation Section of the Land Use Element, the Stormwater Section of the Environmental Element and the Capital Facilities plan Element for policies related to the Utilities Element.) • General Policies Objective U-A: Provide an(adequate lcvcDaf public utilities in response to and�onststen wi� land use, protection of the environment and annexation goals and policies. Policy U-I. Utility facilities and services should all utility systems in a manner_ •reasonabl be consistent with the growth and development (minimizes impacts on adjacent sand uses- concepts directed by the Comprehensive Plan. Policy U-6. Where appropriate, encourage Policy U-2. Promote the collocation of new conservation in coordination with other utilities public and private utility distribution lines with and jurisdictions. planned or pre-existing systems (both above and below ground)in joint trenches and/or right-of- . Policy U-7. Continue to encourage the ways where environmentally, technically, coordination of non-emergency utility trenching • economically and legally feasible. activities and street repair to reduce impacts on mobility, aesthetics, noise and other disruptions. Policy U-3. Process permits and approvals for utilities and facilities in a fair and timely manner Policy U-8. Continue to coordinate the and in accord with development regulations that construction and replacement of City-managed encourage predictability. utilities with other public and private infrastructure in order to minimize construction Policy U-4. Strive to protect the health and safety related disruptions and contain costs. of Renton citizens from recognized harmful effects •of utility generated environmental hazards. Policy U-9. Where appropriate work cooperatively with other jurisdictions to ensure Policy U-5. Encourage thE;appropriate siting,) that reliable and cost-effective utilities are • (onstructio roper ion)and decommissioning of available to meet increasing demands resulting from local and regional growth. V-3 MAR-03-199? 14a59 • 2e5 2?? 4455 93% P.01 CITY OF RENTON UTILITJ• :LEMENT ,--, Policy U-10. Where appropriate require • Discussion: The above general policies are reasonable landscape screening of she-specific—) designed to insure that utility services are safely above-ground utiliti_facilities in order to diminish and efficiently provided, and are,constructed in a) visual,Impacts. environmentally sound maiine iulch reasonably) mitigates impacts 04 ddfaCettt latrai ryes, 7h Policy U-11. Identify utility capacity needed to p`oIiits also emphasize cooperation and accommodate growth prior to annexation. Do not coordination with other agenciesrjurisdictions, annex areas where adequate utility capacity cannot and purveyors to create and maintain utilities be provided. City-Managed Utilities Objective U B: Provide and maintain safe, reliable and adequate utility facilities and services for the City's current and future service area to meet peak anticipated demands of the City in an efficient, economic and , environmentally responsible manner. • Policy U-12. Approval of - development should be conditioned on utility systems . .. ,,i•s y, ' ii"• ' 1;,'f. °•,'''.t ••, .. •. - ' •tg• with capacity to serve the `= -: x•,.. ' 't ' ' ,t ,• • .�". . development, without - _ 'p 't` decreasing locally established f •, • t Y i • levels of service,being in place •• ° ..•.', ' - ,, .. '''�a ?`� `''''" " ':`, :stoma*, ".."" ?��� •t�. i:ca�I`l,. ti• : �;•'�p1rµ'' -3 .pia `:•: '• ' ' 4, u. t •'.. :--'` or with a financial commitment t� �_ _ �: ;,�� :: '. ,,: :,�,. to provide service within a ; specified time frame. "'T. x ' • - - • 16 — • -- s‘• • ''''' '.',:or • . • . .4141,L. .. .: Policy U-13. Coordinate the ,'' . •` '• • ' . . • ' . . • • ''. .!` •tom .M .. +` � � ...,. .. extension of utility services. „• .�4, !11—;11e 4� ..r T •• ,v •,• _„ with expected growth and . -..• f .,w,: wil.*lit n°''I1' :�''t . : ••%i•: development. .. - .,�„ . .+,; .• Policy U-14. Apply level of service standards consistently throughout the service area for city-owned or Policy U-17. Timely and orderly extension of managed utilities. If necessary,this level-of- City provided utility services (water,sanitary service standard may be phased-in over time. sewer,surface water,solid waste)should be provided within the City's.existing and future Policy U-1S. Preference should be given to service areas to meet public health and safety • capital facility improvements which will support requirements. ' the development and redevelopment of the ,. Downtown, mixed ute centers, the Urban Center Policy U 18. Water,sewer and stormwater and other high growth areas concurrent with facilities and services should be in place prior to 'anticipated growth. occupancy of development projects. Policy U-16. Encourage the use of water and Policy U-19. Implementation and coordination energy conservation technologies throughout the programs for the improvement,phasing and City financing of water, sewer and stormwater V-4 Mt;R-03-1997 15:00 20G 27? 4455 93% P.e2 CITYOFRENTONUTILIPPeELEMENT ��. Utility Service Area-Cable Television Telecommunications of Washington, Incorporated (TCI)holds a cable television franchise to serve the City of Renton. The service area includes the entire incorporated area of the City,expanding with annexations. All residential neighborhoods within the City are currently served. Service is still unavailable in some commercial areas due to market conditions which presently preclude line extension. General Description and Location of Cable Television The TCI facilities supplying Renton with cable television service are composed of a receiver, a headend, a trunk system and a feeder system. The receiver and the headend, which amplifies, processes and combines signals for distribution by the cable network, are located north of Burien, Washington. The signal is then transmitted via low-power microwave to a site in Kent, Washington, where it enters the trunk system. Signal strength is maintained by amplifiers placed at intervals along the cables. The amplifiers also serve as junction points where the feeder system taps into the trunk cables. Service drops then provide the final connection from the feeder line to the subscriber. Generally following street right-of-ways, the present network encompasses residential neighborhoods to the east, north and south. The unserved portion of Renton generally includes the commercial and industrial areas located in the Green River Valley. Capacity of Cable Television Facilities A cable system is not subject to the same capacity constraints as outer utilities. Providing and maintaining '. the capacity to serve is the contractual responsibility of the Utility. According to the City's franchise agreement with the purveyor, TCI must make service available to all portions of the franchise area. In some circumstances, costs associated with a line extension may be borne by the service recipient. TCI currently offers 38 active television channels,the maximum number possible with existing equipment. In addition, seven FM radio stations and 30 channels of digital music are available by subscription. Forecasted Conditions -Cable Television According to the provisions of TCI's franchise agreement with the City,the company must continue to make cable service available upon request when reasonable for any property within the current or future city limits. Therefore,under the current terms of this franchise,TCI would be required to provide cable service to projected growth within the City and the remainder of the Planning Area. Policy U-100. Require that the siting and location Policy U-102. Encourage healthy competition of telecommunications facilities be accomplished among telecommunication systems for provision of in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on the current and future telecommunication services. environment and adjacent land uses. Policy U-101. Re uire that cellul co niumm�cation structures d towers be sensitively sited and designed to diminish aesthetic impacts, and be collocated on existing statctures_ and towers wherever possible and practical. V.46 MAR-03-1997 15:01 206 277 4455 92% P.03 .. ;..;'...;',:,',..k,,1•:';'..:ii';',,'.;.i:•.' . • 4: • .....:::;.:::-:::ii:::;1:-.1...'::'. • • • r •� NN�s a mygpiNikS . • \• ,p�NTE 3 /�Nj�eNNAS > j a c, f. rim _ - 'z•• < hl� ' '_ +., �r . �*+ , . I � _ "; Igllill III , , s •', !. .. .. ,,..........„ i .6 1 a --, �.,., 3 T► � • .,.:„gt. r;r 4.,, r ,! ,&,p,AA r,: ,e ,, ;", 1 •■ ■ >•• q kk vins soq ■. . >t .. . . 1 .-.•.� . j�Y fi—. 3 Ska'S6 S • k.7,10 '` i`"`•" �+n i ts. �..�• � - i -1 'i-' is1, t...'£. :�' :•Y• -�cl'i.'Ya�1�t3A� C ,-•'F ,.�_ ,Xy f t. ,.,*''.r. ...,.:.:.. >_- .. - •-'.S.-,,' . '';'';- She , R+ Y' •• :` « ' •• 1 h. 'w �P "• , ti,. - .- .•._ ..._v� - _c',iC=T .,.,' c.z...-r.. a._., r .•�,+' 'd �.• `""'G:' "'�T• s`+' -Se Art .z J. V - "}, ,I / a t;'y E' n•YI+ "/.' - `_ • n1�.;.}�'� ]�-'''''�' �. T r } ;.,1 4.5'V 11 4 I,e% - _.T we F [' pt i]���1 S .J.�2iM,1i.31 L.!i ry..r l / i- �- l' . �� i TTT L.. <. ..,m, 'S" ' }} r p1j7 �tf'�. .� d !. r� f 'cit. ,<�V� o�r/�"-'��4 !` + y } X •�� • eItt i Amer .dt" ^r v-'u`Y^t-`your; r•^>• �Sf`' ., ^ . �.. •.. . - t • • o.i• e�. '-1r Ir 'ter ,,40 .' r' — by~' =`, ' ei _ - r, c•` r . rxe_ kl . • i �"' �i'�{!+2[{, a f4, + s... ,�-.f •r y i `r Lf i �:'i T!'s r -, �'+z'YI%'�J��[ yf,�- '.!"3" .'[ •.~+ - -.. < •rrx �'�''*5� t i r7 ^E+Ps d r ,.s 2•+ • _ _ _ ._— ...t "'<,1 a.r: +�..i+w.,..•p:r,=s 9v - '' • .i.Q'+.�;r`. ,,,n s'' '+ _ ___ �4 — - s e•; z. *4,,:s i, w {`•t,�tl'. �3$ - •^ '4f 4< t4 4 • e6f-rrf"• .- •, Y. S, .. .."'•tea f ✓- 4 .'av h. ���.•v..v ..3..'1Fk'`G.f,.'i•�.... '�..:s.F� .-`^ .. .,. ::,: Nextel Communifnations 5808 Lake Washingto d.,Suite 400,Kirkland,WA 98033 206 803-3222 FAX 2____3-3719 \\) W COMTAC( January 28, 1997 Megan Matthews, President Matthews Land Company, Inc. 5619•Scotts Valley Drive, Suite 200 " . Scotts Valley,California 95066 Dear Megan; This letter serves as formal notification of our decision to reassign the consultant lead responsibility for certain Nextel projects in Western Washington to your firm as of the date of this letter. Your company and its employees and sub-consultants are hereby authorized to represent Nextel on all site acquisitions, planning, permitting and construction management issues. We look forward to working with you on these projects. If you have any concerns or need additional information, please contact Mary Murdoch at (206) 803-3722. Very truly yours, 7 M Do Pl411„-0j- SOCO John A. Storch 939 9yjyD nstructi e1 A.CNucsiltant ke Engineering Director, PNW Coon onsu 408.438.9500 Matthews Land Company,Inc.' cc: Mary Murdoch V J"I'I!MS 5619 Scotts Valley Drive,Suite 200 Scotts Valley,California 95066 r landCPortable: 408.499.4190 �) �'li����' Fax: 408.438.9538 • On the day of 1toovtL .tj , 1997, I deposited in the mails of the United States,.a sealed envelope containing • 1 • r4c.f•0 a hd ct St CV% • documents. This information was sent to: • Name Representing • OtnGCOtMW �.-Arf IDS S1nt ard., Ihconne • ttou)oa..v 1%ind VIASFtih Scdb • • (Signature of Sender) S & L. 'gtX STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that n c.RA k. c.ee_c.�I . signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. • Dated: 3 q �e.�- '�7 �� Notary Public• and gton C�J�l�� for the State of Wa 9 • iC ' '79e, _ Notary (Print) I Ai ;l Li/U �si4 •N.`V ,.c t • .,„ My appointment expires: (D- 01 9- 97 +'L. % . • ? a. ,*c. Pro `,9 e. � NOTARY.DOC City of Renton REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works & ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONAL USE DECISION LAND USE ACTION REPORT DATE February 17, 1997 • Project Name Nextel Communication Facility Applicant ONECOMM CORPORATION File Number LUA-97-006,ACU Project Manager Mark R. Pywell,AICP Project Description Administrative Land Use Action (Administrative Conditional Use Permit) for the installation of three (3) omni-directional antennas. The antennas are approximately 12 feet six inches tall and will be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building. The top of the antennas will be 55 feet above ground elevation. No antennas will be removed as part of this project. Project Location Shurgard Storage, 1755 NE 48th Street • Exist. Bldg. Area gsf N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area N/A gsf Site Area N/A Total Building Area gsf N/A . • f :: �� S.P•052 86 j, W _ .e= I� de ` G16E- � .� �,�y.:::, _ _ I - (3) �! f-1 I � (6r ^�{ 'S.P 182082 m N s l� , `.i y. 33[ i —I- 4.. rnKEi/ SE /.. /'.: ^: SCi A&IltVJ r J�K� . D= 10.1: i�3''' ;i'\ 124.9:/ Y. " • oC ..:/:.:; "i .,.. N I5 y 6„ 1<s ,. [1 [-(1 EGA stir.%:: 1, , u 1 —` IC , I I r 1. / • II 1 1,5 G� 4 o 185 --' - = • — 16 7 — E5M_ -—-- ---=- — U ;" — I v 10 1 • C. !� 1 • i 1. = 5.69' L — — .,..‘,',/,','? .Administrative Conditional Use Report I___ ary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 2 A. Type of Land Use Action x Conditional Use Binding Site Plan Site Plan Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Special Permit for Grade&Fill Administrative Code Determination B. Exhibits The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing: application, proof of posting and publication, and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Drawing No. C-1, Site Plan (Received Jan. 10, 1997). Exhibit No. 3: Drawing No. A-1, Building Location Plan (Received Jan. 10. 1997). Exhibit No. 4: Drawing No. A-2, Exterior Elevations(Received Jan. 10, 1997). C. Project Description/Background: The applicant seeks approval to install three 12' 6" omni antennas on the Shurgard storage building. The antennas will reach a height of fifty-five feet as measured from the surface of the ground. The project is located in the Arterial Commercial (CA) zone. The CA zone allows for structures over fifty feet in height provided that a conditional use permit is obtained. The land use, cellular antennas, also requires an administrative conditional use permit. Thus, this permit covers both the height of the antennas and the location of the antennas in this zone The City has received one letter expressing concern with the number of antennas being constructed on this site. It should be noted that the City does not have an ordinance that regulates the number of antennas that may be constructed on a site. The Conditional Use Permit does review "Community Need" of a proposed project with the surrounding neighborhood. CURPT.DOC/ -Administrative Conditional Use Report F,;..::ary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 3 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now makes and enters the following: G. Findings 1) CONSISTENCY WITH CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Section 4-31-36 lists 11 criteria that the Hearing Examiner is asked to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on a Conditional Use application. These include the following: A. CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING CODE&OTHER ORDINANCES: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standard of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and any other plan, program, map or ordinance of the City of Renton. (1) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ITS ELEMENTS AND POLICIES The proposed communication facility is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies. Policy U-1: Utility facilities and services should be consistent with the growth and development concepts directed by the Comprehensive Plan. The City of Renton's business, industrial, and residential development is growing. The expansion of the Personal Communication System within the City is to ensure that a high quality of service can be offered to the local and regional community. Policy U-4: Strive to protect the health and safety of Renton citizens from recognized harmful effects of utility generated environmental hazards. The applicant states that the radio signals emitted from the PCS antennas do not contain any known health risk to the public. The applicant further states that the facility does not emit harmful rays, noxious odors, heat, excessive noise, or pollutants. The facility will operate at less than 200 watts of power. This is less than the power rating of most radio and television towers. Policy U-5: Encourage the appropriate siting, construction, operation, and decommissioning of all utility systems in a manner that reasonably minimizes impacts on adjacent land uses. The applicant states that the rooftop site provides the City with excellent coverage and minimizes the impact on adjacent land uses. This site is already used as a cellular site. The new antennas will allow the applicant to increase the level of service without the significant impact of locating a large tower structure on a lot in the adjacent area. (2) ZONING CODE The project site is zoned Arterial Commercial (CA). The CA zone allows for the construction of Personal Communication Systems providing that a conditional use permit is approved. The CA zone normally limits structures to a maximum height of fifty feet. The applicant is proposing a structure that is fifty-five feet in height. This zone allows for structures to exceed the fifty foot height limit provided that a conditional use permit (CUP) is obtained. As the applicant is already requesting a conditional use permit for the tower a second CUP is not required. Both the land use (the location of the PCS in this area) and the height of fifty-five feet can be considered under the same CUP application. CURPT.DOC/ Administrative Conditional Use Report 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 4 B. COMMUNITY NEED: There shall be a community need for the proposed use at the proposed location. In the determination of community need, the Hearing Examiner shall consider the following factors, among all other relevant information: (1) The proposed location shall not result in either the detrimental over concentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the proposed use. This project does not result in the detrimental over concentration of this use either in the City of Renton or in the immediate area. The Comprehensive Plan calls for the consolidation and co- location of telecommunication facilities. The Shurgard Storage location in the CA zoning district near the 1-405 corridor makes this an excellent site for the antenna installation according to the applicant. (2) That the proposed location is suited for the proposed use. According to the applicant, the Nextel ESMR antenna system is designed to serve the entire Puget Sound region. In as much, the system requires a number of antennas to serve not only specific areas, but also that each antenna site be integrated into the regional system. The proposed Shurgard site would serve Nextel customers in the Kennydale and 1-405 corridor. C. EFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The following site requirements shall be required: (1) 'The proposed location shall not result in either the detrimental over concentration of a particular use within the City or within the,immediate area of the proposed use. -Although this site is already used for a PCS site, the additional antennas will not constitute a detrimental over concentration of a particular use. The antennas location, on top of the building, makes them difficult to see from the surrounding area. (2) That the proposed location is suited for the proposed use. The project site is already used as a cellular antenna facility and appears to be giving excellent coverage for the Kennydale area and the 1-405 corridor. No problems have been identified by City staff with the use of this site for cellular antennas. The height of the antenna array is determined by local topographic features such as ground elevation, tree canopy, and buildings within the area. A radio signal must travel unobstructed to be effective. The customers' handset must be able to "see" an antenna. Although the site is not highly visible from the human eye perspective (these facilities do not stand out as you travel this area), it is highly"visible"for the handsets using this facility. C. EFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The following site requirements shall be required: (1) LOT COVERAGE Lot coverage shall conform to the requirements of zone in which the proposed use is to be located. As the proposed only the antennas will be located on the roof of the building. The equipment cabinets will be located within the existing building, there will be no additional lot coverage beyond that approved as part of the original site plan for Shurgard Storage. CURPT.DOC/ .Administrative Conditional Use Report I, ...ary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 5 (2) Yards: Yards shall conform to the requirements of the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. Additions to the structure shall not be allowed in any required yard. There is no maximum front yard setback in the CA zone for buildings over 25 feet in height. The existing building is over 25 feet in height. Also, there are no side or rear yard setbacks in this • zone. Therefore, the existing buildings meet the required setbacks. 3) Height: Building and structure heights shall conform to the requirements of the zone in which the proposed use is to be located. Spires, belltowers, public utility antennas or similar structure, may exceed the height requirement upon approval of a variance. Building heights should be related to surrounding used:in order to allow optimal sunlight and ventilation, and minimal obstruction of views from adjacent structures. As noted above, the antennas will be approximately 55 feet in height. This height is needed in order to provide a clear line of site between the antennas and the handsets people use to make their calls. As part of the conditional use permit process the height of 55 feet can be approved. D. COMPATIBILITY: The proposed use shall be compatible with the residential scale and character of the neighborhood. (Ord 3599, 1-11-82) Staff believe that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area. The properties directly adjacent to this facility are also zoned for commercial land uses. The residential and commercial uses in the adjacent area will be buffered by distance, trees, and topography. E. PARKING: Parking under the building structure should be encouraged. Lot coverage may be increased to as much as seventy-five percent(75%) of the lot coverage requirement of the zone in which the proposed use is located, if all parking is provided underground or within the structure. (Ord.3903, 4-22-85) Only one service vehicle needs to access this type of facility approximately every one to two months. Parking already exists on the Shurgard site and the occasional service vehicle should not require the provision of additional on-site parking. F. TRAFFIC: Traffic and circulation patterns of vehicles and pedestrians relating to the proposed use and surrounding area shall be reviewed for potential effects on, and to ensure safe movement in the surrounding area. As noted above, only the occasional service vehicle will need to access the site after the construction phase of the project. The adjacent roads will be able to accept the anticipated traffic flows. G. NOISE, GLARE: Potential noise, light and glare impacts shall be evaluated based on the location of the proposed use on the lot and the location of on-site parking areas, outdoor recreational areas and refuse storage areas. As noted by the applicant, the antennas and equipment cabinets will not generate noise, light or glare. The cabinets will be located inside of the existing building, only the antennas will be located on the roof of the building. H. LANDSCAPING: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by building or paving. The Hearing Examiner may require additional landscaping to buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. No additional landscaping is required due to the installation of the antennas. 1. ACCESSORY USES: Accessory uses to conditional uses such as day schools, auditoriums used for social and sport activities, health centers, convents, preschool facilities convalescent homes and others of a similar nature shall be considered to be separate uses and shall be subject to the provisions of the use district in which they are located. N/A CURPT.DOC/ Administrative Conditional Use Report 1 ...nary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 6 J. CONVERSION: No existing building or structure shall be converted to a conditional use unless such building or structure complies, or is brought into compliance, with the provisions of this Chapter. N/A K. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed use and location shall be adequately served by and not impose an undue burden on any public improvements facilities, utilities, and services. Approval of a conditional use permit may be conditional upon the provision and/or guarantee by the applicant of necessary public improvements, facilities,.utilities, and/or services. Public improvements already exists at this site. No new improvements will be required as part of this project. 2) Request: The Applicant, Nextel Communication, has requested approval for Administrative Conditional Use Permit for the installation of a Personal Communication System on the roof of an existing Shurgard Storage building and to install antennas with a maximum height of fifty-five (55) feet. 3) Administrative Conditional Use: The applicant's administrative conditional use application complies with the requirements for information for conditional use. The applicant's site plan and other project drawings are entered as Exhibits No. 2 thru 4. 4) Comprehensive Plan: The subject proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Employment Area- Commercial. 5) Zoning: The Conditional-Use as presented, complies with the zoning requirements and development standards of the Arterial Commercial zone (CA). 6) Existing Land Use: Land uses surrounding the subject site include: North: commercial; East: commercial; South: commercial; and West: commercial. H. Conclusions 1) The subject proposal complies with the policies and codes of the City of Renton. 2) The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Employment Area - Commercial; and the Zoning designation of Arterial Commercial (CA). CURPT.DOC/ • • - Administrative Conditional Use Report 1.,.;;aary 17, 1997. LUA-97-006,ACU Page 7 /. Decision The Administrative Conditional Use Permit for Nextel Communication, File No. LUA-97-006,ACU, is approved. SIGNATURES: 2 --20--T, 7 Jame C. anson,Zoning Administrator approval date kiLegy.0 Michael D.Kattermann,Z ning Administrator approval date CURPT.DOC/ - Administrative Conditional Use Report 1-waary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only,they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Airport Manager 1. The applicant states that "ESMR" facilities operate at extremely low power and thus this facility will not be a source of interference with electronic equipment, including radio,-television and telephone transmissions." They also state "Interference is prevented by FCC regulation." The applicant is licensed for up to 100 watts output per antenna. initial output will be 10 watts per antenna, with an effective radiated power from the antenna or 50 watts. The ultimate radiated power from each antenna may be 500 watts. This site is overlooking Lake Washington and may be nearly in line of sight to the airport. The project site is under the most frequently used by aircraft in the area of the airport. The frequency is unidentified. 2. The Shurgard buildings are located against a steep hill, thus the antennas will be shielded by natural terrain. The antennas are 12' 6" in height and do not increase the height of development of this site over what has been constructed in the past. Therefore, the submittal of a Notice of Proposed Construction does not appear to be required (see FAA Form 7460-1 instructions). 3. Municipal Code 4-31-17 states "No use may be made of land within any airport approach zone or airport turning zone in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between the airport and aircraft...". The .project site.is located=within,the airport turning zone (horizontal surface that extends outward from the runway 10,000 feet). The applicant would be required to discontinue the use of the antennas, in the event of such interference, until the source of the.interference has been corrected. Applicant states that such interference is prohibited by FCC regulation, but continued use of the antennas by the applicant or facilities user may cause interference to airport related communications or transmissions unless use of the facility is terminated upon identification of the problem. TRANSMITTED this 24th day of February, 1997 to the applicant and owner: IDS Shurgard Income Growth 1201 Third Ave. Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101 ONECOMM Corp. N.A., A Delaware Corporation DBA Nextel Communications 5808 Lake Washington Blvd., Suite 400 Kirkland,WA 98033 TRANSMITTED this 24th day of February;1997 to the parties of record: Howard&Martin Seelig 3300 Company P.O. Box 1925 Bellevue, WA 98009 TRANSMITTED this 24th day of February, 1997 to the following: Jim Chandler,Building Official Bob Arthur,Land Use Inspector Art Larson,Fire Marshal Neil Watts,Public Works Division Lawrence J.Warren,City Attorney Valley Daily News CURPT.DOC/ - Administrative Conditional Use Report 1,cuiaary 17, 1997 LUA-97-006,ACU Page 9 Land Use Action Appeals 8 Requests for Reconsideration The administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the date of approval. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14 day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3);WAC 197-11-680). REQUESTS FOR RECONSIDERATION must be filed in.writing on or before March 6, 1997.Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Zoning Administrator is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior meeting, may make a written request to the Zoning Administrator for review within (14)days of date of approval. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Zoning Administrator may, after review of the record,take further action as it deems proper. If an appeal is made to the Hearing Examiner, requests for reconsideration will be forwarded to that office for consideration at the same time as the appeal. AN APPEAL TO THE HEARING EXAMINER is governed by Title IV, Section 4-8-11.B,which requires that such appeals be filed .directly with the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be made in writing on or before 5:00 PM on March 6, 1997. Any appeal must be accompanied by a$75.00 fee and other specific requirements. THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning the land use decision with the Zoning Administrators or the Hearing Examiner. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the Hearing Examiner. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. CURPT.DOC/ F—. Q n f — - — — , m $ ti• �j e6$ .;:la G !k111111 NI r 1 I ! W r d • Pal 5 iPe- �5e 10 W0 .V7.. 5I IIii CCgtIngi 2BIY a ;11 Iiigh co ec IF Tr co CD 0 111 ! IL 1 y.Hts \ Q I ! ! ill 1 , . 1 i >- z __1 z pp 's . ., w a, . I � Y af-4 g I g R 9 5 alai f i1X'1 .-p ,i I sI Ei h. ; ,. �PQ rig 111,41 11 1; 1%10 g ' 1 . 8 • � 9ill � as 5 . f 0- eQ x 2�Qf i e if.,y 4:19. aY g5 a lI I I ; ylg ill ! io ; i ra:g g ..,_ b kiii hillinihill imigh dirg mil lit § 1 ill Li hip. :f9.8yee..di9, 3y_my .y 40: .:is °m JI \6 !i g 1 i 111 !i I391I 11111; bill / ligiill lia 8111 as Ash Ibaa 9e�i9f 1lima .fYi ;a65 D 0 : i tk �971Iiiii sal him Mill a ls1E illp C�ITY:O:�Q�.:NN ING —� d � �5a5 y !IS Wti !WWII aaee8 E2c § L JV _____, , L66/ ® d Nvr :'Ai • 1111110,111 a a 1 1: 11 it tali 5 ;�;��Ill Itg 1 . as qs qeq gag syy q6q OOOOOO a n \ fi F A Q 6 6 ������ 2 ' \ � \_-__��_ 4 ` 1 1 1 1 // r j r 1 1 1 1 1 - � r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 G 9 I' 1 8 1 1 I 1 g1A • C k *.1 n { 1 _21 il ig1 3 1 I 3 L1): RIi 1r • e 1 e I`\ a 4 r I 1 ' 9 1 1 r J to J 1 F 1 1 0 a A r a I � 1 , 1 a 1 r a ° 1 A:;; ° 3 r <;: 1 ; E ^ 1 V e 1 4 1 b 1 H ' L Iomr ut-� _- - _,� -=___ — _yam,— _ _��n .__ _ __ w 5 , 1ed. i'ds , 1,-Ifs - bd. A < )fd. Ade q'd, • ' $ t ,: 1 I HHlui � g 1 Z.8 ill e m • . . _ . . , •. • • NE.TL° . , f 4.mu11•1011•G 00100/1 uo Lamar1 m mn OF rmuc mua 40C 5808 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. SUITE 1400 KIRKLAND.WASHINGTON 98033 , 206-803-3333 • A IEll t - j% 1 EMI 'All 1 1 / i:.y 414I. !////%////%i //i%%%/////.i%i////i%%%%%//% %////%%/ %i%%%%�%%%%%%r I•' L111 10.In Orrin 10 MU 01/ _ • W . IMMO U3CATld1 PLAN • YwL 1/1f.1•-0-11. . 11,NUM 1.0“IN 90110 nETsIIM!I NO AMINE• • (01v®ar rawsam '/ ;. �� 4405—n0010 111¢ Imo-■ • 11111111111/11U1W1 ME • 10 0 M.o.0 L4 nm E. MI.0100.1 • ci mnc nn w -4 MI ' p a IMF I q Q t Ini111Y- 1363 K YTN I T OwrAnaa roar taA 17 OR —.� 0 4 O INoy I . 'OVERALL ROOFTION PLAN i 45 A-1 IOVUDLL•DDf PON sc.". )nr-1•-S'] 1 N qp , I • • ._ . . . . F ... —I • nsnc row DI noam DM MOMS to 4I wom.n a...rr ---,-- r 7 SB0B LAKE WASNINGTON BLVD. —� ro ws I - SHOE/400 I I a KIRKWID,WASHINGTON 98033 206-803-3222 • I i1'i'I 1III IIr IIIf ilj III iiiv'lliH Re is I I I�d II �Iil1•Ilil!It�!lil��l� dill lil I ,, I I i�l j!III II!Ilillli!!i�lii!li�III; ilil6llllllifil I11,111111 !II, y w k . NORM ELIVAIICH r.... wr-r-v I, soups tLmT10„ .u.c yaf.-,•-P't l- 1 UM/ Mai o / t0 ,u Como Mena . • 1l 11 l l'I l l II1I III I,I. I 11,I!i,I: � nff-"a�� i 1 I;'II,I IiIi 6,�• • -- — -- -- -- --,— .__, , ., , ' ' T ..._. _. '\.._MOM..MM. (rr I 0 • In NM[warm r..c ,iar- -e 13 MINEVISMISIIIIII COMM o Z 1T1 w11041Monz-4 • 37 z --a10.ovsm a.rn..s '...... c • 1730 Id 4M IT. I� Juqq IIII�pp�II u�ryryp Ijrypj ,? II�a'I'I�iII�h i811id���llli II�I�b I No ME wuno�r tR03E I ,•' rr'rr.irrr'tr' : — EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS n �n --n _ �I.�l�l�1�1 �1 ,=WM 11.2,,. • A-2 I ;FAST EEO.00M ,r u: „u-"Q 1• 1„.0.8 -1 I 3300 Company Seelig Family Properties January 31, 1997 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING rlTY OF RENTON Mark Pywell Planner FEB 0 4 1997 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED RE: Nextel/Shurgard Conditional Use Permit#LUA97-006,CU Dear Mark, We own the property adjacent to the east of the Shurgard Storage Site where a new conditional use permit is being requested. We did not raise objections when the storage buildings were built although they are a type of neighboring use that devalued our property. Matters are made worse by the fact that the storage buildings are not normal mini-warehouses, they are multi-story which buried much of our property. Some years ago Shurgard decided to lease some roof space for telephone antennas and their storage space for related electronic gear. These rooftop antennas are unsightly and devalued our property further but still we did not raise objections. More recently Shurgard rented more roof space for antennas and more storage space for electronic gear. Now they are requesting permission to do even more of the same. We believe these Shurgard people have become pigs with mounting all these antennas above their roofs. The antennas are unsightly and they degrade their property and ours. A support for antennas and storage of related electronic gear is not a use for which their building permit was granted. Our property is zoned for business and we should be given a fair chance to use it without having the neighbor's actions destroy our marketing opportunity. Such activity by Shurgard also deprives the City of Renton of the tax benefits and family wage jobs from decent development of our property. With the Port Quendall Project pending across 1405, nearby properties like ours are resources for worthwhile uses and such resources should not be wasted. We hereby request that further use of the Shurgard roofs for antennas and the mini-storage rooms to house related electronic gear be denied. That is not the intended purpose for the property and there are many other suitable locations for antennas and the related electronic gear. XcffullYStedP ,6 . HOWARD & MARTIN SEELIG <:\ , Phone: 206-454-0885 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1925, Street Address: 1309 114th SE,Suite 107, Fax: 206-451-8203 Bellevue,WA Bellevue,WA 98009 98004 • • City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Pu; .,'Yorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: evAct-v j %tm Se,Iv tea COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 ;, APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 elrl� 'DIV APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL a fro PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 JAN 15 19,v LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street Boo/Nr,i/� rt 1`T SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A CAN SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation LandIShorellne Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS NO OC • C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS O 0 • We wed this ication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wh i f is ne ded to properly assess this proposal. 1"21q Sig ture of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 : enton Department of Planning/Building/Fuuaii Works ENVIRONMENTAL 8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: kbitGe. COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water UghVGlare Plants Recreation Land'Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Th ''CW± C Pow wuce)a B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS • We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. (kV/14(A t) achSignctor oruhorized Representative Date Rev.ev.10/93 City' •enton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1'tL4 COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA:.N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Llght/Glare Plants Recreation LandrShorellne Use Utilities • Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS M aAk_ rte31.,(Z)/-111C -- fie C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS aZte- r ( /Z29Z-/ /t) We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where dditional informal o . needed to properly assess this pry osal. a/a) /5/97 \ Signature of Direct or Authorized epresentative Date DEVAPP.DOC � Rev.10/83 1 I City_. ._enton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL 8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: MrrOgr COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary 'Earth Housing ✓r Air ✓ Aesthetics ✓ Water ✓ _ Light/Glare ✓ Plants - ✓ Recreation ✓ Land/Shoreline Use ✓ Utilities ✓ Animals ✓ Transportation 1✓ Environmental Health +f Public Services ✓ Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Alrport Environment 10,000 Feet / r� 14,000 Feet V The application states that "ESMR facilities operate at extremely low power and thus this facility will not be a source of interference with electronic equipment, including radio, television and telephone transmissions. " and "Interference is prevented by FCC regulation. " The applicant is licensed for up to 100 watts output per antenna. Initial output will be 10 watts per antenna, with an effective radiated power from the antenna of 50 watts. The ultimate radiated power from each antenna may be 500 watts. This site is overlooking Lake Washington and may be nearly line of sight to the airport and is under the area most fre - quently used by aircraft incthe area of the airport. The frequencies are unidentified. , B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS None C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS The Shureguard buildings are located against a steep hill , thus the antennas will be shielded by natural terrain. The antennas are less than 20 feet in height and do not increase the height of another antenna structure (i .e. they are not being built/attached onto a tower or other antenna support) , therefore the submittal of a Notice of Proposed Construction does not appear to be required (see FAA Form 7460-1 instructions) . Municipal Code 4-31-17 states: "No use may be made of land within any airport approach zone (continued) We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where ad "on al informati needed to properly assess this proposal. %Q cautilit,Lak 221 Signature Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.D C Rev.10/93 • • ENVIRONMENTAL& DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET (Continued) Application No: LUA-97-006.ACU Nextel Communication Facility , Code-Related Comments (Continued) or airport turning zone. ins§uchcar.manner as, to create electrical interference with radio communication between the airport and aircraft. . . " The project site is located within 'the airport turning zone (horizontal surface which extends outward from the runway 10,000 feet) . As a condition of permitting this Conditional 'Use, applicant should be required to discontinue the'use of the antennas located at the site, in the event of such interference, until the source of the interference has been corrected and approved. Applicant states that' such interference .is prohibited by FCC regulation, but continued use of any, antennas (existing or new) by the applicant or facilities user- may cause interference to airport -related communications or transmissions unless use of the facilityois terminated upon identification of interference eminating from the site. City tr 'enton Department of Planning/Building/F��,�' .;S o,, FIRE DEPT. ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICAT • f vrgiii SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: � fireuele pv‘ COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JAR IAA APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment • Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation LandrShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ • Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet /Ub /r4jor imetc1s /Voted B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS ^� • C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS44 AL c tf.,Q aoinrnerl/ 5 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional i formation is n =•.d to properly assess this proposal. 414* ///i/77 . Signature actor or Authorized Re Vesentative Date DEVAPP.•• / Rev.10193 City ui rienton Department of Planning/Building/ Works ;ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET flP REIM UN REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: F ewk-Weglet,J_ ,. COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 •'era APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 19971 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 '4mc'""'1°`" LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in. tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Ught/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS CITY OF RENTON JAN 16 1997 .bUi���dvi� DIVgSION We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional iJc( formation is needed to properly assess this proposal. U)�af-z 1;16/97 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 City Cal nenton Department of Planning/Building/F. Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: .I ' Sle(a 'COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL C PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 f1i1 LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A - , ,0 /997 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility con 'of" r e omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on thesisi4 roof of the Sh Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Wafer Ught/Glare Plants Recreation Land'Shorellne Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistoddCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS NU cowini4 N 1 ' We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. lA�a i/S1/47 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10f93 City ..anton Department of Planning/Building/P'.;.,,,.; Works 'ENVIRONMENTAL 8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:'rsA, %Dung\ COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 28, 1997 APPLICATION NO: LUA-97-006,ACU DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 14, 1997 APPLICANT: ONECOMM CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER: MARK PYWELL CITY C?l" h"rON IZ PROJECT TITLE: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY WORK ORDER NO: 78179 R ' rO LOCATION: Shurgard Storage; 1755 NE 48th Street 1 5 1997 SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A 'Po uDf1i6 N SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of thre omni-directional antennas approximately 12 ft. 6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts impacts Necessary impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water LlghVGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS iJo aG(�l�lotlk� 7Y417 tt. _� >w Mist)yal/OLf 6? tvatic cot Leirst4 • C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS 1Jo comb fitA- • We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. ived ea7A- 7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 4 © CITY OF RENTON - _ ; -!L. Planning/-Building/Public Works - _ 0 N1°ti- . w . 200 Mill Avenue South- Renton, Washington 98055, a. ry �rt�t ClrT r'• p i3a i,-22 a 1 vb, F S�� ,TER • ".., v�taA�� � - -- TED CAPITA STIT�I InA 5520 LD]gwy#430 , Dallas, TX 15240 - iitt++9 .� Thisoaner contains 50%recvcledoaper.10%post-consumer ++�s��tsss�f�tt�+I+st�si+u���ss�s�+�s+��+stii++ttt�ltf 1, NOTICE OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON An Administrative Conditional Use (ACU) Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. 1 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY/LUA-97-006,ACU DESCRIPTION: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas, approximately 12 ft. 6 in. tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. GENERAL LOCATION: Shurgard Storage/1755 NE 48th Street • PUBLIC APPROVALS: Administrative Conditional Use Approval Biliidirigj Permit The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the'third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings,.or prior to an administrative site plan approval. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the Development.Services Division at 235-2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. , _- ... /. '.,a 43 -DiVISI N 4.` COR?DRAT£': =I l ��'; .•' L r I _ref, , :-.1:- ,.moo r. _ .e ;41:.--:--:',-:• - 4.. ' .!;,''‘;..... ,z,--. ..:- p,, : •_., I o : :,:, ....k„.„3„,._,.., :•;,, :: , , .4, , H.,—: :• - 4, tr-, • , .i: ;.; oti/. .Z!.•:2) 1-7:: 021 i - ... (3) / I—' " .., - 20'SPI882 - _ N; ' j Asef a3 SE . 76TH r "`' SHUKL-ARD SAM ::I' -. 1••^.'i: _' 1.•' ' ` lei 'I!: _ Imo; `. • — • • : - C E • • , - s•- Ic / _ L.A ¢ i. , _ _ .' \ ;:i, ' 5 I ji (I) r s. . c \ 0'. - N - _ . /f 1184 183 ... B°a �.: —y .t -.'' ,._: \) .r (3) . .r GENMALOT.DOC //.' ti: ',�� • :�I ::O...�I_N�'O L'::n:?{6i:ti?{i'^:?d:C}:4:•i:{{•:::r?:4i'?:{::?{{•ii'iii:•:iNii"'••••.:::: :::.; ....................r:f.•}?iiiiiii:4iiii:.v..::i'Y:..:..�•.'::::::ii:{4i:i:n:}i:4:i:jY::::?:}IX{:v::+:........................................................:,vv:::: ....................v::nrr?v.v v..r:w::.v:....v. . ................DEVELOPMENT�SER:r.:>vE$ �..:.:,�<:::>:<�� ::::::.t.,.: .�:•>•.•�:::{.:r:•:•:::.:•;•:• :::.:..:::::�:::.:::::: w.••:•:v :n ::::.v::::v:::nw::::::::. :::::.v.v.::::..v::v.v:r..:h:.:...........:.....................v...v ...........F..........:... �::u::::..:?w,v.•:............. ......:..............n.v::::::::::::u:;.v................:..... ..:::v;n.... .:::::::.v v.::.:..:.... ... ...f.{vv U :::.::.::.: ..:.:::..::. :.::::.::::.......::....::::.::..:::::..:::..::::.:::...:::::..:................. ....................... b !Op:R:aningiNEMBEERME.,:igERE PROJECT NAME: hekte' LID mvVku-( CaAlcal 1i APPLICATION NO: 91 -006 I AGO The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development. • NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER • CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL INSTITUTI Martin Seelig June Olive Huson&Katrina Hoof 5520 Lbj Fwy#430 PO Box 1925 11030 SE 76th St Dallas, TX 75240 Bellevue, WA 98009 Newcastle, WA 98056 33 y33o- aid() -06 '33`133c)- (1,3ao -0a • 33L-/33 - o�c6Z-off HAL REALTY V INC HAL REALTY V INC KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION CO R J 2125 Western Ave#300 2125 Western Ave#300 1000 Kiewit Plz Seattle, WA 98121 Seattle, WA 98121 Omaha,NE 68131 33!-/33c)-•wilt3 -oS 33Ll33v- %"/3-off 33933(1 -i/60 -c KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION CO R J MAY CREEK ASSOC Campbell Holdings 1000 Kiewit Plz PO Box 1129 1800 E Imperial Hwy#120 Omaha.NE 68131 Bellevue, WA 98009 Brea, CA 92821 33`133v- 1It10-0[ lc/330^ I/0c-oc. 33�I330 - d -v 7 c...a G. 3 Campbell Holdings Campbell Holdings Michael Deitch I800'E Imperial Hwy 4120 1800 E Imperial Hwy#120 4126 187th Ave SE Brea, CA 92821 Brea, CA 92821 Issaquah, WA 98027 • 331-I 330 -IIg.° -a? '33`133o-- 1110- 07 i3L0G. ( 13t-OG. a '33 `l 3 3 ci - 11`/v--U 3 Ming-Tsong Kao DENNY S REALTY INC 16131 NE 42nd Ct 293E Main St Redmond, WA 98052 Spartanburg, SC 29302 33`t330 - t15O-< ) 33(I 33 - (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) 0 • (Continued) • • NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER • Applicant Certification I,. ,OHD,( lAt t-lamei4. , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property (Print Name) owners and their addresses were obtained from: • D City of Renton Technical Services Records - Title Company Records • D 'ng County Assessors Records Signed WDate 1// 1 ! 7 (Applicant) ON i351U1LF OF Ntz'xTEL ATTESTED: Subscribed and sworjlik al; ar4irublic, in and for the.State of Washington, residing at C?0,.}�'1a Arco: ock'tiR Of?.i4' of 3Gtnuooey• i -" 01 G zj Signed �rnso� • 3 -David.McClu'1t (Notary Publi • • rvvii r tp / ci'Jlres 10 • ton::.Use:>:.:::>:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:;.;:;;.;:.;:.;;;;;::.;;::.:::.:.;::.;:.;:.>:.;;:.;;:•:;>:.;:;:;.::.:;;:.;:.:;.;:.;:.;:.;::.;::.;:.;:.;:;.: ............................•.... �••�>.��:(F1� �ATION:€.`OF��MAIL G rf .:::�:::?>•i.;' :`:` �:>:`:`::sE:#E: ::i: iE::>::::E `>::s :::::::::isE:::;%::E::s:::i:::;:;::isi::::?E:: ::::::'•::::::::i: <: •' r'es:: fi:::he s Q>e e Gt'.<EY�.I . 'i�4 iiii:::;�::ti;:!si.?;is�i :;$:M1:i:•i::•,:ii:ii:;:j;} . . ::::::: •�•�::S+jv":iii?:::vi::4i:>.4i:i4ijiiLj:•iiiiilii:Siiii ::::::::::::.�::::.:i':�::::w::::.}v.r:::::•::::::n....y.Li'i'Liii::::::::::::::•:::::::.�::::::::.ii L?�:...::iii:4:::w::::::::..ii}i:.;v:�w::::::. �ii'4:v:^i'ii^:?bi •i:•i}::i:i:•:v4:i:•i:•:•: 4:i?:•:4Y:i:•i:4:•.�iiY.::::w::::::vp•::.y,:::::::::::w::::::.}v:::::y;}'•i:4:4:•:::•i%vi:� w::::::::::::•:::::::iJ:?i:ii:^ii:��i}::i:h:3i 4:i•i:•iY•iiii:':ryii::.:::.••••••••••••:::. �:•::::.:•:.:.�:.. :::...:::.iii:::,y..;.....:'::;:'::•:}:;j::?:•:is i::.':.':::::�.':i:::.... '. :::::•. ... .: ::iiiiiiiiii'r::.'4iiiiiiiiiiii'riiii}}}ii::?i:•i:•�:O> til i:;:i<:}.$ ::::::•�•....:.;• ::>i{:;:;;{�:::.:...:t,.....�........................................rgned:.�:::: ! �.' ..�. ...............................;:>:><:::>::»:<:>�>::<Date.:............................�....:...........:�—.,—>:;::::.;:.;:�;;;:;;;:.;:::<�:;:.;:.;:.;:;.; ................................. ............................................... y.t.:;::::S i"�'!fiu'�{:::::::ii'>'`::ii:?:;:F:j::::::::{?':>>::}>::i:!::::: :::ivii+iii}i?';:;:;:y;;::i:ii::ii::i'r:4i:4::`::i`::iii:i::`::;:5`ii:; i:;.::::j::j:::>:i}::i}>i::::j?'{•.;i{:i:j'::i:�::•{i:i::i:+: ATTES .. criE�e.�:and.:;s.wo�.ct::before::;me�::::�'::;o..aryPutalc�:..:.:and::::o.:::�::e»�Sa�;e�o�4:...:::a..:::::t►9t9.::::::::::.�:. ::.�::: .�:•. :.. '.�::::.�::::::::::::.v::::: :. .. •::::•:::::.:. i'. :':ti:':::•::•:.::'Fi:•:•:i:•:•:•ii:i;%::::iL::v::•il :.::.:.� :::::::.�:.::.�::::. res�dn� .at. .... .... ..... ................. ..........fin„the>:........................:;;:.;:.Y..:.;;»:.::: .. . . ....... ......�.►.:.>::.;;:::;.: ,��....:::<::>::<>:::>':»»» listprop.doc I 6/g/91 REV 07/95 2 I 1 .: DEELOPMENT•SFR'SfkCES:>DkV 1ST N...........:....:..........:.:..........• :::.:.::::.....:................ L S 01: .....:. R OU .D1 C: SOP .: : T: : :: 11 . R5. .; ::.:1:: ::::::::::... : . : : ... .... . : : . : : ... ::. a,„m . ii. .:. 'witlit'3OQ. ee...o thy.. e`ct s�....PROJECT NAME: / APPLICATION NO: / The following is a list of property owners within 300 fee of the subject site. The Development Services Division will notify these individuals of the pro"%sed development. NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL / NUMBER • • / - ' - / ' i / l .�.• • • // • . l ''..' / . . I 4." L 4, •�� - - < n" O� '�� ,, . 0 (Attach additional sheets; if necessary) • •3 V — — __ /I' .--fo ti=;7- rJ .:1 'ff 1 /70 1 r.o . I ..' l — tl _ ya1� v1° - 3 °ea0 _ 11 — i_ ,� �� _ : . N69 JBW :3 .Rj __ cPr) �/ t _�z /— o _ �a - dRENTp✓ .QQD ¢Z-1 , NE Wc:Po 4 T•+r tM + _ b .to ^ / 40UI/ - • • / , )f ,'P • v m�, Z.o T / ti l�nmec, _ t. �F =/ •/ y • 9 � 1 b, o O ll _- . / 111, • e - m alr — - _ /fe 7, O y I' • 186 ,`�M1���p ��il �18i Off\ Z 168 �� — .. • . — 0 .. Z d.1.Z Z;f j i ti 16 ki — �' pL n in JoCo • _ • 588-ia-5GL i' 4 co 7yo 'G3 0 ^ • • /1; - • +1., — - �3�3 — o �L '� e • • i AY Q n ^ yi ,� — 1- Ze.Gj M 1 — RE/J77N�1 / U J qt o5o A / I L LOT g o�' N ,. 'l `w` �l SoT3 `\vv 580-4.0-5,;E 329 Z5 — VII \ /� 1?E,Jro,+/ oea. 4z43 SE. _t�1,4e,.: �a "' 1308.99 76TH ST. .v49-47-17.,1f34' ,ve.y_47-/7u/ .CE,�'r,2.\/ OE:P --Z43 ( „s / - . 4./ C7 s I ti IiENTON oKp 43/8 3so 'n it 4J :. e \I '�'6I.0 3 ‘(CD ti J 1 Y • _ 3.v V w 2 _ J 3� ° J 1 ° 9y {n i 11:>\461\ i c �S I \'h ' t9 1n hl ` ft •J q N LOt 2 (0 ,-) in .../ :'8 3 to Fy �.'t0� J f9-of•'+r l it- 8 t,� I85 5}i1A''. F!�'�° 182 167 ^ h 4 • c , .C) .• 72 o N. N88-s7•nw O\ �>u v .Fro t V ib-ro� /b7.o0 —17 (Ise -7-17tcJ ^ L �{� rh. L,/.ao wz 3'29 29 5 yo ^ 1 iij. CKD F ��7 j 1 J SD.o).pL f _ A \\' t 1.1'� c r . ff N` Cr) ci _ oIn + `: f N (� I \14i� C2- " i ,s ♦ I r 92 $JI Ier "t 2 e /_:, r 1. 0 • 7 y ~ K• CO ti ; z 0Ott I • ;pp A /Jo g q AC I 8 AJOB•¢7-17u/ 32929 R Nr" ORD. 431A •'♦ 436e 0 °°�o ! +o;_r .; Q. • RES. 45 ,ff.,, h A ,� 1uw`.�M►` f,.« •. . •3Z9.25. S(/.e. ,v //. sc.as i 44 ui Li 0 I /04-/7 • I w N B?-/4-Z7i R.32. M i i�///I/ir R:i7g.10 I ` J� r..=v&,r.r �e tip`` o G7. L/NC ; -civo lSa,pflo I ✓FY6 o tp . I '-o l �C' +/If-/f.o4c ia'i.r of o6Y oT"� I u +ib L \ • �i /oiD !//♦ �.n 7 F / -1'1 �.-7/4/ .✓I4 1 �l s' a ,°� * a,,, °c$va s = h :f�F W 5ZE 7o.4oR oe79. o '/yF 'o,, ei �o q Ql y3 s n cam, rlin I vv I N, ST t ._s ,,, • 3/ 's' °° 166 ......_ 165 LOT I a 96 ova - � 1/4„ m • WI LOT 3 • on �I„ a,� v • z n Y ..�„4(.I (^ NNM •11 r,•1 rr, k- u• m �J Z NOTICE OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION RENTON, WASHINGTON An Administrative Conditional Use (ACU) Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY/LUA-97-006,ACU DESCRIPTION: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas, approximately 12 ft. 6 in. tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet, GENERAL LOCATION: Shurgard Storage/1755 NE 48th Street PUBLIC APPROVALS: Administrative Conditional Use Approval Building Permit • The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings, or prior to an administrative site plan approval. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the Development Services Division at 235-2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification..8 .....i.%I.)--.1 v 1 s 1_ / . _ .,-:: •,, ,..,- ., /,,.• . 7 E P . ,. - - , N 1 . N j , 7 /3� .`i LL CORPORATE Z0 :l MI ii e T iY - j - - — I. ,',fir' yn r;A.-. ;•os2 66 12) .3✓ Q 1Z- y ,'/ :;r: GZ .4,::•:-. f>,,.._,__• - ,.:S P IppB2 rp 0 i ic4?Ze //1/4., E As �Jlh& SE 4 76TH ' - lY t c< (' _I I<;- - -iv If : . I E.,al s(TE ~.. <I _. cn - _�14 <,. t. 1" - c.)? �I HEM _' ,:;. i?, F. ,,;._ '"..,- I-- r2-'...,- :‘ C.2-).. .cy___ 0 995069 . I .•c .. e.•.:: IP. - -_n, RENTON tt— _r/\ E: $, 28 i 25 4:.5t 184 183 _ g. y(z- \, . II iA1:'i :.I.:: in ::.7-- ._(3i:::. _-,..' :��' '' 165 w ryes; GENMALOT.DOC //,, �; j cu Z ]E o. , __________ _ ___ .., • NoncE• PENDING APPLICATION PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY/LUA-97-008,ACU DESCRIPTION: Nexlel Communications proposes to Install a communication facility consisting of three omni•directIonal antennas,approximately 12 R.S In.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building fora total height of 55 feel. • GENERAL LOCATION: Shurgard Storage/1755 NE 48th Street ' PUBLIC APPROVALS: _Building Permit _Preliminary Plat _Short Plat XXXX Admin. Conditional Use _Rezone Site Plan Approval Permit ' Environmental Review _Shoreline Conditional Use Other - Permit _Fill&Grade Permit _Shoreline Substantial _Other • Development Permit _ The application can be reviewed In the Development Services Division located on the third Door of Renton City Hail. . Comments will be accepted any time prior to Public Hearings,during Public Hearings,or prior to an administrative site plan approval.Comments for Substantial Shoreline Permits must be received within thirty(30)days from the last date of applicant's•Notice of Application•publication In the Valley Daily News. For further Informallan on the eppllcelion,or Ir you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD end receive additional notihcallons of the Clly's environmental determinations,appeal pedods and/or the public hearing date(s)for this project.please contact the Development Services Division at 235-2550. • •�/ o.o.- ' , _ t ,o • aoy r ,�''/'6 v-,, GA z-g--ie3---•-- i'.A? . r,:i.r S AB*`Dt2f76'7" SE a 76TH i .r• se�;wm sera T • !{/{,•4 If7�� I GA ',•rE TEAS :gyp • ACi 1 j 10 Gi _,g f, . -. .yY s • F.. 7 x 184 183 :r-••,. . . et .Ec ' R-w PLEASE INCLUDE,THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. i . CERTIFICATION . • I. rS�U,i'GI.• Ja,GV-SO I" . hereby certify that 3 copies•of the above document were poste by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on . ailtAcum) 6, igoo . Signed: NU/1Gt,iJ •-. j Cii'A ' STATE OF WASHINGTON )• ) SS - COUNTY OF KING ) • . I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that • _ , F'Y signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free d 16 lun!ani,?ctmfoc the uses •and purposes mentioned in the instrument. . ' O,.�''6 y ., Dated: 1�/9 -Azi / :-�` ' cony Notary tic in a d or the StatO OJfr'1'gtdn D. •J`i,.�, Notary Print) `41 A—le - '�y!.•`.�•if!l1-1_ifl My appointment expires: / G /'6't4 1 `, • i NO TARY,OOC • ...., NO-ItCE PENDING APPLICATION PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: NEXTEL COMMUNICATION FACILITY/LUA-97-006,ACU DESCRIPTION: Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility consisting of three omni-directional antennas, approximately 12 ft.6 in.tall. The antennas would be mounted on the roof of the Shurgard Storage building for a total height of 55 feet. GENERAL LOCATION: Shurgard Storage/1755 NE 48th Street PUBLIC APPROVALS: Building Permit Preliminary Plat Short Plat XXXX Admin. Conditional Use Rezone Site Plan Approval Permit Environmental Review Shoreline Conditional Use Other Permit Fill&Grade Permit Shoreline Substantial Other Development Permit The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on,the third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted any time prior to Public Hearings,during Public Hearings, or prior to an administrative site plan approval. Comments for Substantial Shoreline Permits must be received within thirty(30)days from the last date of applicant's"Notice of Application"publication in the Valley Daily News. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the Development Services Division at 235-2550. j ma y •.�?, �.-. 'e1 . DIVISIIN m a. - 1�' y... '' E i, CORPORATE x P . :k.....- it ao( , �L,./b ,11 GA A�--0----183------•41 s w�a5 v RIo ;•,�;' ❑, _ [ uI ~'!IQ? O'SP ' ' N; n""''i'. —�1 3: No 4f emu = SE .76TH 185___— ..: Q 157 . `4—'I •.___.cl: a:.... _ — wa: _ _ 'ACE_=: IsP assoE? RENrON -'E i e - •\'8^.tE. ."t` 3184 183 ' o ' tL o E:ti R_,� N .... ...... I ' I \'� • , '166 "- 165 ,u Gil,! ,. „ 6: ;< ° .n. , .... .-.... .,: ;•t4CiL`i SCE^'d ^7c.C_ . yr .. P..LEASE<INCLt)DE.,.Z E<pR:OJLCI'NUMgEl2`INHLN CALLING'FOR'PROPER%FILE:'1DEN71F.ICATION`< :::'`':::`:: .. CIT, )F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jesse Tanner,Mayor January 14, 1997 Mr. John Helmer Odelia Pacific Corporation 1201 Third Avenue, Suite#320 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Nextel Communication Facility Project No. LUA-97-006,ACU Dear Mr. Helmer: The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application for an Administrative Conditional Use (ACU) permit is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at 277-5586, if you have any questions. Sincerely, • /`r• Mark R. Pywell, AICP Project Manager cc: OneComm Corporation/Applicant IDS/Shurgard Income Growth/Property Owner ACC PTLTR.DOC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50'"recycled material.20",.post consumer APPLICATION "acfz ar<additio riotariieilMaster::Appliaatiort. or.::each:o:wner ...:.. : PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: S�S�LQG-SRO lNC4 G-aok�TF� K£NNyOIFLE/SFkAQG-Mk4 S?oR13LE Sl1r< ' Iq NX-rel., sire wAoLi9tto aaa-Y PRPROPERTY/PROJECTAAlD�DDRESS )/LOCATION: ADDRESS: 1a.01 ..Imo I�WE. S A1E. 0.940 �l�a !l� '7 D " CITY: „_<�i/7-1-'ri ZIP: C1gJoi KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): S3'/330-'tl26 —na TELEPHONE NUMBER: (ADA 6gq- gs104 EXISTING LAND USE(S): 1&J2WGE FAC/1 Ty ? i•r`4e/*iinv.int/MC4 dX :'dif:M:>:><<ARROPANT:>(if:plhotf o o:wn.e.:.::::.:.:::.::....:.... NAME: ONEGoMN1 GC71Q,P, N.A.) APROPOSED LAND USES: OBI-AwARE. cokPokAlioN,1 1.f3.i , -Tra- 13 M PIO-/1 CAIA Ai S . SAG/L.17 y COMPANY�(if a Ii able): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: N �1EL Cola wi t/N 1C4776Ns If/4- ADDRESS: S'o LAKE WA4fi11 7-6id 1f1.v1). Stir E Nc1 o PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): kX Lmo, WA 4$03 3 /v/1r CITY: ZIP: EXISTING ZONING: cA TELEPHONE NUMBER:, . 13 3- 3a as PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): 0 SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE): NAME: I41'I ileo►�1 �� . . . RECEIVES • COMPANY.(if'applicable):,• PROJECT VALUE: 1116i Ffe. e a lbAttrki SOIOof) JAN 1 0 •7997 .DEVELOPMENT PLANNING vE. sv�7c ADDRESS - lax)I TN1R>, 3ac7 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER Pfzf(1Tfi�i) ND A CITY: SEA71t WA ZIP: gtibi IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? ND - TELEPHONE NUMBE �a06) 7ti9 9$3 8 CITY 0& riENTCN 1 � - II < > L:::::.'_ C D GRIP P:ERTY,.. A`fach.`<se"; r::>:::::::<:>:::::::: ::::.::>:::<:;;:;> V<:OFP.RO .. t a i sheetii : nec'essar::::::>:»:>::>::>::>::::::>::>:: <::><:::::::>:<:>:: 1-DT l ga. 1H 1 ar t irr s LK Curl ( iQ V EM OF riiEN 413 L tl I oZ dF 4I1Ni.- CcwnTy ' &HoRT PGi1 i-- 4 if g 6-64.9 REc. Se.l aa3) 6 c N2 SP DA9F I ::::•i:::::;:::JT::::i:::•::i::i:::•:::•Ji::i i:: <�':: :::: ::i:. .:. '•:::.:iiii:Y:�:.?i:i:;•i:;.;.:'':si:::::<::isi::i'::::':::i•'.::$::::::;:;::.:??::::i:::l:::::::::::::i:':'::::J:::.:jv::::::::i::i::i:::::.:�..:: .:;:•:::.::.:;;::•;:;::•;:;•;;:::•;::.:::.;;>:.::.;:.;:.::.;:.;:.::::::::::. .::::.: .....:.:::.::........TY.PE::;O.F: Ik 0 S I1'€>i.:;: >erl n fees `<>>`'»>< < i>> >?> << >::;:::::�;>:::::::;::»::;::;;:�;::;::;::;;::>::::::;::::. �he.'kalt<a:, •.::li'ca� to°ni::t . es. t .. ...... .•t. .....t...................... ......................... .e. ............................................. A _ANNEXATION . " . . •' ' . $ SUBDIVISION:, _•,- ; • .' I — COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ _ REZONE $ _ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ _ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ SHORT PLAT. •• $. . • _TEMPORARY PERMIT ;, $ •• _TENTATIVE' PLAT .$ y CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ /LW _ PRELIMINARY PLAT $ �' —SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ _ FINAL PLAT $ GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ — . , _ .(NO.-,CU..YDS:. .. . . ), .PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ VARIANCE 5 (FROM SECTION: ) _ PRELIMINARY WAIVER $ FINAL • . '• . • _WETLAND PERMIT : ; $ .. . , ROUTINE VEGETATION ' .. ',. ' • MORILE`HOME PARKS: '` " 'S' '' - II MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ I _ BINDING SITE PLAN $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: — SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ 1 _ CONDITIONAL USE $ , . . •.. ' _ VARIANCE $ _ EXEMPTION $No•:Charge _(ENVIRONMENTAL'REVIEW'• '$•':'Wr _ REVISION $ - • • ill I, (Print Name),/ lgT'V Mere,-i ear ,declare that I am (please check one) the owner of the property involved in th" TI cat o he I authorized representative to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorization), and that tl e'foregoing soterett ' herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge a�-rph �p!SgtuN E.4,,i Oq+ y %'�r tIOTAFi ' V Si ,_�. / 1 ATTEST: Subsc ibed nd sworn,-to beore ine, a NotAry Public,in IVY?, Cl�11 �e�er of �t�l ` �`fltS for the State of residing at, ptin.1t ! p 1 A p^)/h , on the) c.a o P�e I (Name of Owner/Repre entative �c v />. ft 91 •.,�o� (Signature of Ow er/Representative) . Q / . i' • • % huts (Sin ure of Notary Public)/l6luote. '7cQtiib . ..: .::::.. ......................:..................:.:.:::: . .......... 0�/�7 .. ......................... ........................... ......::::::...... ........... ...:.: .................................................. ........ ...................................................... ............... . : «: ; >..(Th .>.sect n:t o>. e::.co . ted ... . . ...... : ......... . ....... .. .. ..: : .:::. .... . .:• . ... •:N mber.:: ' :. a::::. : .. ECF SA R SHP ....CU::'...LLA.. PP .FP .:.TP SP ;F(.VMP.::::: .;::;;..':':::::::;l:::_ :<:::> ::::......:...........:......»:......:>:>:»>::;::>;:;::»::>::»::::>A,4D.:.:.W::.FPUD....S.M.....5. . ...... .H....... . S :.. :::::::>:::;ii'i i::':::>::>::::::;:::;..; :.:. ^:: ;:>` d:: ':::::>::>ii!':: TAL O.STAGE. .ik.:0 ID : :::.;;;:.:TOTAL:FED.S....$. .��.0. ....: :.. . .::.:.:.`TO.....:......;.:.... �.:........:.;. .:.: : ..::W. .'.:.4t;ye . :. :::::::........ .:.. . , . MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 9/96 . I. PROJECT NARRATIVE Project: Nextel Communications Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio Facility Conditional Use Permit Submittal for Shurgard Storage, Site#WA0494022Z-4 Located at 1755 NE 48th Street Nextel Communications proposes to install a communication facility as part of their Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) system. ESMR utilizes both digital technology and a multiple"cellular" site infrastructure network design. This advanced form of telecommunications offers a combination of wireless communication features and services that has not previously been available from cellular telephone or other wireless communications companies. The integrated communication system includes mobile telephone, group communication,paging, two-way dispatch, and data transmission. Currently, these different services have each required separate pieces of equipment such as cellular telephones,pagers, an computer modems. Nextel's ESMR technology uses only a single, lightweight hand set,the Unicator. The proposed communications facility would be located at the existing Shurgard Storage at 1755 NE 48th Street. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 334330-1125-02,and the lot size is approximately 2.9 acres. The existing Shurgard Storage facility consists of five buildings totaling 44,220 square feet. All access is from SE 76th Street. The zoning district is CA and the predominant land use is commercial with some multi-family residential in the vicinity. Three omni-directional antennas, approximately 12'6"tall would be mounted on the roof of the storage facility for a total height of 55 feet. Each antenna is tubular in shape and is approximately three inches in diameter. These are commonly referred to as "whip" antennas. Radio equipment would be housed inside an existing storage unit occupying approximately 120 square feet. The antennas and radio equipment will be connected by a coaxial cable. No other physical changes would be made to the property or off site. Parking, landscaping and public improvements are not affected. The communications facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven day a week. Please refer to the site plans and area maps submitted with the application. There are currently two other communication facilities located on the Shurgard site. The project will not impact surrounding properties or land uses. ESMR facilities operate at extremely low power and thus this facility will not be a source of interference with electronic equipment, including radio, television, and telephone transmissions. Interference is prevented by FCC regulation. There would be approximately one routine maintenance visit per month to the site. Cli'eeigD JAN101997 vEvElot,m„..T PLANNING CITY pp Rey oN JUSTIFCATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST Project: Nextel Communications Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio Facility Conditional Use Permit Submittal for Shurgard Storage, Site#WA0494022Z-4 Located at 1755 NE 48t'' Street A. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning. The proposed use is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance. Chapter 5, the Utilities Section of the Comprehensive Plan addresses telecommunication projects. It states that facilities should be sited to not cause adverse impacts to the neighborhood and to co-locate on existing facilities whenever possible. The proposed antennas are only three inches in diameter and will not block any public views or create any adverse aesthetic impacts. The siting of the antennas on an existing storage facility that is located near I-405 also tends to minimize impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. Zoning ordinance section 4-31-10.4, Commercial Arterial Zone, allows the proposed use, defined as a medium utility,with a conditional use permit. All set back and development standards are met. The total height of 55 feet of the proposed antennas does not exceed the height of the existing antennas. B. Community Need. The Nextel ESMR antenna system is designed to serve the entire Puget Sound region. Inasmuch, the system requires a number of antennas sites to serve not only specific areas,but also that each antenna site be integrated into the entire regional system. This is similar to concept that allows continuous cellular telephone coverage throughout the region. The proposed Shurgard Storage site would serve Nextel customers in the I-405 corridor in and around the Kennydale area as well as link Nextel customers to the rest of the Nextel system. This project does not result in the detrimental over-concentration of this use either in the City of Renton or in the immediate area. The Comprehensive Plan calls for the consolidation and co-location of telecommunication facilities where possible. Nextel wishes to consolidate this installation with other telecommunication facilities. The Shurgard Storage location in the CA zoning district and near I-405 make this an ideal site for the Nextel antenna installation. C. Effect on Adjacent Properties: As discussed above in the Comprehensive Plan section, the proposed antennas are only three inches in diameter and will not block any public views or create any adverse aesthetic impacts. The siting of the antennas on an existing storage facility that is located near I-405 also tends to minimize impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. ESMR facilities operate at extremely low power and thus this facility will not be a source of interference with electronic equipment, including radio, television, and telephone transmissions. Interference is prevented by FCC regulation. There would be approximately one routine maintenance visit per month to the site, therefore the traffic impact will be negligible. There will be no demands for additional public services or any effect on any public facilities. Therefore, this project will not result in substant'. B„„,� undue adverse effects on adjacent property. MN 1 n u 79g ClTyOI l���ltl r.:;' ODELIA PACIFIC CORPORATION 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 320 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)749-9838 Laureen Nicolay January 9, 1997 Current Planning Division 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,WA 98055 RE: Nextel Communications Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio Facility Conditional Use Permit Submittal for Shurgard Storage,Site#WA0494022Z-4 Located at 1755 NE 48th Street Dear Ms.Nicolay: Please accept this letter and accompanying information as a complete application for an Administrative Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project is a proposal by OneComm Corporation NA,a Delaware corporation,d.b.a.Nextel Communications(Nextel)to construct and operate an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio(ESMR)communication facility at the Shurgard Storage facility located at 1755 NE 48th Street. The following are submitted: Eleven(11) Copies of Master Application One (1)Set of mailing labels Two (2)Copies of Notarized List of Surrounding Property Owners , One (1)Check for$1,004.48(CUP-$1,000;mailing-$4.48) ' ,/ Eleven (11) Copies of Project Narrative a/ , � Eleven (11) Neighborhood Detail Maps 7 Eleven (11) Sets of Site Plans with Generalized Elevations b �F<0A, ei 7,,99� One (1)Set of 8 '/2 X 11"Site Plan Reductions Ty fin, One (1)Set of Colored Display Maps c/ FRA,TCq /,. Eleven (11) Copies of Justification for CUP Request 04, NG SEPA Exemption: State legislation passed last year exempts this type of personal wireless service project from the requirements of SEPA. The following exemption is applicable to this project: RWC 43.21C(a)(ii),"...the facility includes personal wireless service antennas,other than a microcell,and is to be attached to an existing structure(that may be an existing tower)that is not a residence or school and does not contain a residence or school,and the existing structure to which it is to be attached is located in a commercial,industrial,manufacturing,forest or agricultural zone..." Therefore,no SEPA checklist is required for this submittal. Request for Submittal Materials Waiver: We respectfully request that the need for a conceptual landscaping plan, conceptual drainage report,floor plans and a tree cutting plan be waived because this project does not affect any of these areas and they are not applicable to this CUP application. Please call me at 749-9838 should you have any questions regarding this submittal. Thank you. Sincerely, Ode •'•. '. c Corporatio on 0 f of Nextel Communications John He •er enclosures **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Reprinted: 01/10/97 12 :13 Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9700156 Amount : 1, 000 . 00 01/10/97 12 : 13 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #1222 ODELIA PAC Init : LN Project # : LUA97-006 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 334330-1125 Site Address : 1755 NE 48TH ST Total Fees : 1, 000 . 00 This Payment 1, 000 . 00 Total ALL Pmts : 1, 000 . 00 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 .345 . 81 . 00 . 0006 Conditional Use Fees 1, 000 . 00 gttasVj City of Renton WA Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9700224 Amount: 4.48 01/14/97 16:55 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #1222 ODELIA PAC Init: LN Project #: LUA97-006 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 334330-1125 Site Address: 1755 NE 48TH ST Total Fees: 1,004.48 This Payment 4.48 Total ALL Pmts: 1,004.48 Balance: .00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 4.48