HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX Decision_Crown Castle Monopole_202203141
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 1
CAO VARIANCE - 1
RE: Crown Castle Monopole
Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan
LUA21-000203, CU-A, SA-H
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND FINAL DECISION
Summary
The Applicant is requesting a conditional use permit and site plan approval to construct a 99.1-foot-
high monopole wireless communications facility disguised as a tree at 2902 NE 12th St. The
applications are approved subject to conditions.
Testimony
A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the
hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A.
Exhibits
Exhibits 1-15 identified at Page 2 of the February 22, 2022 staff report were admitted into the record
during the hearing. The following exhibits were also admitted during the hearing:
Exhibit 16: City staff power point.
Exhibit 17: Google earth aerial photographs
Exhibit 18: City of Renton COR maps
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 2
CAO VARIANCE - 2
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. Sally Natalino, Crown Castle, 2055 S Stearman Dr, Chandler, AZ 85286.
2. Hearing. A virtual Zoom hearing was held on the application at 11:00 am on February 22,
2022, Zoom Meeting ID No. 946 7233 4580.
3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting a conditional use permit and site plan
approval to construct a 99.1-foot-high monopole wireless communications facility (WCF) disguised
as a coniferous tree at 2902 NE 12th St. The proposed height is designed to accommodate three
carriers: the stealth tower would incorporate antennas for two (2) different wireless carriers (AT&T
and T-Mobile according to the Applicant) at RAD heights of approximately 80 feet above grade and
90 above grade as well as space for a third antenna array at approximately 70 feet above grade that is
intended to be utilized by a future carrier. The subject site is 61,133 square feet (1.4 acres) in size.
The property is owned by the Renton Housing Authority (RHA). A Conditional Use Permit was
approved in April 2018 to allow RHA to operate the Sunset Multi-Service and Career Development
Center on the site (LUA18-000127). The purpose of the new facility is to replace a monopole WCF
previously located on an adjacent site. The total lease area, approximately 2500 square feet., would be
located to the north of the existing building. Maintenance access to the site is proposed via an existing
public alley that connects the site to Harrington Ave NE. A gated entrance on the north side of the
site provides access to the alley.
4. Surrounding Uses/Colocation. The project site is surrounded by duplexes to the north, east
and west and multifamily development to the south.
As to availability of alternative sites for co-location, staff determined that the Applicant submitted
satisfactory evidence that no existing tower or support structure can accommodate the needed
facilities. AT&T, one of the two (2) carriers that currently plan to install equipment on the stealth
tower, currently does not have any facilities in the Sunset area (Exhibit 14). The other carrier to locate
on the stealth tower, T-Mobile, will be removing a monopole on an adjacent parcel south of NE 12th
St due to redevelopment of the site. Relocating to the new tower would ensure T -Mobile continues to
have the ability to provide reliable service to customers in the area. According to the Applicant, a lack
of existing towers in the Sunset area, lack of tall buildings or other structures that could support
antennas, and an increase in the number housing units in the neighborhood, necessitate the
installation of a new standalone wireless facility. Staff reviewed the Applicant’s colocation feasibility
justification and concurs that no other suitable towers or structures are available in the surrounding
area.
According to the Applicant, an additional third colocation opportunity is available for another
wireless carrier to install equipment on the proposed stealth tower. In order to ensure both the tower
and the equipment enclosure can support an additional carrier based on the proposed design, a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 3
CAO VARIANCE - 3
condition of approval requires that the Applicant shall provide a letter from a professional RF
engineer demonstrating that future collocation of at least one other wireless carrier is feasible based
on the existing site characteristics and design of the proposed monopole and associated equipment
enclosure.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal.
Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows:
A. Critical Area. No critical areas are mapped on the project site according to COR Maps.
B. Topography and Vegetation. The proposal will not create any significant impacts to
topography and vegetation. No significant grading is proposed as a result of this project
as the site is primarily flat. Vegetative impacts are anticipated within two (2) areas
including the pad used to support the ground cabinet equipment and support pole base as
well as the public alley to the north of the site to be used for maintenance access. The ar ea
near the equipment base would result in a 50-foot by 50-foot square foot area of
vegetation cleared, including six (6) trees (Exhibit 4). The trees proposed for removal
include two (2) 10-inch Maples, a 24-inch Maple, a 24-inch Madrona, an 8-inch Maple,
and a 10-inch Madrona. Improving a portion of the alley (APN 7227802041) to the north,
as required as part of the mitigation measure in the SEPA decision (Exhibit 12), requires
the removal of three (3) deciduous trees approximately 28, 32, and 36 inches in diameter.
The Applicant has proposed mitigating the removal of the trees by planting nineteen (19)
compact strawberry trees around the equipment enclosure. Compact strawberry trees are
short in stature and typically only grow to a maximum height of eight (8’) to ten (10’)
feet. In order provide a taller, higher quality visual buffer around facility, a condition of
approval requires the planting of larger trees.
With or without the larger tree condition the proposal meets the City’s tree retention
standards. The Applicant has proposed the removal of six (6) trees within the 50 feet by
50 feet lease area ranging from 10-inches to 24-inch DBH, resulting in a tree retention rate
of 87.5%. Therefore the proposal complies with the tree retention standards in RMC 4-4-
130.H.ii, which requires that at least 20% of trees be retained for development in the R-14
zone.
C. Height/Compatibility. The proposed height and fencing is the minimum necessary for
project objectives and as conditioned the design is compatible with surrounding
development.
The proposed height is necessary to provide adequate cell phone service. According to
the Applicant, the height proposed is the minimum necessary to avoid signal blockage
created by the area topography, achieve RF line of sight required for adequate
service/coverage, and to allow an additional carrier to collocate on the tower due to the
separation between antennas required. Staff have determined that the proposed height is
necessary for the needs of the project. Testimony at the hearing also established a strong
need for better cell phone service in the surrounding area.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 4
CAO VARIANCE - 4
The proposed faux tree stealth tower, which is designed to visually imitate a coniferous
tree, is located approximately 150 feet away from the nearest public ROW (NE 13th St)
within an existing grouping of trees ranging in height for 30 feet to 71.5 feet (Exhibit 12).
At 99.1 feet tall, the proposed faux tree clearly stands out from the existing trees as
documented by the photo-simulations (Exhibit 5) submitted by the Applicant. Although
less visually impactful than a standard, uncamouflaged monopole, the proposed stealth
tower would stand out significantly due to its sheer size and location adjacent to a
residential neighborhood with building heights typically only reaching two or three
stories. While the branches on the middle and upper portions of the tree serve to reduce
the overall visual impact when viewed from afar, the illusion is less effective when
viewed from closer to the facility due to the type of finish used on the main support pole.
In order to better approximate the look of a real tree, the main support pole should include
design elements that help it blend in with the other trees on the site. Therefore, to further
reduce the visual impact of the tree when viewed from nearby properties, a condition of
approval requires that the Applicant shall incorporate a textured finish or cladding system,
such as the Larson Ultraflex bark offered by Valmont Structures, on the main support pole
that imitates the look of natural tree park (Exhibit 15).
Another tower issue necessitating mitigation are some antennas at the top of the tower.
The plan set (Exhibit 4) shows antennas associated with the top-most antennas extending
beyond the ends of the faux branches, which reduces the visual effectiveness of the faux
tree stealth tower. Therefore, a condition of approval requires that no part of the
equipment mounted on the stealth tower support pole shall extend beyond the faux lateral
branches, unless an alternative concealment method is approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager.
The proposed structures would not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier.
The associated equipment enclosure would include a six (6’) foot tall wood fence installed
around the perimeter which is consistent with the type screening used for at- grade utility
or mechanical equipment. The location of the enclosure near the back of the site within a
vegetated area would create a negligible visual impact on the adjacent properties and
would not look out of place on a commercial site. In addition, the recommended
condition under criterion ‘a’ above would require the Applicant to install additional
landscape elements around the perimeter of the enclosure which would further reduce the
visual impact to adjacent properties.
D. Residential Areas. The site of the proposed tower is located in the Residential-14 (R-14)
zoning district and is adjacent to both single-family and multi-family residential uses.
According to the Applicant, sites closer to residential areas are more valuable for carriers
than remote sites or industrial areas due to customer demand and the potential for growth.
The broader neighborhood to the north of site is dominated by residential multi -family,
residential single-family, and civic uses such as schools, churches, and social
organizations. While locating within a residential area is not preferred from a visual
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 5
CAO VARIANCE - 5
perspective, growth in residential areas is the primary driver of cellular service demand
and therefore, represents an efficient area for carriers to locate their equipment, according
to the Applicant. As indicated in the RF justification (Exhibit 14) submitted by the
Applicant on behalf of AT&T, the carrier to be located at the highest point on the tower, a
substantial coverage gap exists in the greater Sunset area stretching from NE 4th St to
May Creek Park. In addition, according to the RF Justification submitted by the Applicant
on behalf of T-Mobile (Exhibit 14), who would be collocating on the tower below
AT&T’s equipment, the tower location is necessary as it will replace an existing T-
Mobile-owned monopole south of the project site along NE Sunset Blvd that will be
removed as part of the site’s redevelopment. According to the Applicant, residential
growth in the area has put a strain on the existing towers in the area and the proposed
tower would alleviate pressure on both networks due to its location between an
underdeveloped residential neighborhood and fast-growing commercial area.
While the tower is in close proximity to residential uses, staff has concurred with the
Applicant that the location of the proposed stealth tower is optimal due to its proximity to
an area experiencing significant residential and commercial growth. The Applicant has
proposed a faux tree stealth tower designed to blend into the environment, which once
constructed, would provide higher quality cellular service to residents while blending into
the environment through the use of a high quality design. In addition, staff recommended
conditions of approval adopted by this decision will further serve to reduce the overall
visual obtrusiveness of the facility.
E. Light, noise, glare and visual impacts. The impacts of light, glare, and noise are not
anticipated to be above what would be expected and permitted in the R-14 zone. The
facility will include two emergency generators, but they will only be used in cases of
emergency and tested for a maximum of about ten minutes each per week during regular
business hours.
6. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate and
appropriate infrastructure and public services as follows:
A. Water and Sewer Service. No water or sewer service is provided for the project and
none is needed.
B. Fire and Police. The City of Renton will provide police service and the Renton Fire
Authority will provide fire service. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that
sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development.
C. Drainage. The project proposes less than 2,000 square feet of new impervious area
and less than 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced impervious area, therefore, the
project is exempt from Storm Drainage Review. Final evaluation would be based on
review of the Building Permit Application materials. If more than 2,000 square feet
of new and/or replaced impervious area is proposed, the project will be subject to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 6
CAO VARIANCE - 6
drainage review. Surface water system development fee is $0.80 per square foot of
new impervious surface, but not less than $2,000. This is payable prior to issuance of
a civil construction permit.
D. Parks/Open Space. The project is not residential in nature and no park impact fees or
specific parks facilities are required.
E. Transportation and Circulation. The proposal is served by adequate transportation
facilities.
The proposal provides for safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. Since
the proposal will only generating approximately one trip per month, the proposal is not
anticipated to create any demand for transit or off-site traffic improvements. Site
access is and will remain adequate as determined by Public Works staff. The building
on the site is currently accessed via two (2) driveways off of NE 12th St, classified as a
Collector Arterial road. No changes to access to the main building are proposed as a
result of the project. Vehicles accessing the site for maintenance of the proposed WCF
would utilize the existing public alley to the north of the site, eliminating the need for
large trucks or cranes to use NE 12th St for ingress/egress. Due to the nature of the
adjacent uses and type of project proposed, consolidation of ingress and egress points
with adjacent uses was determined by staff to be infeasible. If the project site or
adjacent sites redevelop in the future, consolidation of access points would be re-
evaluated at that time.
The design of the existing surface parking lot and pedestrian walkway system on the
site provides high quality internal circulation and safe pedestrian connections. The
proposed WCF as finally constructed would not impact circulation on the site, as all
maintenance vehicles serving the facility would access the site from the public alley to
the north of the site. In addition, the existing pedestrian walkway connecting the alley
to parking lot in front of the building would not be impacted by construction of the
WCF or associated equipment enclosure.
The Applicant is proposing to utilize the partially improved public alley on the parcel to
the north of the site in order to access the proposed WCF for installation and
maintenance of the equipment. As part of the SEPA Determination of Non-
Significance-Mitigated issued by the Environmental Review Committee (Exhibit 12), a
mitigation measure was included that requires the Applicant to improve the portion of
the public alley extending north from the project site approximately 250 feet.
Improving the alley section to City of Renton street standards represents a significant
step towards improving the entire alley which will be used by future development for
access. While the project does create an additional connection, it improves an existing
connection that will be important and beneficial for future development in the adjacent
neighborhood to the north.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 7
CAO VARIANCE - 7
Existing conditions provide for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets,
walkways and adjacent properties. A five-foot wide sidewalk is located along the NE
12th street frontage near the site that allows pedestrians to safely access the site. In
addition, an onsite sidewalk provides a protected, dedicated pedestrian route from the
public sidewalk to the front entrance of the building. No changes to pedestrian
circulation are proposed as part of the project. Vehicular connections to adjacent
properties are not currently present due to the existing development pattern. Pedestrian
connections to adjacent properties are provided via the public sidewalk along NE 12th
St. In addition, an existing concrete walkway extends from the onsite walkway near the
front entrance to the public alley to the north of the site. No changes to the concrete
walkway are proposed as a result of the project.
F. Schools. The project is not residential in nature. No impacts to schools are anticipated
and no fees are required.
G. Refuse and Recycling. RMC 4-4-090 sets the standard for adequate refuse and
recycling facilities. No refuse and recycling facilities are required for the proposal.
H. Parking. City code standards do not apparently require any parking for the site and
existing on-site parking is available should the proposal create any need for parking.
I. Landscaping. As conditioned, it is determined that the proposal provides for adequate
and appropriate landscaping.
Due to the height of the proposed WCF, the installation of additional landscaping
would not significantly reduce the visual impact of the main monopine pole structure.
Existing trees on the site (Exhibit 4) provide a moderate level of screening and help
camouflage the proposed monopine, which is designed to have characteristics of an
evergreen tree. The Applicant has also proposed the installation of additional trees
around the lease area space, which would contain both the main monopine support
structure and the associated equipment. A condition of approval requires the installation
of larger, native trees in lieu of the species proposed. If complied with, the condition
would result in landscaping that will provide a higher quality transition to the
neighboring properties and increase the overall appearance of the project at ground
level.
Conclusions of Law
1. Authority. Hearing Examiner site plan review qualifies as Type III review pursuant to RMC
4-8-080(G). As outlined in RMC 4-8-080(G), the Hearing Examiner is authorized to hold hearings
and issue final decisions on Type III applications subject to closed record appeal to the Renton City
Council. The conditional use permit is classified as a Type II permit by RMC 4-8-080(G). RMC 4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 8
CAO VARIANCE - 8
8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the highest-number
procedure,” which is the Type III review for the conditional use permit.
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is within the Residential
High Density Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Residential-14 (R-14) zoning
designation
3. Review Criteria/Modification Approval. RMC 4-9-200D2biv requires hearing examiner site
plan review for monopoles exceeding 60 feet. RMC 4-2-060O requires administrative conditional
use permits for monopoles sited in the R-14 district. Conditional use criteria for wireless
communication facilities such as monopoles are governed by RMC 4-2-0601. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)
governs site plan criteria. Applicable conditional use and site plan standards are quoted below in
italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
Conditional Use
RMC 4-2-0601a. Height and Design: The height of the proposed tower and/or antenna as well as
incorporation of design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual
obtrusiveness.
4. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C, the monopole is of the minimum height necessary
to provide service in a service deficient area. As further detailed in 5C, the monopole has been
designed to visually integrate into the landscape with its faux tree design, conditions that require
enhanced faux design and conditioned planting of surrounding trees.
RMC 4-2-0601b. Proximity to Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent and nearby
properties and the proximity of the tower and/or antenna to residential structures and residential
district boundaries.
5. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C and 5D, the monopole is compatible with
surrounding development.
RMC 4-2-0601c. Nature of Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent and nearby
properties. The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse
effects on adjacent property.
6. As determined in Conclusion of Law No. 5, the proposed use is fully compatible with
adjoining uses. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant
adverse impacts. For these reasons, the proposal will not result in substantial or undue adverse
effects on adjacent property.
RMC 4-2-0601d. Topography and Vegetation: The surrounding topography and tree canopy
coverage.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 9
CAO VARIANCE - 9
7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5B, the proposal will not create any significant impacts
to topography or vegetation.
RMC 4-2-0601e. Ingress/Egress: The proposed ingress and egress.
8. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6E, the proposal is served by adequate access.
RMC 4-2-0601g. Collocation Feasibility: The availability of suitable existing towers and other
structures to accommodate the proposal.
9. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, there are no other suitable areas available for co-
location.
RMC 4-2-0601h. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The compatibility with the general
purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, this Title, and any other City
plan, program, map or ordinance.
10. As determined in Findings of Fact 16 and 17 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with
the comprehensive plan and zoning code.
RMC 4-2-0601i. Landscaping: Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent
properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
11. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5F, landscaping beyond that proposed by the Applicant
and conditioned for the proposal is not necessary as the Applicant will be installing as much as can be
reasonably effective in buffering impacts to adjacent properties.
SITE PLAN
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to
be in compliance with the following:
a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and
approvals, including:
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives,
and policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the
Community Design Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
ii. Applicable land use regulations;
iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 10
CAO VARIANCE - 10
iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in
RMC 4-3-100.
12. As concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 4 and as conditioned, the proposal is consistent
with the City’s comprehensive plan and development regulations.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses, including:
i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a
particular portion of the site;
ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets,
walkways and adjacent properties;
iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities,
rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from
surrounding properties;
iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual
accessibility to attractive natural features;
v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and
surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance
the appearance of the project; and
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid
excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
13. As conditioned, the criteria quoted above are met. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 6E,
the proposal provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
adjacent properties. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6G, the proposal complies with the
City’s refuse and recycling standards as City standards require no refuse or recycling space for
such a facility. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C, the proposal will not adversely affect
any views. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6I, the proposal is adequately landscaped to
reduce impacts to adjoining properties. The proposal will not create any significant light
impacts, including excessive brightness or glare, for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No.
5E.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement,
spacing and orientation;
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 11
CAO VARIANCE - 11
ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian
and vehicle needs;
iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation
and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious
surfaces; and
iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide
shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to
enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and
protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or
pedestrian movements.
14. The criteria quoted above are met. The structure is separated reasonably far from other uses
on the project site and surrounded by trees as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5, which should
reasonably serve to protect both on and off-site privacy for the infrequent number of times the
project site is accessed for maintenance. All other impacts addressed in the criterion quoted
above are addressed in Finding of Fact No. 5.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for
all users, including:
i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets
rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on
the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties;
ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system,
including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points,
drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and
pedestrian areas;
iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking
areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
15. The proposal as conditioned provides for adequate access and circulation as required by the
criterion above for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 6E.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project
focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the
occupants/users of the site.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 12
CAO VARIANCE - 12
16. The project is exempt from open space requirements.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to
shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines.
17. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal as
determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing
natural systems where applicable.
18. The City’s critical area regulations identify and adequately protect all natural systems of
significance. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the project site has no critical areas.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and
facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
19. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact
No. 6.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development
phases and estimated time frames, for phased projects.
20. The project is not phased.
DECISION
As determined in the Conclusions of Law above, the conditional use permit and site plan applications
satisfy all applicable conditional use and site plan criteria and are approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. The Applicant shall comply with the following mitigation measures issued as part of the
Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated July 12, 2021.
a. The Applicant shall improve the portion of the public alley (APN 7227802041)
extending north from the project site with a length of approximately 250 feet per
the City of Renton street standards contained in RMC 4-6-060. The final design
and extent of the alley improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Public
Works Plan Reviewer at the time for Civil Construction Permit review.
2. The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan showing sight-obscuring native
trees around all four sides of the equipment enclosure perimeter. The Applicant shall
utilize trees that grow to a large size at maturity and may include species such as Western
Red Cedar, Douglas Fir, or an alternative native species. The detailed landscape plan
shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit issuance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 13
CAO VARIANCE - 13
3. The Applicant shall incorporate a textured finish or cladding system on the main support
pole, such as the Larson Ultraflex bark offered by Valmont Structures, that imitates the
look of natural tree park. The Applicant shall submit a physical sample of the proposed
finish to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit issuance.
4. The Applicant shall submit an engineering analysis prepared by a professional engineer
that makes a specific finding confirming the reduced setback is safe. The analysis should
be submitted at the time of building permit application for review and approval by the
City’s structural engineer.
5. The Applicant shall submit an updated construction plan set and photo simulations that
clearly documents the code-required branch density as well as shows the branches
installed down to a minimum of 20 feet above grade. The updated plan set and photo
simulations shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit issuance.
6. The Applicant shall utilize a design that mimics a tree species native to western
Washington including for structure features such as faux bark, branches, and needles. The
tree species utilized for the design shall be reviewed and approved by Current Planning
Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
7. The Applicant shall add antenna socks with realistic faux foliage to all antennas. In
addition, the Applicant shall paint all other cabling and equipment on the stealth tower
brown or green depending on location in order better blend into the environment. All
future new or swapped equipment on the stealth tower shall also utilize antenna socks
with faux foliage, regardless of the carrier. The antenna sock specifications shall be
reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
issuance.
8. No part of the equipment mounted on the stealth tower support pole shall extend beyond
the faux lateral branches unless an alternative concealment method is approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager. The Applicant shall submit an updated plan set and
photo simulations showing the updated design to be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
9. The Applicant shall provide a letter from a professional RF engineer demonstrating that
future collocation of at least one (1) other wireless carrier is feasible based on the existing
site characteristics and design of the proposed monopole and associated equipment
enclosure. The letter shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for
review and approval prior to building permit issuance.
DATED this 10th day of March 2022.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN- 14
CAO VARIANCE - 14
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III application(s)
subject to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the hearing
examiner’s decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision.
A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal
period.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
EXHIBITS
Project Name:
Crown Castle: 816039 WCF
Project Number:
LUA21-000203, CU-A, SA-H
Date of Meeting
February 22, 2022
Staff Contact
Alex Morganroth
Senior Planner
Project Contact/Applicant
Jennifer Taylor, Lynx
Consulting, 17311 135th Ave
NE, Ste A100, Woodinville, WA
98072
Project Location
2902 NE 12th St (APN
7227802040 and
7227802041)
The following exhibits are included with the Hearing Examiner Decision:
Exhibit 1: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report
Exhibit 2: SEPA Checklist
Exhibit 3: Site Plan
Exhibit 4: Construction Plan Set
Exhibit 5: Photo Simulations
Exhibit 6: Drainage Report, prepared by Duncanson Company, dated July 11, 2019
Exhibit 7: Subsurface Exploration Report, prepared by Tower Engineering Professional, dated
April 30, 2019
Exhibit 8: Advisory Notes
Exhibit 9: Resolution 4393
Exhibit 10: Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner
Exhibit 11: Duwamish Tribe Email, dated July 24, 2021
Exhibit 12: Environmental Review Committee Decision dated July 12, 2021
Exhibit 13: Tree Survey
Exhibit 14: RF Justification
Exhibit 15: Bark Example
Exhibit 16: Staff PowerPoint
Exhibit 17: COR Maps, https://maps.rentonwa.gov/Html5viewer/Index.html?viewer=cormaps
Exhibit 18: Google Earth, https://www.google.com/earth/