Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWireless Communications Facilities Ordinance (6/23/1997) C Oc U C Nd coCCo -0 � N E oncv 0, ~ = C a .2 N C • U � '� CU ca O7� E a'5amoo 7 7� co > C. �>m °) E cmCN 0,= o VWOO= 'ao '�mma»ea T �c ZU~UU o.g- c mEi sc_ E 0 CD W c� = coQ >,o co CI U va_ OOZmir�aomU ,_ no�L=Vccoo rca rn tO co ) ?Z s) o o a54).202 a) d c 7-Z_o• -O c N U c' )0w N N a0 UWc[ 0) NOC OCCap' mQ 0oda LN 0moocN ,7 � `oacoa Zl. a ).2' ¢NamA' 0 �UCW MJ EN20 ZZ a) O AL co ^` a Y a^) a) = �• i o }. C ° V- Uad U c030 ° w� N cn HI ! oa) o- L j �- �= c M (paw cw a) o . ° ° o �) 00 a`) s ~ o. c) 0.. ° ooco � 20 N N r co 0 oo E1 Via) •"' E c E co i- . 3 a) c . .c cn o L -�// •E C (i) O a) V O U I fil a C L f� L L a) C a) Qco O '9 o � 5 c� 0 � o a) CO c"n �' � � � � n uai � v co \ -c >, r �, c co xc n „..„ 3 c cV o_ 3 3 ct c � � • � � a. TO as al . rn cu 0 E = E °coYa3i c0 , a) ` o a � � ° O > := y -0 C c ; C \ U cn a) O r cU U d Raba) al o w cn cLY � c N '° � >, 0O C as ,0 C 0 c L a cb O ° C UO O c'S o as 0) c°0 a)(DX E 0 .CC a) , LL m 3 n-s9)al la � `°° 3 > Y ° an 0) _� "ID U. a) sa L• a0 c Q id 'y j a) N a) o m .._ ca cu 0 a) C s«- rNi 3 `ttttttniii►//// 0 o Zr) C 0 -0 c a) a - CD 0 a) co ��\\ GS °°°i E o � � -0 (nca a)0 to v o a) •Z• s- �S ®p��y L 3 a) >, nj L C O O O E y�;'R�Q, 1. 0 - ctS + C C ! _ C >+ a O C C ° C CD C Z � �_. n �n tM.Q r. o 0 , c a (R r , :) 3= a) a50c = cs = 'c 'aa) rn a c •C a) 'C O O +-' O 7 u1 .0 N !., ` c� c . 0 Cr) v O al F- J cn Replaces Ord 4666 CITY OF RENTON, WASHIINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4689 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) , OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY ADDING CHAPTER 38, WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I . Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by replacing Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities, which reads as follows : CHAPTER 38 WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES SECTION: 4-38-1 : Purpose and Intent 4-38-2 : Definitions 4-38-3 : Administering and Enforcing Authority 4-38-4 : Telecommunications Act of 1996 4-38-5 : Submittal Requirements 4-38-6 : Permit Fees 4-38-7 : Development Standards for Antennas : Micro Facilities 4-38-8 : Development Standards for Antennas : Mini Facilities 4-38-9 : Development Standards for Antennas : Macro Facilities 4-38-10 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole I 4-38-11 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole II 4-38-12 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Lattice Towers 4-38-13 : Additional Permit Criteria for Wireless Communication Facilities 4-38-14 : Conditional Use Permit Criteria 4-38-15 : Airport Restrictions 4-38-16 : Exemption 4-38-17 : Obsolescence 4-38-18 : Collocation 4-38-19 : Radio Frequency Standards 4-38-20 : Permit Limitations vow Noe ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • 4-38-21 : Alternates and Modifications 4-38-22 : Variances 4-38-23 : Appeals 4-38-24 : Violations and Penalties 4-38-25 : Severability • 4-38-1 : PURPOSE AND INTENT A. Goals . The purpose of this Chapter is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications facilities, including towers and antennas . The goals of this Chapter are to: 1 . Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; 2 . Encourage strongly the joint use of new and existing tower sites; 3 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 4 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas; and 5 . Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efficiently. B. Principal or Accessory Use. Antennas and towers may be considered either principal, accessory or conditional uses . A different existing use or an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or tower on such lot . For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna complies with zoning development regulations, including but not limited to setback requirements, lot coverage requirements, and other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even though the antennas or towers may be located on leased parcels within such lots . Towers that are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use or structure. 4-38-2 : DEFINITIONS Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meaning of terms used in this section shall be as follows: 2 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • ACCESSORY ANTENNA DEVICE: An antenna which is less than twelve (12) inches in height or width, excluding the support structure (examples : test mobile antennas and global positioning (GPS) antennas) . ANTENNA: Any system of poles, panels, rods., reflecting discs or similar devices used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals . Antennas include the following types: 1 . Dish antenna: see parabolic antenna. 2 . Omni-directional antenna (also known as a "whip" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a three hundred sixty (360) degree radial pattern, and which is up to sixteen (16) feet in height and up to four (4) inches in diameter. 3 . Directional antenna (also known as a "panel" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than three hundred sixty (360) degrees . 4 . Panel antenna: see directional antenna. 5 . Parabolic antenna (also known as a dish antenna) is a bowl-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 6 . Whip antenna: see omni-directional antenna. ADMINISTRATOR: The Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City, or any successor office with responsibility for management of the public properties within the City of Renton, or his/her designee. ATTACHED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY: A wireless communication facility that is affixed to an existing structure, for example, an existing building, tower, water tank, utility pole, etc . which does not include an additional wireless communication support structure . COLLOCATION: The use of a single support structure and/or site by more than one wireless communications provider. DEPARTMENT: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City of Renton. EQUIPMENT SHELTER OR CABINET: A room, cabinet or building used to house equipment for utility or service providers. FAA: The Federal Aviation Administration, which maintains stringent regulations for the siting, building, marketing and lighting of cellular transmission antennas near airports or flight paths . 3 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 FCC: The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the licensing and practice of wireless, wireline, television, radio and other telecommunications entities . GUYED TOWER: A freestanding or supported wireless communication support structure which is usually over one. hundred (100) feet tall, which consists of metal crossed strips or bars and is steadied by wire guys in a radial pattern around the tower. LATTICE TOWER: A self-supporting wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than sixteen (16) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 .37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than one hundred (100) square feet as viewed from any one point . MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than six (6) feet in height and with an area of not more than five hundred eighty (5 8 0) square inches (e .g. one (1) foot diameter parabola or two (2) feet x one and one half (1 . 5) feet panel) as viewed from any one point . Also known as a Microcell . MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than ten (10) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 .37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than fifty (50) square feet as viewed from any one point. MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . PREAPPLICATION SUBMITTAL: A map and other pertinent information prepared in accordance with the same general requirements as the conditional use permit submittal, but submitted prior to conditional use permit application. PREAPPLICATION MEETING: A conference held with a project applicant and City representative (s) in advance of the proposed development project application. During the conference, the City representative (s) shall inform the applicant of applicable policies, plans, and requirements as they apply to the proposed development project . 4 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • PROVIDER: A company providing telephone or other communications service . RELATED EQUIPMENT: All equipment ancillary to the transmission and reception of voice and data via radio frequencies . Such equipment may include, but is not limited to, cable, conduit and connectors . RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PARCEL: Any parcel of property with one of the following zoning designations : Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) . SUPPORT STRUCTURE: see Wireless Communication Support Structure. TOWER: see Wireless Communication Support Structure. WCF: see Wireless Communication Facility. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY (WCF) : An unstaffed facility for the transmission and reception of low-power radio signals usually consisting of an equipment shelter or cabinet, a support structure, antennas (e.g. omni-directional, panel/directional or parabolic) and related equipment, generally contained within a compound. For purposes of this ordinance a WCF includes antennas, support structures and equipment shelters, either separately or in combination. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SUPPORT STRUCTURE: The structure erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . Support structure types include, but are not limited to, stanchions, monopoles, lattice towers, wood poles or guyed towers . 4-38-3 : ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING AUTHORITY The Administrator and/or his/her designated representatives are responsible for the general administration and coordination of this Chapter. 4-38-4 : TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the City to comply with the following conditions . A. The City zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among wireless telecommunication providers that compete against one another. B. The City zoning requirements may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service. 5 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 rrr' C. The City must act within a reasonable period of time on requests for permission to place or construct wireless telecommunications facilities . D. A decision by the City denying a request for permission to install or construct wireless telecommunications facilities must be in writing and must be based on evidence in a written record. E. If a wireless telecommunications facility meets technical emissions standards set by the FCC, it is presumed safe . The City may not deny a request to construct a facility on grounds that its radio frequency emissions would be harmful to the environment or the health of residents if those emissions meet FCC standards . 4-38-5 : SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Preapplication Plan Review: For permitted uses, the applicant may choose to submit a preliminary sketch (five copies) for preliminary staff review prior to submittal of the . application. For conditional use permit applications, the applicant shall submit a preliminary sketch (five copies) for preliminary staff review prior to submittal of the application. The staff shall review this map within fourteen (14) working days and inform applicant of any preliminary concerns and recommendations for revisions at a scheduled preapplication meeting. The staff shall also indicate where photosimulations will be required for the application submittal, and may choose to waive submittal requirements for the conditional use permit when deemed appropriate. This shall not preclude the staff from making further recommendations at the application stage. B. Conditional Use Permit and SEPA Review: In addition to the information listed for a conditional use permit application in Section 4-36-4, the following items shall be required for a Wireless Communications Facility conditional use permit application. The following information shall also be required as part of a SEPA review application for a permitted use subject to SEPA review: 1 . Map of View Area: A diagram or map depicting where within a one quarter (1/4) mile radius any portion of the proposed facility could be seen. 2 . Photosimulations : Photosimulations of the proposed facility from affected residential properties and public rights-of-way at varying distances . A diagram or depicting where the photosimulations were taken shall also be included with the application. 6 4689 ORDINANCE NO. • 3 . Service Area: A map showing the service area of the proposed WCF and an explanation of the need for that facility. 4 . Inventory of Existing Sites : An inventory of the provider' s existing facilities with the Renton city corporate limits, and any other facilities outside the city limits that are within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed facility. The inventory is to include specific information about the location, height, and design of each facility. The Department may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional use permits under this Chapter or other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the City, provided, however that the Department is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable . 5 . Site Plan: A site/landscaping plan showing the specific placement of the WCF on the site; showing the location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features to be retained; and indicating type and locations of existing and new plant materials used to screen WCF components and the proposed color(s) for the WCF. 6 . Applicant Agreement Statement : A signed notarized statement indicating: a. The applicant agrees to allow for the potential collocation of additional WCF equipment by other providers on the applicant ' s structure or within the same site location; and b. The applicant agrees to remove the facility within six (6) months after that site' s use is discontinued or if the facility falls into disrepair, and restore the site to its pre- existing condition. If there are two or more users of a single WCF, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the WCF. 7 . Draft Lease Agreement : A draft lease agreement with the landholder, or separate equivalent documentation that : a. Allows the landholder to enter into leases with other providers; and b. Specifies that if the provider fails to remove the facility upon six (6) months of its discontinued use, the responsibility for removal falls upon the landholder. C. Building Permit for Permitted Uses: When the proposed Wireless Communications Facility is a permitted use, the 7 ORDINANCE NO. 4689vie following items shall be required with the building permit application, in addition to the items listed is Section 4- 36-4 . 1 . Service Area: A map showing the service area of the proposed WCF and an explanation of the need for that facility. 2 . Inventory of Existing Sites : An inventory of the provider' s existing facilities with the Renton city corporate limits, and any other facilities outside the city limits that are within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed facility. The inventory is to include specific information about the location, height, and design of each facility. The Department may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional use permits under this Chapter or other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the City, provided, however that the Department is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable. 3 . Site Plan: A site/landscaping plan showing the specific placement of the WCF on the site; showing the location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features to be retained; and indicating type and locations of existing and new plant materials used to screen WCF components and the proposed color(s) for the WCF. 4 . Applicant Agreement Statement : A signed notarized statement indicating: a. The applicant agrees to allow for the potential collocation of additional WCF equipment by other providers on the applicant ' s structure or within the same site location; and b. That the applicant agrees to remove the facility within six (6) months after that site' s use is discontinued or if the facility falls . into disrepair, and restore the site to its pre- existing condition. If there are two or more users of a single WCF, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the WCF. 5 . Draft Lease Agreement : A draft lease agreement with the landholder, or separate equivalent documentation that : a. Allows the landholder to enter into leases with other providers; and 8 4689 ORDINANCE NO. • b. Specifies that if the provider fails to remove the facility upon six (6) months of its discontinued use, the responsibility for removal falls upon the landholder. 4-38-6 : PERMIT FEES The Department shall be responsible for the permitting, inspection and acceptance of all improvements listed in this Chapter, and shall make charge therefore to the applicant . The charges are listed in the Fee Schedule, Chapter 1, Title V of City Code. 4-38-7 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MICRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MICRO FACILITY: MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than six(6) •feet in height and with an area of not more than five hundred eighty (580) square inches (e .g. one (1) foot diameter parabola or two (2) feet x one and one half (1 .5) feet panel) as viewed from any one point . Also known as a Microcell . B. Permitted Use: Micro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all zones . C. Location on Building: A Micro Facility shall be located on existing buildings, poles or other existing support structures . A Micro Facility may locate on buildings and structures provided that the interior wall or ceiling immediately adjacent to the facility is not designated residential space. D. Height : Micro Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Micro Facilities may exceed the height limitation by six(6) feet, or in the case of existing structures the antennas may extend six (6) feet above the existing structure. Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . E. Color: A Micro Facility shall be same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. 4-38-8 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MINI FACILITIES A. Definition: MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than ten (10) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 .37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than fifty (50) square feet as viewed from any one point . 9 twor ORDINANCE NO. 4689 *101, B. Permitted Use or Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, . and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the site is under one (1) acre or the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred (100) feet from any residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Buildings : A Mini Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space. D. Color: A Mini Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E. Height : Mini Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Mini Facilities may exceed the height limitation by ten (10) feet, or in the case of existing structures the antennas may extend ten (10) feet above the existing structure. Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure. 4-38-9 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MACRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than sixteen (16) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than one hundred (100) square feet as viewed from any one point. B. Administrative Conditional Use Permit/Permitted Use: Macro Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . 10 4689 ORDINANCE NO. Macro Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use in these zones if the site is under one (1) acre or the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the setback for the facility is a minimum of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in these zones if the setback is less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Building: A Macro Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space. D. Color: A Macro Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E. Height : Macro Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Macro Facilities may exceed the height limitation by sixteen (16) feet, or in the case of existing structures the antennas may extend sixteen (16) feet above the existing structure . Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . 4-38-10 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE I A. Definition: MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones if the site is less than one (1) acre in size, or has minimum setbacks of less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. 11 4410 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • C. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an Administrative conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Suburban (CS) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Suburban (CS) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones if the minimum setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. D. Permitted Use: Monopole I Facilities are a primary permitted use in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones if the minimum setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. E . Maximum Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole I Facility shall be less than sixty (60) feet for all permitted zones. F. Antenna Height : Antennas equal to or less than fifteen (15) feet in height or up to four (4) inches in diameter may be a component of a Monopole I Facility. Antennas which extend above the wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the Monopole I wireless communications support structure . For example, the maximum height for a Monopole I shall be sixty (60) feet and maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas seventy-five (75) feet (sixty (60) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . G. Antennas : Macro facilities are the largest attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole I Facility. H. Landscaping: Monopole I Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility, or equivalent screening as approved by the Administrator. Landscaping shall include 12 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-11 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE II A. Definition: MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B. Prohibited Zones: Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones . C. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Suburban (CS) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone, unless the Monopole II Facility is to be constructed on property where wireless communication support structures presently operate, and the new Monopole II Facility will not exceed the height of the existing support structures . D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone. E. Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole II Facility shall be thirty-five (35) feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or one hundred fifty (150) feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole II facility. Antennas which extend above the 13 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • Monopole II wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. For example, the maximum height for a Monopole II facility shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas one hundred sixty-five (165) feet (one hundred fifty (150) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . G. Landscaping: Monopole II Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility, or equivalent screening as approved by the Administrator. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-12 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES: LATTICE TOWERS A. Definition: LATTICE TOWER: A self-supporting wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . B. Prohibited Zones : Lattice Towers are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones . C. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Suburban (CS) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones . Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone. D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones . Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone. 14 • 4689 ORDINANCE NO. • E. Height : The maximum permitted height for a Lattice Towers shall be thirty-five (35) feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or one hundred fifty (150) feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Lattice Towers . Antennas which extend above the Lattice Towers wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. For example, the maximum height for a Lattice Towers shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas one hundred sixty-five (165) feet (one hundred fifty (150) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . G. Landscaping: Lattice Towers shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility, or equivalent screening as approved by the Administrator. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-13 : ADDITIONAL PERMIT CRITERIA FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES The following criteria shall be met before a building permit can be granted: A. Visual Impact 1 . Antenna Height : Antennas may not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above their supporting structure, monopole, lattice tower, building or other structure. 2 . Existing Character: Site location and development shall preserve the preexisting character of the surrounding buildings and land uses and the zone district to the extent consistent with the function of the communications equipment . Wireless communication towers shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site to the extent practical . Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized, unless such disturbance would result in less visual impact of the site to the surrounding area. 3 . Screening of Equipment Shelters and Cabinets : Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communications equipment should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. When 15 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 *NO • • they cannot be located in buildings, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped to screen views from adjacent residential or commercial zoned properties . Any landscaping shall be in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. 4 . Exposed Metal Surfaces : Accessory equipment facilities may not be enclosed with exposed metal surfaces . B. Noise Levels : No equipment shall be operated so as to produce noise in levels above forty-five (45) dB as measured from the nearest property line on which the attached wireless communication facility is located. Operation of a • back-up power generator in the event of power failure or the testing of a back-up generator between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. are exempt from this standard. No testing of back-up power generators shall occur between the hours of 9 p.m. arid 8 a.m. C. Fencing: Security fencing, if used, shall be painted or coated with a nonreflective color. Fencing shall comply with the requirements listed in City Code 4-31-15 (C) , Fences and Hedges . D. Lighting: Towers shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the governing authority may review the available lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views . Security lighting for the equipment shelters or cabinets and other on-the-ground ancillary equipment is also permitted, as long as it is appropriately down shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the site . E. Advertising: No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent roadway shall be placed on or affixed to any part of a telecommunications tower, antenna array or antenna, other than as required by FCC regulations regarding tower registration or other applicable law. Antenna arrays may be located on previously approved signs or billboards without alteration of the existing advertising or sign. F. Building Standards : Wireless Communication Support Structures shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222 Revision F Standard entitled "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures" (or equivalent) , as it may be updated or amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit the building official shall be provided with an engineer' s 16 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 certification that the support structure' s design meets or exceeds those standards . 4-38-14 : CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicability: The governing authority may grant, with or without conditions, or deny the requested conditional use permit . The governing authority may limit the term and duration of the conditional use permit . Conditions imposed by the governing authority shall reasonably assure that nuisance or hazard to life or property will not develop. B. Conditional Use Criteria: The governing authority shall consider the following factors in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit, although the governing authority may waive or reduce the burden on the applicant of one or more of these criteria if the governing authority, concludes that the goals of this ordinance are better served thereby. 1 . Height of the proposed tower. 2 . Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries . 3 . Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties . 4 . Surrounding topography. 5 . Surrounding tree coverage and foliage . 6 . Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness . 7 . Proposed ingress and egress . 8 . Potential noise, light and glare impacts . 9 . Availability of suitable existing towers and other structures . 10 . Compatibility with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and any other plan, program, map or ordinance of the City. 4-38-15 : AIRPORT RESTRICTIONS A. Airport Regulations : All wireless communications facilities and attached wireless communications facilities must comply with the Airport Zoning regulations, as listed in City Code 4-31-17 . B. Notice to FAA: A Notice of Proposed Construction shall be submitted to the FAA a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the issuance of any building permit for any wireless communications support structure or attached wireless communications facilities . 17 ORDINANCE NO. -4689 N. 4-38-16 : EXEMPTION A. Exemptions from Conditional Use Permit : The following are exempt from the requirement of a conditional use permit, and shall be considered a permitted use in all zones where attached wireless communications facilities are permitted: Minor modifications of existing wireless communications facilities, whether emergency or routine, so long as there is little or no change in the visual appearance, as determined by the Administrator. B. Amateur Radio, Receive Only Antennas : This Chapter shall not govern any tower, or installation of any antenna, that is under seventy (70) feet in height and is owned and operated by a federally licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only antennas . 4-38-17 : OBSOLESCENCE Any wireless communications facility or attached wireless communications facility that is no longer needed and its use is discontinued shall be reported immediately by service provider to the Administrator. The use of the site is not discontinued until the last service provider using the facility ceases use of the facility. Discontinued facilities shall be decommissioned and removed by the facility owner within six (6) months of the date it ceases to be operational or if the facility falls into disrepair, and the site restored to its pre-existing condition. The Administrator may approve an extension of an additional six (6) months if good cause is demonstrated by the facility owner. 4-38-18 : COLLOCATION A. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers or Other Structures : No new wireless communications support structure shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the governing authority that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: 1 . No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area required to meet applicant ' s engineering requirements . 2 . Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant' s engineering requirements . 3 . Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant ' s proposed antenna and related equipment . 18 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 ..� • • 4 . The applicant' s proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant' s proposed antenna. 5 . The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable . Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. 6 . The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable. B. Cooperation in Collocation Efforts : A permittee shall cooperate with other WCF providers in collocating additional antennas on support structures and/or on existing buildings provided said proposed collocators have received a building permit for such use at said site from the City. A permittee shall exercise good faith in collocating with other providers and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a substantial technical level of impairment of the ability to provide the permitted use (i .e . , a significant interference in broadcast or reception capabilities as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden) . Such good faith shall include sharing technical information to evaluate the feasibility of collocation. In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or both the applicant and permittee. C. Reasonable Efforts : All applicants shall demonstrate reasonable efforts in developing a collocation alternative for their proposal . 4-38-19 : RADIO FREQUENCY STANDARDS A. Verification of Compliance : The applicant shall comply with Federal FCC standards for radio frequency emissions . Within sixty (60) days after the issuance of its building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Administrator a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency emissions of all antennas installed at the subject site and compares the results with established Federal standards . Said report shall be subject to review and approval of the Administrator for consistency with Federal standards . If on review, the City finds that the WCF does not meet Federal standards, the City may revoke or modify the permit . B. Interference with Local TV or Radio: The applicant shall ensure that the WCF will not cause localized interference 19 440 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • with the reception of area television or radio broadcasts . If on review the City finds that the WCF interferes with such reception, and if such interference is not remedied within thirty (30) days, the city may revoke or modify this permit . 4-38-20 : PERMIT LIMITATIONS A. Maintenance: The applicant shall maintain the WCF to standards that may be imposed by the City at the time of the granting of a permit . Such maintenance shall include, but shall not be limited to, maintenance of the paint, structural integrity and landscaping. If the applicant fails to maintain the facility, the City may undertake the maintenance at the expense of the applicant or terminate the permit, at its sole option. B. Change of Ownership: The applicant shall notify the Department of all changes in ownership or operation of the facility within sixty (60) days of the change. 4-38-21 : ALTERNATES AND MODIFICATIONS A. Alternates : The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of construction not specifically prescribed by this Chapter, provided any alternate has been approved and its use authorized by the Administrator or his/her designee . The Administrator may approve any such alternate, provided he/she finds that the proposed design and/or methodology is satisfactory and complies with the provisions of this Chapter and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this Chapter in suitability, strength, effectiveness, durability, safety, maintainability and environmental protection. The Administrator may require that sufficient evidence or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that may be made regarding its use. B. Modifications : Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Chapter, the Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided she/he shall first find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this Chapter impractical, that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Chapter, and that such modification: 1 . Will meet the objectives and safety, function, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the requirements of this Chapter, based upon sound engineering judgment . 20 ORDINANCE NO. 4689 • 2 . Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity. 4-38-22 : VARIANCES A. Variance Requirements : A variance from the requirements of this ordinance may be approved by the Hearing Examiner when undue hardship may be created as a result of strict compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. In recommending or approving any variance, the Hearing Examiner may prescribe conditions that he/she deems necessary to or desirable for the public interest . No variance shall be approved or recommended unless the Hearing Examiner finds : 1 . That there are special physical circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use or development of his land; and 2 . That the variance is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances; and 3 . That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. B. Applications Required: Application for any variance shall be submitted in writing by the applicant at the time the permit application is submitted to the Department . The application shall state fully all substantiating facts and evidence pertinent to the request . C. Variance Fees : The appropriate fees shall be paid at time of application as required in City Code Section 5-1-1. 4-38-23 : APPEALS Any decision made in the administrative process described in this Chapter may be appealed pursuant to Section 4-8-11 of this Title . Any appellant must be seeking to protect an interest that is arguably within the zone of interest to be protected or regulated by this chapter, must allege an injury in fact, and that injury must be real and present rather than speculative . 4-38-24 : VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES Violations of the provisions of this Chapter will be a civil infraction and punishable under Chapter 33 , Title IV of the City Code. 21 r ORDINANCE NO. 4689 , 4-38-25 : SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Chapter or its application to any person or property is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Chapter or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances shall not .be affected. SECTION II . This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 24th day of November 1997 . /7) Marilyn . P tersen, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 24th day of November 1997 . Je e Tanner, Mayor Approv —as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: November 28, 1997 ORD. 684 : 11/10/97 :as . 22 November 24. 1997 `ow Renton City Council Minutes `11°' Page 388 Resolution #3294 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Transportation: Transit interlocal cooperative agreement with the Transportation Improvement Board Signal Priority Project, for the design and construction of the Renton Transit Signal Priority System. TIB Grant, CAG-97- MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 12/01/97 for second and final reading: Planning: Center An ordinance was read amending Section 4-31-10.1.D.2 of Chapter 31, Zoning Downtown Upper-Story Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code by eliminating upper- Setback Elimination story setbacks for property zoned Center Downtown and located in the Downtown Core Area. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/01/97. CARRIED. Planning: Card Room An ordinance was read amending Sections 4-31-2, 4-31-10.1.C, 4-31-10.2.C, Ordinance Revisions 4-31-10.4.B.2, 4-31-10.5.C, 4-31-11.1.B.2, 4-31-11.2.B.2, 4-31-12.B.2 and 4- 31-16.C.6 of Chapter 31, Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code by adding card rooms as a definition, adding card rooms as a prohibited use in the Mixed Commercial (CM), Community Commercial (CB), Convenience Commercial (CC), and Commercial Office (CO) zones, and adding card rooms as a permitted secondary use in the Arterial Commercial (CA), Light Industrial (IL), Medium Industrial (IM), and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/01/97. CARRIED. Budget: 1998 Utility Rates An ordinance was read amending Sections 8-1-9.A of Chapter 1, Garbage, and 8-4-31.C.1 of Chapter 4, Water, of Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) of City Code relating to 1998 utility rates for all customer classes. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/01/97. CARRIED. Finance: 1998 Property An ordinance was read fixing the rates and amount of taxes to be levied, and Tax Rates levying the same upon all taxable property, both real and personal, in the City of Renton, Washington, to finance the departments and activities of city government, and to provide for the general obligation bond principal and interest redemption requirements for the year beginning on the first day of January 1998. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/01/97. CARRIED. Finance: 1998 Budget An ordinance was read adopting the annual budget for the year 1998 in the total balanced amount of $106,806,380. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/01/97. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading: Ordinance # 4689 An ordinance was read amending Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code Legal: Wireless by adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities. MOVED BY Communications EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ordinance ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. 1 November 17, 1997 ille Renton City Council Minutes CiPage 376 restrict multi-family residential use of the.site. (Site is generally located on the south side of MLK Jr. Way, east of the City limits to 74th Ave. S., if extended.) 5. Amend Environmental Element policies EN-13 and EN-57 to allow for wetland enhancement as a mitigation option and to delete specific references to the Greenbelt Map. 6. Relating to Transportation Concurrency requirements, clarify that annual testing must show that level of service is met city-wide before a concurrency test is conducted for an individual development proposal, and that the transportation plan is based on land use assumptions which should be considered in project review. 7. Amend policies LU 212.14 and LU 212.I5b to allow rezoning to Arterial Commercial (CA) in the Employment Area-Commercial area north of I-405, and require a five-acre threshold size for any such rezones. 9. Amend annexation policies to allow annexations less than ten acres in size. 10. Rezone a portion of the May Valley prezone area from Residential Single Family to Residential Rural. 11. Retain the existing and separate Employment Area-Commercial and Employment Area-Office designations. The Committee further requested the preparation of a second ordinance adopting amendment #8, the proposed Shoreline Master Program amendments, as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission. As documented in the staff report dated November 6, 1997, the changes would not take effect until the State Department of Ecology approves them in accordance with the Shoreline Management Act. The Committee further recommended that these ordinances be prepared for the City Council's consideration on December 1, 1997. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the RESOLUTIONS Council meeting of 11/24/97 for second and final reading: Legal: Wireless An ordinance was read amending Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code Communications by adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities. MOVED BY Ordinance KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/24/97. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS ' MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL Council: 12/22/97 Meeting CANCEL ITS REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF DECEMBER 22, Cancellation 1997. CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:01 p.m. MARIL J.I.op TERSEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Brenda Fritsvold 11/17/97 November 10. 1997 Renton City Council Minute' Page 366 The Committee also recommended concurrence with the recommendation of the Board of Public Works that Council require the applicant to grant to the City a 15-foot wide easement for the existing storm drainage line and associated manholes. The existing pipeline is to be located within the easement area with a minimum of five feet horizontal clearance, on center, of the existing pipeline. The new easement document shall contain language to allow for direct access (through Tract "G" of the Stonegate plat) by City personnel and vehicles to the City facilities located within the I5-foot easement area for operation and maintenance purposes. The Committee also recommended concurrence with the recommendation of the Board of Public Works that Council collect the requisite processing fee from the applicant. No public funds were spent in acquiring or maintaining the easement to be partially released. Therefore, this is a Class "B" easement and requires no further compensation other than the processing fee. Class B: All City of Renton easements for which no public funds have been expended in the acquisition, improvement or maintenance of same or easements originally dedicated or otherwise conveyed to the City by the present petitioner for the release of said easement for which no public expenditures have been made in the acquisition, improvement or maintenance thereof. Therefore, if Council determines the easement classification to be Class B, the City shall receive no further compensation other than the release of easement filing fee, which has been paid, and the processing fee, which is now due and payable. The Committee further recommended that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the release of easement document and that the City Clerk record the document with King County. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claims Vouchers #152772 - 153250; two wire transfers in the total amount of $2,727,027.46; approval of Payroll Vouchers #156278 - 156578; and 488 direct deposits in the total amount of $1,261,636.60. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning & Development Committee Chair Schlitzer presented a report Committeee regarding the Wireless Communications Ordinance revisions. The Committee Legal: Wireless recommended adoption of the revised draft ordinance dated November 3, Communications 1997, as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission, with one Ordinance additional revision. The ordinance should be revised to allow for the construction of new Monopole II facilities within 300 feet of a residential zone with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit, provided the site already has other existing support structures. The Planning & Development Committee further recommended that no additional changes be made in the ordinance to allow for the construction of additional support structures within residential areas of the City. The current prohibitions through the prohibited use designations should remain unchanged in the ordinance, except for this one revision recommended by the Committee. The original Wireless Communications Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on June 2, 1997, in response to an emergency situation. Following completion of the environmental review for this ordinance, a public hearing was conducted before Council on June 23, 1997. Revisions were requested at that time by industry representatives, and this revised draft ordinance incorporates staff . / ,Qovember 10. 1997 Renton City Council Minut Page 367 / recommendations in response to those requested revisions. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning: 1997 Planning & Development Committee Chair Schlitzer presented a report Comprehensive Plan regarding the proposed 1997 Comprehensive Plan amendments. The Shoreline Master Program Committee recommended that a public hearing regarding Amendment #8, Amendment Shoreline Master Program amendments, be scheduled for December 1, 1997 since State agency comments have resulted in additional changes which were not reviewed by the Planning Commission at its hearing on July 30, 1997. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning: Center Planning & Development Committee Chair Schlitzer presented a report Downtown Upper-Story regarding the proposed amendments to the Center Downtown zoning Setback Elimination classification which would eliminate upper story setbacks for property zoned Center Downtown and located in the Downtown Core. While the prescriptive standard for a setback would be removed from the zone at this time, the determination of appropriate mitigation addressing shadows, views, etc. for site-specific proposals would be based upon environmental and site plan review. The Committee concurred with the staff recommendation to eliminate upper-story setbacks. The Committee recommended that a public hearing be scheduled for November 24, 1997, and that an ordinance be prepared for Council consideration on November 24, 1997, with first and second reading recommended to be complete on December 1, 1997. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Corman presented a report Committeee recommending that Council award the contract for the application of metal CAG: 97-159, Airport siding on Building 5-02 to L&J Development, LLC. Building 5-02 is located Building 5-02 Metal Panel at the Renton Municipal Airport and leased to the Boeing Company. The Residing, L&J Committee further recommended that Council authorize the transfer of Development $47,375 from the unobligated fund balance of the Airport Fund to the Building 5-02 Residing project. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution #3291 A resolution was read requesting the City of Newcastle to annex certain areas Planning: Deannexation to currently within the corporate limits of the City of Renton, and specifying the Newcastle, NE 50th St/Lk continuing obligation of properties within such annexation for Renton's Wash Blvd NE existing bonded indebtedness. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Ordinance #4688 An ordinance was read amending Section 4-31-39 of Chapter 31, Zoning Legal: Zoning Code, Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code relating to nuisance Declaration of Nuisances violations and penalties. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY and Permitting of SCHLITZER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. Injunctions ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Council President Keolker-Wheeler reported a problem experienced by Executive: Phone System volunteers who answer the City's incoming main phone line. All phone calls for City Hall (Caller ID originating from any City line show up on recipient Caller ID systems as Problem) coming from the City's general information number, regardless of APPROVED BY 11 r CITY COUNCIL • Date //— /0 f, PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November10, 1997 - WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE REVISIONS (Referred 6/23/97) The Planning and Development Committee recommends adoption of the revised draft ordinance dated November 3, 1997 as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission, with one additional revision. The ordinance should be revised to allow for the construction of new Monopole II facilities within 300 feet of a residential zone with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit,provided the site already has other existing support structures. The Planning and Development Committe further recommends that no additional changes be made in the ordinance to allow for the construction of additional support structures within residential areas of the City. The current prohibitions through the prohibited use designations should remain unchanged in the ordinance,except for this one revision recommended by the Committee. The original Wireless Communications Ordinance was adopted by City Council on June 2nd, 1997 in response to an emergency situation. Following completion of the environmental review for this ordinance, a public hearing was conducted before Council on June 23, 1997. Revisions were requested at that time by industry representatives, and this revised draft ordinance incorporates staff recommendations in response.to these requested revisions. • b Timothy J. S e , Chair �" ..L3._41 AL., :ob Edwards, ' e Chair King Parker,Member , cc: Mike Kattermann - Jim Hanson • wircomrpl . July 28, 1997 ,�,, Renton City Council Minutes r..r Page 253 Recycling Program. Refer to Utilities Committee. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from David D. Miller, CEO of Versidata Systems, Citizen Comment: Miller - Inc., 321 Burnett Ave. S., Renton, 98055, requesting that the City modify Parking Restrictions in the parking restrictions in this area for the convenience and use of downtown Downtown customers and employees. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Larson Correspondence was read from Ruthie Larson, 714 High Ave. S., Renton, -Wireless Communication 98055, regarding signal interference on Renton Hill and the need for Facilities ownership information on wireless communication facilities or towers. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report regarding the City's Utilities Committee policy on providing sewer service outside City limits. The Committee Utility: Sanitary Sewer recommended revising City Code to allow connection to its sanitary sewer Connections to Properties system by property owners outside of the current City limits. Approval of Outside Renton (City requests will be based upon the following criteria: Policy) * The property shall be within the City's adopted potential annexation area or approved sanitary sewer service boundary; and * The Planning/Building/Public Works Department mandates design standards and criteria for the property or properties requesting service without annexation. King County Boundary Review Board approval of service and service agreements with adjacent districts will be obtained, when necessary, prior to issuance of the public works permit. The property owner will obtain and pay for all required permits, including but not limited to City side sewer permits and County right-of-way permit (if necessary). The property owners will be responsible for their fair share of the cost of the installation of the sewer main either through direct costs or latecomer's assessments; and * Connection will be subject to agreement to pay the non-City rate for wastewater (currently one and one-half times the basic City rate), and agreement to pay all costs associated with the permitting for such connection to the City sewer system. The Utilities Committee further recommended that the ordinance amending City Code section 8-5-15C be presented for first reading. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 255 for ordinance.) Mayor Tanner noted his concurrence with this change. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending Public Works: S Renton concurrence in staff's recommendation that Council authorize the transfer of Sewer Replacement $480,000 from various Wastewater 421 accounts (as listed below) to the South Funding Renton Sewer Replacement project: Boeing Lift Station Replacement WO #45010 $30,000 Sunset Sewer Interceptor WO #45125 $305,000 ---7) o CITY OF RENTON ill City Clerk Jesse Tanner,Mayor Marilyn J.Petersen July 29, 1997 Ms. Ruth Larson 714 High Avenue S. Renton, WA 98055 Re: Communications Towers in the City of Renton Dear Ruth: Thank you for your letter regarding signal interference on Renton Hill and the need for ownership information on towers. The letter was entered into the record at the regular City Council meeting of 7/28/97, and referred to the Council's Planning and Development Committee. That committee is currently reviewing the proposed Wireless Ordinance, and your letter will be included in the deliberations of the committee. If I can provide additional assistance or information, please feel free to call. Sincerely, fdle Marilyn J.0'a r i en City Clerk • cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Council President Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Neil Watts, Plan Review Supervisor • 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2501 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer -7'4-42 • 4- c / RECEIVED JULY 24. 1997 JUL 241997 TIM SCHLITZER j-�N ION O.I Y UOUlleIL COUNCILMAN CITY OF RENTON RE: COMMUNICATION TOWERS IN THE CITY OF RENTON AT THE PRESENT TIME THERE IS A TOWER LOCATED ON THE SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT PIPELINE ROAD AT THE CORNER OF 7TH AVE. SO AND JONES AVE. SO. ON RENTON HILL. THIS TOWER CAUSES INTERFERENCE OF TCI CABLE CHANNEL 19 TO ALL HOMES WITHIN ABOUT A THREE BLOCK AREA. THE TOWER COMPANY SAYS IT IS THE CABLE COMPANY THE CABLE COMPANY SAYS IT IS THE TOWER. THE REALITY SEEMS TO BE THE FREQUENCY OF THE TOWER AND CHANNEL 19 ARE SO CLOSE TOGETHER RECEPTION IS POOR. ONE OF THE RESIDENTS OF RENTON HILL DID SOME RESEARCH AND CONCLUDES THE PROBLEM COULD BE CORRECTED WITH SOME TYPE OF ELECTRONIC ADDITION TO THE TOWER. THIS IS AN EXPENSIVE ITEM AND THE TOWER COMPANY IS APPARENTLY UNWILLING TO ADD THIS DEVISE. IN DRAFTING RULES FOR TOWERS YOU MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD PREVENT THIS INTERFERENCE FROM HAPPENING WITH NEW ANY NEW TOWER INSTALLED. WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THE COMPANY INSTALLING TOWERS CLEARLY IDENTIFY THERE OWNERSHIP OF THESE TOWERS SO THEY CAN BE CONTACTED IF NECESSARY. IF THE COMPANY THAT OWNS THE TOWER ON RENTON HILL WANTS TO INSTALL MORE TOWERS IN RENTON, IT WOULD BE NICE IF THEY COULD CORRECT ANY PROBLEMS ALREADY CAUSED BY EXISTING TOWERS. TH K YOU RUTHIE LARSON PRESIDENT, RENTON HILL COMM. ASSOC. r.r ..r RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting July 7, 1997 Council Chambers Monday, 7:30 p.m. Municipal Building MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Tanner led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Council President; DAN CLAWSON; KING COUNCILMEMBERS PARKER; TIMOTHY SCHLITZER; BOB EDWARDS; TONI NELSON. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER RANDY CORMAN. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN JESSE TANNER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Executive Assistant to the ATTENDANCE Mayor; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; MARILYN PETERSEN, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; VICTORIA RUNKLE, Finance & Information Services Administrator; CHIEF ALAN L. WALLIS, Police Department. APPROVAL OF MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL COUNCIL MINUTES APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 23, 1997, AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Executive Assistant Jay Covington presented an administrative report REPORT summarizing the City's recent progress toward goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 1997 and beyond. Items noted included: * Renton's Library received a grant from the Washington State Library Commission for a stand-alone public workstation providing access to the Internet, which could be available by October. * The Library's connection to the Washington Library Network was moved to the City's new Internet Service Provider, at a cost savings of 39% and with a six-fold increase in connection speed. * The City received $164,646 in flood relief funds from King County that will be used to stabilize the eroded south bank of the Cedar River next to the Narco site. * A recycling day was held June 21st with over 620 citizen participants. * First Savings Bank of Renton is proposing a matching grant of $25,000 to the City's Housing Repair Assistance Program. AUDIENCE COMMENT Ralph Evans, 3306 NE 11th Pl., Renton, 98056, spoke regarding wireless Citizen Comment: Evans - communications facilities in Renton and how the heights and diameters of Wireless Communication these can compare to standard utility poles. Although he felt that the Facilities; Gene Coulon ordinance passed by Council on this subject was generally good, he was Park Regulations concerned with potential safety risks associated with people gaining access to the towers and climbing on them. He also suggested that the City require providers to update their facilities as technological advances are made. He agreed that the facilities should not be allowed in residentially-zoned areas as permitted uses, and said it would be far easier for the City to compromise on its regulations via a conditional use permit rather than persuade providers to relinquish some of the rights granted by a less restrictive ordinance. On another subject, Mr. Evans displayed photographs of signs posted at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, which notify park patrons of various July 7, 1997 _;enton City Council Minutes Page 222 OLD BUSINESS Council President Keolker-Wheeler presented a report regarding the Police Committee of the Whole Department's records and information system. The Committee of the Whole Police: Records and was briefed by staff on the status of selecting a new information system to Information System replace the current outdated Police Department system. After a lengthy and involved request for proposals process, no acceptable proposals were received. Staff is now reviewing alternatives to developing a new system, including beta testing, partnering with a known software developer, and re-advertising with more financial information disclosed. The Committee recommended that this item be referred to the Public Safety Committee for oversight and coordination with the Administration. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Mayor Tanner noted that last year, the Administration included over $1.5 million in the budget for software and technological improvements, including the Police Department system. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution #3268 A resolution was read setting a public hearing on July 28, 1997, to consider Vacation: SE 5th St (N of vacating a portion of SE 5th Street in the 2700 block, north of Maple Valley Maple Valley Hwy), Highway (Bruce Orff/VAC-97-004). MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Orff/VAC-97-004 SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading: Ordinance #4670 An ordinance was read providing for 1997 Budget amendments in the amount Budget: 1997 Mid-Year of $196,559 for transportation improvement projects. MOVED BY Adjustments for Six-Year KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE TIP ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Responding to an inquiry from Councilman Schlitzer, Mayor Tanner said the Executive: Downtown- Administration did hire a consultant to assist with the final design for the Area Consultant downtown transit hub. The consultant's duties were subsequently broadened to include work on other City-owned properties (including the old Sound Mazda site). Mayor Tanner assured Council that the consultant is not reworking the entire Downtown Renton Plan, as has been rumored. AUDIENCE COMMENT Ralph Evans, 3306 NE I 1 th Pl., Renton, 98056, asked when the wireless Citizen Comment: Evans - communications facilities will next be discussed by the Planning & Wireless Communications Development Committee. Committee Chair Schlitzer replied this has not yet Facilities been scheduled. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:11 p.m. MARILYN P RSEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Brenda Fritsvold 07/07/97 47 �� �� �n�u,:9..%��� Now `err+" "I 111 Ow tee? tr c c = w co � o0' 0. ma 0 _ jam:: i vai co �, c m c a)h C 7 p� CA 3 p3 = N • % a Z � Q y o c o� `< / v: 0 _ N• _v, �.. "^ tea) •..-0 7 II ,//) .:d a a o cap cr.`� v ao N o i`, ,.„ ..: a G) co j 3 O o p _ a) a) a) 0 v ```������►-� w - 0) 7 .y. 7 CD OS a) m O� a) " OO M 3 0 0 -► N C C a 7 0 .�'C II) C c D CT is o a;p ? o o 7 a'0 a p 0 � 3 CD x5a-0 = 0-. a c oct D <D E O 0 a) (0 a) a) O to ? c7 0 a) m a R. y 0 - cn H N. // cQ N OZ o ccp \ a `� 7' o m cD 0 cp. _ f7D 0 .c 7 <O -., cD O p LI, 1 c0 v) 7 " w 7 7 a o o v, C) 7 .'. N = 0 ' 7 cD o CD n p 0 7 (D 3 7 Q 7c a X ? = ,, x' O a) c O `-< (�D n t '' (Ns o a " a) -v 7 * 0 o 7 TI a) 0 °, 0 cG O o * a) n O) a * r< C CO CO o � a) I C o .< a c ' p CO _r o a; . l'�. m . a s<-o CD CO AT v, 7 p ► � '� - = " o a 0 a 7h o _00 as � v,' o 7 0 �+ ' 7 i 7 7 0 o a 3 o 0 O 0 co 7 O O d o V, cp .N+ 0 o P 7 p a) p 7' CD (n c- 00 c0Ilk CD a 0 CD -i a, = -, 0) N V = o o- o a) m y 0 N 0) O p 0 0 0 X p 0/IN '•'. N C C ._.• = 3 c0 0 cu CO N� O Cpo> > ' 0 O 0• ^' G l0 V/ CD 7 y CD a 13`G N > o N n f(D 7 N D N c 0'Ow N CD c C7�D) o -, ai 10 ,-' ma.= 2.a � c v w Z` ca�'`o0`cva9st5" ma0nw70 � �3 �v -8 3 m m * oo§ m�nm -1 ww3m w - 74 j5 �, ocomo.m (Dw o. =-00 p m m =m >>a cnoaC)� po = O< o F -- cnco� n�,co y. c m c _.m �cwwyoo wow5m0 F.• �=v� co A �vaQ03cnovm.-' m awsmy � .i waci mccn = ) Ra ,.,,o -o w w g= nv aFa-o o _. 3o > ? z -Do c N o m 0) o CmcD aC- r� -. n - N,a= o ? o , c0 ,�n =�. � om�o � Wo7o �?= Q .4_ m �.i1 ,,., r-° ip , +� fn r -1 aU p as (nLC� I) = v St 0"`71 1f a CO t0 0 a =. C C) C = O. * a cn y n> > ° 0 <'' a � c Q m tom cD ^. �' �yZ = - .. — o _to C o v I U` 0 tJ C 0 N O ?_-. _ .'_ •= C1 -0 O tD C icy:;, c, : % a 33 t�D a � � ° y � m � tD 1 '/' �� ? CD a m a � ti � N � o o ,,i✓°�+O+,u+,+.a <, ) ,i a W .O.« 7 * o= ... � fD a) al-0 Q� N 1 %HIV ? -` O v to O a tD C a) tD tD f�D tD (D , tD * _0 0. = O to m n O. X j O N ^' - o Cn m a = mto t0n � m ,0�.. vai 0 •3 .. g tD 7C � Z r� CD cD -I 0 = a� —. a lQ . ... O �, -.. CD O < to 7:4 O O cp r. v I o a0a) v5-0 * N 0 0 0 mo cn � a 03tc • ma, 0 13 co O 0 n to tD tD `� -.. O f0/1 �•� •A• as 0 tQ cA) co o � ac 0_ m r O - = c._. 0 Cr ) a <c m 2 cn C+ to C) = _ a - °, o ��. as -., = ? o a, o Z Z` - ff 0 3' =(O m g - —I N 7 O = .+ (D .r a 3 N 0 ,-�1 CD ? so i7). C (D 7 O CO 0 O l O. O 3 1 .. .. C . (D CD N Z (o I. CD O 00 o CD a0 0 --Im = -, - �, r. 0 =. = v 0 0 .% .J c o -- omrnaN w • I 0 fD 0 o N x CD lQ N C C .. = = to EA C O ? 0 S to if N CD tox y CD o� �o Im v<�-I1O(n In ln _2Z zz r ®71 x x iiit m g-g xppc)mmma g a m ��1�T=��i5 i5�n�-�� ��e �gg?s�i F©ao'St�n_wo 2caa� �< �.� p � 0A tnSF,,,,$'� R mdg.63 6 4543' oo'p . R O O 2LL �D x a c m �.. Min njr}a � Gyl _ ��ri�v O 7 61 3J� 7 veco vp ?� �= a _< ota i 7 O O O O f=D 0 0 A Al C(D O ..N A Q O Z N N O 4N rn V,7,0 W.? OM _ .< 0 p 0-..N m �C7 0 N » d CD ' ... i (1) N �..� Z.-a gz D co-,--� Om 19co � �* n- C m-. = co o p • opcto .<� w i >m -0 _ co O ppC ?d= 031 Nnpia7 J ,�,<t0 ? Z '€ co co fD W O cD N O.i p W Cr 7 11 p .-I(D '° Ic y W xi C O '�O.p �O p.s� 7 p N 0 p cr,i 2127'3!nm mwomm.= 5v, P vn� <� ‘e- June 23, 1997 Renton City Council Minutes Page 206 St. Interchange; Transit Program; Walkway Program; Intra-City Intermodal Transportation Program; Downtown Transit Access Program; Monster Road Bridge Replacement; Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program; and Transit Priority Signal System. Audience comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE 1998-2003 SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. (See page 212 for resolution adopting the TIP and ordinance on the mid-year budget adjustments.) Responding to Councilman Parker, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman said Edmonds Avenue will be extended to provide access to two new residential developments off of NE 3rd/NE 4th Street. Access will not be provided directly to SR-169. Legal: Wireless ' This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published Communications Facilities in accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Tanner opened the public hearing to consider the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance. Neil Watts, Plan Review Supervisor, explained that this ordinance was adopted on an emergency basis by Council on June 2nd. It is an attempt to balance the need to protect residential neighborhoods with the public's desire for quality, low-cost wireless communications services. The ordinance provides some flexibility in siting facilities, with the exception of single family areas. Staff recommends that this matter be referred back to the Planning & Development Committee for consideration of four minor changes (the addition of language addressing pre-application reviews; discussion of a commercial zone that was inadvertently omitted; clarification of language regarding the height of antennas on existing structures; and the addition of descriptive drawings to better illustrate some of the ordinance's provisions). Audience comment was invited. Cydly Smith, 330 - 120th Ave. NE #110, Bellevue, 98005, representing Western Wireless, submitted a letter addressing several areas of concern with the ordinance, including: the definition of a lattice tower, submittal requirements, the design of support structures and the structural integrity of support structures, the prohibition on placement of facilities adjacent to a residential area, equipment shelters or cabinets and their required landscaping, the prohibition on mounting panel antennas on roofs, height restrictions on monopoles, the requirement that facilities be separated, setback and acreage requirements in residential areas, lighting issues, the obsolesence section, and the hold harmless agreement provisions. Councilman Schlitzer requested that the providers give the City specific information regarding how many wireless facilities are required to provide service to the Renton area, as well as where the ordinance prohibits these from being sited in a location where a provider believes it necessary to have one. Marcus Handler, 1109 - 1st Ave., Suite #205, Seattle, 98101, from The Walter Group, representing U.S. West Wireless, explained that the wireless providers are greatly affected by the hilly topography of this area, which necessitates June 23. 1997 ..• Renton City Council Minutes Page 207 taller facilities. He was, therefore, concerned about the height limits contained in the ordinance. He was also concerned about the definition of a micro facility and felt this should be changed to clarify what will be permitted, especially as it relates to collocation of facilities. He suggested that providers be encouraged to screen with natural vegetation where this already exists, and that flexibility be built into the landscaping requirements. Although he agreed that monopoles should not be built in residential areas in most cases, he said in some instances this might be better for the community if the poles can be satisfactorily screened. Responding to Council inquiry, Mr. Handler said he was primarily concerned about the setback requirements contained in the ordinance. He felt these will have to be reduced to ensure that providers are able to meet their service coverage objectives. Russ Stromberg, 1109 - 1st Ave., Suite #205, Seattle, 98101, also from The Walter Group, described the problem the company is currently having in establishing a wireless communications facility in the Kennydale area. Although the company had planned to locate an 80-foot monopole on property adjacent to I-405, the site's zoning is residential and thus the facility cannot now be constructed. Mr. Stromberg felt that the setbacks contained in the ordinance were extremely cumbersome, pointing out that U.S. West does prefer that its facilities be set back and relatively screened, if only for its own public relations purposes. Councilman Corman suggested that the City consider whether providers can be permitted to purchase easements on neighboring properties for encroachments as one way of achieving the required 100-foot or 300-foot setback. Mayor Tanner noted that in cases of hardship, providers can seek a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Michael Lyons, 1700 NW Lake Ave., Suite 420, Seattle, 98109, representing Nextel Communications, said while Renton's wireless facilities ordinance is, for the most part, very good, he had several areas of concern and/or comment, as follows: * The requirement that sites be restored to pre-existing conditions when no longer in use should specify that only that portion of the facilities above grade must be removed; * Because leases are proprietary documents, carriers should be required to record only a summary of their leases and should not have to submit copies of entire lease agreements; * Documentation of the structural integrity of support structures should be submitted as part of the building permit, because changes could occur in the land use process that would affect the design of the facilities; * Location and siting provisions must be flexible because to secure coverage, carriers may need to site facilities in residential areas; * Setback requirements must also be flexible (including options and exceptions) to ensure good siting of facilities; * A 15-foot site-obscuring landscaping buffer would not necessarily screen facilities better than a three-foot buffer of carefully chosen, fast-growing materials; * The six-month period for determining whether a facility is obsolete should be extended; and * The City should allow for very low radio frequencies, such as 835 megawatts. June 23, 1997 _ Renton City Council Minutes Page 208 Noting that carriers sometimes lease space from private property owners for these facilities, Councilman Schlitzer said neighboring property owners might be interested in cooperating to let a carrier site a facility on the boundary dividing their properties. The ordinance as currently written, however, would not allow for this type of agreement. Mr. Watts agreed that the ordinance currently provides for a great deal of protection for residential neighborhoods, adding that its setbacks are more stringent than those of any other jurisdiction surveyed. These provisions can be revised, should Council deem it appropriate to do so. Mayor Tanner suggested that the communications providers submit maps to the City showing where their existing facilities are located. The maps could then be consolidated to show the location of all facilities currently in Renton. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER BACK TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. RECESS MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. TIME: 9:22 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 9:28 p.m.; roll was called; all Councilmembers present. ADMINISTRATIVE Executive Assistant Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative report REPORT summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 1997 and beyond. Items noted included: * An interdepartmental team has been established to coordinate current downtown projects, including the transit center and the piazza (public square). * The City is partnering with The Boeing Company to construct Oakesdale Avenue between SW 16th and 19th Streets as a five-lane street, including the bridge over Springbrook Creek. * The Renton Police Department was praised by the prosecutor in the (King County) Sgt. Matthias Bachmeier case for excellent professionalism, persistence and keen investigative detective work indispensable to the conviction of Bachmeier for arson and aggravated first degree murder. * Wizards of the Coast contributed $3,500 for the summer teen musical production Crazy For You. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Appointment: Planning Mayor Tanner reappointed Richard Wagner, 2411 Garden Ct. N., Renton, Commission 98056, to the Planning Commission for a three-year term expiring 6/30/2000. Council concur. CRT: 97-008, Shaw v. Court Case filed by James E. Kennedy, 999 Third Ave. #1606, Seattle, 98104, Renton representing Stacey Shaw, alleging: discrimination against plaintiff in her WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE The intent of this new ordinance is to encourages wireless industry to develop infrastructure for Renton community in locations suitable for such facilities. Rather than attempt to be very restrictive, or mandate specific locations, the ordinance attempts to encourage use of prefered locations and facilities through the "carrot and stick" approach. By defining more desirable situations as permitted uses, as opposed to conditional use permits for less desirable locations and facilities, the wireless communications service providers are encouraged to use more acceptable alternatives. The ordinance regulates three components of wireless facilities: Antennas, Support Structures and Accessory Equipment Facilities. Antennas: Micro Facility, Mini Facility and Macro Facility Support Structures: Monopole I, Monopole II and Lattice Towers Definitions: Micro Facility: 4 foot height,or 580 square inches. Mini Facility: 10 foot height, 1 meter diameter, or 50 square feet. Macro Facility: 15 foot height, 1 meter diameter, or 100 square feet. Monopole I: 60 foot height or less. Monopole II: 60 foot to 150 foot height. Lattice Tower: Metal crossed strips or bars,up to 150 foot in height. \Zone Type Single Family Multi Family Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Use Micro Antenna Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Mini Antenna Permitted* Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Macro Antenna Admin C.U.P.* Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Monopole I Not Allowed* Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Permitted Permitted Monopole II Not Allowed HEX C.U.P. HEX C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Lattice Tower Not Allowed HEX C.U.P. HEX C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. The ordinance also includes submittal requirements, setback requirements, landscaping requirements, obsolescence clause (if not used for 6 months, must be removed), co-location requirements, noise standards, spacing requirements and radio frequency standards. WIRELES2.DOC\ CITY OF RENTON TUTORIAL MAY 1997 MONOPOLES,ANTENNAS AND LAND USE Background In the fall of 1996,the City of Renton began experiencing a sharp increase in requests for information from telecommunication companies concerning the placement of cellular antennas and monopoles within the Renton corporate limits. City planners, who work to insure that land is used appropriately in our community, were concerned and began taking steps to develop guidelines that focused on need, compatibility, aesthetics and service. What is the telecommunications industry? Telecommunications is the science of transmitting communication from one location to another. This transmission could be via wire, cable or space. Examples of communication through wire include telephone and telegram, where a sending and receiving signal cannot be processed without telephone wires. Communication through cable includes cable based television, i.e., TCI, which can only be received on a television through a cable service, and fiber optics. Examples of communication through space include radio and cellular telephony. Cellular telephony is a combination of telephone, radio and computer technologies to allow communication without the need of telephone wires. Examples include digital pagers and cellular phones. This medium of communication is also known as `wireless' communication system. Which companies offer wireless telecommunications services to our community? Wireless telecommunications service providers in Renton include AT&T Wireless Services, AirTouch Cellular, GTE Mobilnet Incorporated, Nextel Communications, Sprint PCS and Western Wireless. In the near future the Federal Communications Communications Commission (FCC) will auction additional radio frequencies,potentially leading to more carriers and franchises. What are the different types of Personal Wireless Services? Personal wireless services include cellular telephone, personal communications services, other mobile radio services, and any other FCC licensed wireless common carriers. Although these services are classed together, each service works with a somewhat different technology and requires a different type of antenna and transmission facility. Cellular telephone service works by transmitting signals from relatively low-power transmitters on tall towers. Each transmitter covers an area called a"cell". As the user travels through one cell to another, the signal is"handed off'from one transmitter to another in the adjacent cell. Cellular transmitters are on towers of varying height, usually ranging from 40 to 300 feet and higher. cellular transmitters also can be located on top of tall buildings. the number of towers needed to serve a particular area depends on the terrain and the population density - more users may mean more and smaller cells,and therefore, additional facilities,with varying heights required for clear transmission. Personal communications service, or "PCS", is a newer technology just starting to be constructed that uses even smaller "cells" than the traditional cellular service. It will compete with cellular telephone service and may become the service of the future if it provides better quality and reception, transmits data and offers paging. Since PCS transmitters cover an even smaller geographic area than cellular service,more transmitters and towers will be needed,and towers will be place much closer together. WIRELES3.DOC\ 1 Specialized mobile radio(SMR) services typically consist of one or more base station transmitters and a mobile radio unit in the vehicle or premises of the user. communications are transmitted through the base station by telephone wires or by low-power radio signals. Users of SMR include fleet-dispatched taxicabs and delivery services and"closed system"mobile telephone users. Why can't the carriers use the existing infrastructure for transmitting needs? Currently,most Americans have a telephone that requires a wire or fiber optic cable, telephone poles, a switching station and an actual phone to make calls from one location to another. This system has evolved over many decades. When the telephone system was first introduced it was only offered in larger cities where the telephone poles and telephone wires were installed along the streets connecting one telephone customer to another. Quickly the excitement over the invention of the telephone grew,but simply owning a telephone did not enable one to plug into the system. Instead,telephone lines had to be installed within and between cities. When a citizen signed up for telephone service, a telephone wire was installed from the street to the house or the business, allowing a telephone customer in Renton to call another telephone customer in Kent. Soon,telephone lines and telephone poles were extended across state lines, eventually providing service to every community between the east and west coasts. Only then could a citizen from Renton call a relative,friend or customer in Chicago,Illinois or Tombstone,Arizona. Carriers offering the wireless telephone are pioneers in the telecommunications industry because their telephone product does not need telephone poles or wires to transmit telephone calls. Instead the carriers are installing a worldwide system of monopoles, lattice towers, stealth structures, and mobile phones which send and receive radio signals from one point to another through space. this allows customers using the wireless phones access to and from locations not serviced by telephone poles and wires. What do the wireless communication transmitting structures look like? Each carrier has their own version of a distribution pole. The most commonly used structure today in Renton is a monopole. A monopole is a single steel pole which is wide at the base and tapers to the top. a lattice tower is tripod-shaped structure which has a wide base and tapers to the top. Either of these structures may vary from 40 feet to 300 feet in height. An equipment cabinet, box or shed is located at the base of the structure. Inside is the computerized telephone switching gear, radio receivers and transmitters needed to make the communication structure work. Antennas attach to the outside of these structures to send and receive signals. These antennas function much like an antenna used for radio and television, except that they are capable of processing a far greater amount of information. Television and AM and FM radio stations can only send out information which is received by the antenna and heard through the speakers of the radio and/or television. This is known as one-way communication, meaning the listener cannot respond verbally to the radio or television spokesperson without picking up a telephone and placing a call. The telephony antenna not only receives information but can also send and pass on computerized telephone signals, thereby producing two-way communication. A stealth structure is an object that the antenna is built into without the public knowing it exists. Examples include building the antenna into church bell towers, and advertising signs, making monopoles look like trees and installing the antenna inside lighting fixtures. WIRELES3.DOC\ 2 • How many of these wireless communication structures will have to be built? The FCC mandates that all telephony companies provide complete and adequate service to their customers. The number of required communication towers depends on the carrier, the frequency allocation from the FCC and technology. For example, digital pager systems operate on a comparatively lower frequency than cellular. Therefore, antennas can send and receive communication signals a greater distance, resulting in fewer towers. For example, one tower within the northeast, northwest, southeast, and southwest quadrants of the city may be all the carrier needs to provide effective sending and receiving capabilities for the entire city. Cellular carriers are allocated the 824-849 and 869-894 Mhz ranges, which is a higher frequency than used by the digital pager system. This means that more towers are necessary at a given density of users, within each quadrant of the city in order to provide adequate coverage. Lack of adequate coverage results in an inability to send and receive phone calls at some locations, causing a disconnection to a phone call in the middle of a conversation. Personal Conununication Services (PCS) is another communication technology and operates at an even higher frequency than the cellular carriers. PCS is allocated the 1850-1990 Mhz range. this means the towers must be place even closer together because the sending and receiving signals are weaker and cannot travel as far in space as compared to the cellular technology. therefore, PCS requires more towers than cellular within each quadrant of the city in order to provide complete coverage to customers. Each carrier must operate on a different frequency within the allocated frequency bands to ensure that phone calls, pages and other transmitted information do not interrupt other signals. Currently,there are over 22,000 cellular towers in the United States, providing wireless telephone service to over 30 million customers. PCS is the newest technology being introduced to the United States. Because PCS operates at a higher frequency, more towers will have to be constructed to provide complete coverage in their service areas. Can a municipality regulate where these structures are built, and does Renton have any such regulations? The Telecommunications Act of 1996 allows governments the right to regulate the placement of communication towers. The Act also prohibits local governments from denial of approval of towers within its entire jurisdiction. A city can regulate where towers are constructed within its jurisdiction through zoning and development standards, but local governments cannot completely deny requests to allow such towers within its jurisdiction. Remember,the FCC mandates that each carrier must provide adequate service to its customers. Additionally, governments must use caution to avoid creating regulations which favor one carrier over another, thereby creating a monopoly. For example, a community cannot decide that only one tower will be allowed with each quadrant of their city, or that only one tower will be permitted within a three- milt radius of another. This favors the pager and cellular technologies, and, in effect excludes PCS technology. Currently,Renton regulates towers through the conditional use review process. Towers may be allowed within any zone with either an administrative conditional use permit or a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. The standards for height and setbacks are established by the particular zone. WIRELES3.DOC\ 3 The City has developed a draft ordinance to address regulations of different wireless communications facilities within different land use zones. The new wireless communications ordinance is expected to be adopted by August of 1997. Can carriers share the same wireless communication structures? Absolutely! The technology exists for the various carriers to share communication structures provided the tower is at the correct height and location, and there is enough room on existing or proposed towers, and provided the tower is built to accommodate additional carriers. For example, not only do the different wireless carriers require different spacing between their monopoles and towers, but they also set their antennas at different elevations. It is possible to locate a paging carrier on top of a 150 foot communication structure, cellular antennas at around 120 feet and PCS antennas around the 80 foot elevation. but municipalities and citizens must understand that each carrier is different; what suits one company may not be adequate for another, and they are all competitors within the same market. Renton strongly encourages competitors to co-locate wherever possible, and we have experienced success. Just as we do not require competitors in other industries, such as convenience stores and restaurants, to locate on one lot, we should not mandate communication companies to co-locate on every site. We can, however, influence where sites are located through zoning just as we do with commercial and industrial uses,thus reducing their impact on residential land uses. Do wireless communication structures transmit any harmful radio waves? Are they safe for our community? Can these structures fall? The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP), the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), have reviewed the radio-frequency exposure findings and determines there are no harmful health and safety effects associated with the radio frequency transmissions. To date, there are no reports of a wireless communications tower falling in our community. The communication tower structures are required by ANSI to constructed to withstand a 50-year storm event. This is a minimum requirement, and many of the structures are built to withstand more severe conditions. In the event of an emergency, the FCC operates a 24-hour, seven day a week Communications and Crisis Management Center;the phone number is 202-418-2464. Your call and concern will be patch to the appropriate personnel. Citizens are concerned that wireless communication towers may emit harmful radiation. Can we deny an application because of this concern? As long as the tower meets the radiation emission standards that have been set by the FCC, a local government cannot deny a permit based on concern about radiation. The local government can, however, require that the applicant provide evidence that the tower meets the FCC standards. Are there Federal restrictions on the City's ability to regulate the placement of wireless communiction structures? To a great extent,the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act specifically protect local authority over the placement of wirleless communication structures. At the same time, however, the law places some new federal restrictions on that authority. In order to maintain their zoning authority over wireless communication facilities, local governments must satisfy five conditions. WIRELES3.DOC\ 4 1. Local zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among wireless telecommunications providers that compete against one another. 2. Local zoning requirements may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service. 3. A local government must act within a reasonable period of time on requests for permission to place or construct wireless telecommunications facilities. 4. Any city decision denying a request for permission to install or construct wireless telecommunications facilities must be in writing and must be based on evidence in a written record before the council or board. 5. If a wireless telecommunications facility meets technical emissions standards set by the FCC, it is presumed safe. A local government may not deny a request to construct a facility on grounds that its radiofrequency emissions would be harmful to the environment or the health of residents if those emissions meet FCC standards. WIRELES3.DOC\ 5 . Noe, ,olor 1 1 western wireless June 23, 1997 Mr. Neil Watts, P.E. Plan Review Supervisor Development Services Division City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Watts: Thank you for the opportunity to comment upon Renton's draft Wireless Communications Ordinance. The following are my comments. COMMENTS: A. Definition of Lattice Tower: For clarity, I recommend revising the definition as follows: A self-supporting wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment. B. Submittal Requirements: 1. Map of View Area: The requirement for a three-mile view map is too onerous, particularly as the draft does not distinguish between free-standing and rooftop facilities. A more reasonable requirement would be to require a view map from those properties and rights-of-way at distances consistent with Renton's legal notice provisions. 2. Photosimulations: The current draft mandating photosimulations from "affected residential properties and public rights-of-way at varying distances" is too broad to be practically feasible. Again, a more reasonable alternative would be to require photosimulations from those properties and rights-of-way at distances consistent with Renton's legal notice provisions. 3. Inventory of Existing Sites: There is a minor scrivener's error in the third line. The text should be changed as followed: "...any other facilities outside the city limits that are within one-half mile..." 4. Applicant Agreement Statement: Language should be added to provide for those situations in which a WCF is shared by more than one user, such as the following: If there are two or more users of a single WCF, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the WCF. 5. Draft Lease Agreement: This section also does not take into account those situations in which a WCF is shared by more than one user. Appropriate language, such as that suggested under Number Four, above, should be added. Western Wireless Corporation 330 120th Avenue NE,#110 Bellevue,WA 98005 FAX (206) 451-4739 FAX (206) 451-7987 Neil Watts City of Renton June 23, 1997 6. Design of Support Structures and Structural Integrity of Support Structures: A preferable alternative to the current requirement for one report describing the support structure and additional documentation of the structural integrity of the support structure, would be to mandate that a new WCF support structure be engineered to structural standards, such as those established by the Electronics Industry Association or the Uniform Building Code. Renton could also require that structural engineers verify compatibility with Renton's building code. 7. Location on Buildings: Wireless providers such as Western seek to place WCFs on existing structures like buildings. WCFs that are mounted on buildings provide carriers the opportunity to construct discreet facilities that meet coverage objectives and, at the same time, minimize a facility's visual impact. The draft ordinance prohibits the placement of WCFs on buildings where the adjacent wall or ceiling is designated residential space. This restriction is likely inconsistent with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(B)(iv). The Telecommunications Act prohibits the regulation of WCFs on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the FCC's regulations. 8. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets: The proposed language confuses the electronic equipment that supports a WCF with the enclosure that contains it. It should be clarified that electronic equipment should be located within a building or equipment shelter or cabinet. Mandating such a large landscape screen may also preclude the use of smaller lots, especially urban properties, for WCFs. This could violate the Telecommunications Act if such a restriction has the effect of prohibiting a carrier from being able to provide wireless services. Rather than requiring a fifteen foot landscape screen around the equipment shelter, allow for creative alternatives. Painting or architecturally designing the structure to be compatible with the surrounding area can be equally effective in making the facility blend in. In locations where the visual impact of the WCF would be minimal, or in less sensitive zones, such as industrial, reduce or waive the landscaping requirement. Allow for flexibility in siting and landscaping WCFs in those situations where the objectives of this ordinance would be better served, such as using existing plants to screen a WCF. 9. Height: The draft ordinance appears to preclude a carrier from mounting panel antennas on the roof of a building. For both structural and technological reasons, it is not always possible for antennas to be mounted to a building's side. Some types of buildings, such as those with pitched roofs, make mounting antennas to the side extremely difficult. In some situations, the viability of a building as a WCF site will be dependent upon using the roof to achieve sufficient height so that the ability of the site to transmit and receive is not impaired. The ordinance should be revised to authorize panel antennas to be roof-mounted. The City should reconsider the height limits proposed for Monopoles I and II, particularly in those cases when two or more users might be sharing a WCF. Given the topography in the Renton area, current technology and the physical separation required between carriers' antennas, colocation may very well be precluded. A greater number 2 • Neil Watts ...- City of Renton June 23, 1997 of sites within Renton may be the unintended result of these height limits. In order to achieve the objective of colocation and to minimize the number of new WCFs that must be constructed within Renton, it might be useful to provide more flexible height limits, especially in the industrial and commercial areas of the City. 10. Separation of Facilities: The proposed requirement for separation of Micro, Mini and Macro Facilities is problematic because it may unreasonably discriminate against Western Wireless in violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The purpose of the anti-discrimination provision is to promote competition in the wireless communications industry by facilitating entry of new wireless providers into markets previously served by as few as only two existing carriers. The proposed separation requirement may impair Western's ability to provide a commercially viable PCS service to the public. While PCS systems operate in essentially the same manner as cellular telephone systems, PCS systems require more antenna sites than do cellular telephone systems. Thus, the burden of this restriction would fall more harshly on Western than it would on existing wireless providers. Further, while the intent of the separation requirement may be to minimize the presence of these WCFs in certain areas of Renton, it may have the undesirable effect of causing more and/or taller facilities to be constructed in order to achieve the same coverage provided by a single facility. 11. Monopoles: It is never the first choice of a wireless carrier such as Western to site a facility in a residential zone. However, situations do occur when, in order to achieve coverage, construction of a monopole in a residential area cannot be avoided. It may be inconsistent with the prohibition in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 against a local government adopting regulations that have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services. The City should revise the draft to allow Monopole II structures in residential zones subject to the conditional use permit process. The draft ordinance further limits the placement of monopoles and Macro Facilities by requiring WCFs to be set back 100 feet from residential properties and, in some situations, requires that the property on which a WCF is located be a minimum of one acre in size. Western acknowledges that the city of Renton may have concerns regarding the structural safety of antenna support structures. However, a preferable means to achieve safety objectives would be to require that antenna support structures be engineered to structural standards, such as those established by the Electronics Industry Association or the Uniform Building Code. The requirement that facilities be located a minimum of 100 feet and as much as 300 feet from residential zones may be inconsistent with the Telecommunications Act prohibition on local government regulation of WCFs based on environmental effects of radio frequency emissions. Further, if compliance with these setback requirements eliminates so many properties that a carrier may be precluded from providing service, then this could contravene the requirements of the Telecommunications Act, as well. 3 • Neil Watts ..r City of Renton June 23, 1997 As an alternative, the City of Renton may wish to review and adopt the setback provision from the city of Spokane wireless communications ordinance. Spokane's ordinance has a more flexible format to deal with different types of wireless facilities. It is set forth below. Setback Requirements. 1. Support...structures that do not exceed the height limit of the zone in which located need only meet the setback requirements for that zone, as long as the required landscaping and screening is accommodated. 2. Support...structures that do exceed the height limit of the zone in which [they are]located shall be set back from all property lines as required by that zone or one foot for every ten feet of total[support structure]height which[ever] produces the greater setback, as long as they are constructed to the Electronic Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (E/A/T/A) 222 Revision E Standard, entitled "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." Otherwise, the setback from all property lines shall be a minimum of fifty feet or one foot for every foot of[support structure]height, which[ever]produces the greater setback. 3. All equipment shelters, cabinets, or other on-the-ground ancillary equipment shall meet the setback requirement of the zone in which [they]are located. Ordinance No. C31706. 12. Lighting: Western Wireless always seeks to use the least obtrusive aeronautical lighting possible. However, Western Wireless and other carriers are bound by law to comply with FAA regulations. A local government does not have the authority to override FAA lighting requirements. Therefore, the provision mandating that the City review and approve lighting requirements should be deleted. 13. Obsolescence: As stated above, there should be language added to provide for those situations in which a WCF is shared by more than one user, such as the following: If there are two or more users of a single WCF, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the WCF. 14. Hold Harmless Agreement: The hold harmless agreement provisions are troubling for a number of reasons. First, the provision itself may be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clauses of the Federal and Washington State Constitutions because it unfairly targets a particular sector of the telecommunications industry. Under both Constitutions, similarly situated businesses must be treated equally. The focus of this section on the wireless industry could be construed as such an improper classification. Moreover, Article I, §12 of the Washington State Constitution requires that zoning ordinances be uniform and equal in the way they treat those regulated. Further, under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, a local government cannot discriminate against competitors in the telecommunications industry. No such similar obligation is being imposed on the landline, or wired, segment of the telecommunications industry, which is providing a competitive service covered by the Telecommunications Act. 4 Neil Watts _ .... City of Renton June 23, 1997 Second, when a municipality adopts an ordinance, any regulation has to be reasonably necessary and appropriate to accomplish the objective sought. It is unclear what objective the City is seeking to achieve with this agreement. Washington State courts have ruled that there is no liability for a municipality in carrying out its police powers, i.e. the equivalent of governmental immunity. See JSK Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Lacey, 6 Wn. App. 43 (1971). With regard to possible suits concerning electromagnetic fields, the City is preempted by federal law from regulating in this area; therefore, there cannot be liability imputed to the City. There is, in short, no basis, other than on nuisance grounds, for someone to sue the city of Renton. The City appears to be arbitrarily attempting to protect itself from what is essentially nonexistent liability by transferring to a particular group of permit applicants the responsibility for defending a nuisance lawsuit that might, but is unlikely, to occur. Third, it is inappropriate to impose as permit conditions those things that are unnecessarily burdensome to the permit holder. This principle has been developed under Washington case law, such as Gerla v. Tacoma, 12 Wn. App. 883 (1975). Fourth, the requirement to indemnify the City may also be construed as an indirect charge in violation of RCW §82.02.202. The indemnification contemplated under the hold harmless provision goes beyond the general administrative costs that Renton bears from processing a permit application. Litigation costs are part of the general "cost of doing business" incurred by the City. What is the reasoning for requiring a particular permit applicant to bear the costs of defending the City in suits against it? Other types of permit applicants are not subject to this requirement. Fifth, if a condition is imposed on a permit applicant, then it is required that there be substantial evidence in the record justifying the imposition of such a permit condition. There is no evidence either in Washington State or on a national level that these facilities are structurally unsafe or that radio frequency emissions are a public health hazard. The language of the hold harmless provision is unconstitutionally vague. It is so broad that conceivably a permit applicant would be forced to pay for the costs incurred by Renton in defending an appeal of a WCF permit. On what grounds is the City asking carrier-applicants to pay for the City's costs in issuing a permit in case it is challenged? Other permit applicants are not so charged. Again, there is no record to show that there will be a greater number of appeals related to WCFs than for other uses. 5 Neil Watts .. City of Renton June 23, 1997 Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or would like additional information. I can be reached at (425) 451-3440. Thank you for your consideration. Sincer y C ly L. ith Zoning Supervisor 6 CITY OF RENTON 1�t�4 1 P37 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 4, 1997 TO: City Council Mayor Tanner FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance (Revised Report) RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the staff recommended Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance. The Commission reviewed this ordinance at its meeting of May 22, 1997 and made a number of comments with which staff concurred. • The Commission requested that a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency emission be provided within 60 days. The initial proposal was within 6 months (Sec. 4-99-19 A). • The Commission also requested that the providers be required to correct any interference with TV or Radio broadcasts be corrected in a timely manner. The initial proposal was 60 days. The Commission requested that this time period be shortened(Sec. 4-99-19 C). The Commission discussed the treatment of these facilities in residential zones ranging from Resource Conservation to Residential 14 dwelling units per acre in density and agreed with the staff recommended approach. There was discussion about collocation of facilities and of the need to insure that abandoned or discontinued facilities would be removed in a timely manner. The Commission agreed that the proposed ordinance adequately addresses these issues. For: Lemke, Mehrens, Smith Wagner Against: None Absent: Cameron,Franklin Lukins Abstained: Brosman Signe gene Le u laming Commission Chair WIRELESS SERVICE PROVIDERS AirTouch Cellular AT&T Wireless Services Susan L. Reagan Ross C. Baker 3350 161st Avenue SE 617 Eastlake Avenue E. PO Box 7329 PO Box 9159 Bellevue, Washington 98008 Seattle, Washington 98109 (206) 949-0024 telephone (206) 389-5301 telephone (206) 603-2888 fax (206) 389-5382 fax sreagan@usvvnvg.com ross.baker@anws.com GTE Mobilnet Incorporated Nextel Communications Kate Stephens Mary Murdoch 2821 Northup Way, Suite 200 5808 Lake Washington Blvd., Ste 400 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Kirkland, Washington 98033 (206) 739-5053 telephone (206) 803-3722 telephone (206) 739-5099 fax (206) 803-3729 fax kestephens@mobilnet.gte.com mary.murdoch@nextel.com Sprint PCS Western Wireless Stephen Bennett, AICP Cydly L. Smith 11000 NE 33rd Place, Suite 200 330 120th Avenue NE, #110 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206) 602-2304 telephone (206)451-3440 telephone (206) 602-2250 fax ' (206)484-0835 mobile sbenne01@sprintspectrum.com (206)451-4739 fax cydly.smith@wireless.com arrz ., l2l fr/q7 MAI Nam' G�v AirTouch Cellular Attn: Susan L. Reagan PO Box 7329 Bellevue, WA 98008 GTE Mobilnet Incorporated Attn: Kate Stephens 2821 Northup Way, STE 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 Sprint PCS Attn: Stephen Bennett, AICP 11000 NE 33rd P1. STE 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 AT&T Wirelss Services Attn: Ross C. Baker PO Box 9159 Seattle, WA 98109 Nextel Communications Attn: Mary Murdoch 5808 Lk Wash Blvd STE 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 Western Wireless Attn: Cydly L. Smith • 330 120th Ave NE #110 Bellevue, WA 98005 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed June 23, 1997, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the second floor Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton 98055, to consider the following: Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance All interested persons are invited to attend the meeting and present oral or written comments in support or opposition to the proposal. The Municipal Building is fully accessible, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. Please call 235-2501 for additional information or 277-4453 TDD. ter✓ ari yn . ' y, sen City Cler Published: South County Journal June 13, 1997 Account No. 50640 LOCATIONS OF POSTINGS DONE ON b//o , 1997. 1. G 7 66dett641-, 8017/4 2. , iii Q.Gzi't., 3. JiAJ /7L1& • CERTIFICATION STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I A11GHEGE- Nt vMs4 NN HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 3 COPIES OF THE ABOVE NOTICE WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE OR MORE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AND TWO COPIES WERE POSTED AT HE RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 200 MILL AVENUE S., RENTON, WA ON DATE OF :.//O9�I 7 SIGNED 77,,e,uzynxi7n.4_ SUBSCRIBED A D SWORN T BEFORE ME this /0.-f day of WYI€ , 19 97 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at �I� �2'1 r CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed June 23, 1997, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the second floor Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton 98055, to consider the following: Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance All interested persons are invited to attend the meeting and present oral or written comments in support or opposition to the proposal. The Municipal Building is fully accessible, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. Please call 235-2501 for additional information or 277-4453 TDD. ari yn . sen City Cler Published: South County Journal June 13, 1997 Account No. 50640 o . err CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4666 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) , OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY ADDING CHAPTER 38, WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I . Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities, which reads as follows : CHAPTER 38 WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES SECTION: 4-38-1 : Purpose and Intent 4-38-2 : Definitions 4-38-3 : Administering and Enforcing Authority 4-38-4 : Telecommunications Act of 1996 4-38-5 : Submittal Requirements 4-38-6 : Permit Fees 4-38-7 : Development Standards for Antennas : Micro Facilities 4-38-8 : Development Standards for Antennas : Mini Facilities 4-38-9 : Development Standards for Antennas : Macro Facilities 4-38-10 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole I 4-38-11 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole II 4-38-12 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Lattice Towers 4-38-13 : Additional Permit Criteria for Wireless Communication Facilities 4-38-14 : Conditional Use Permit Criteria 4-38-15 : Airport Restrictions 4-38-16 : Exemption 4-38-17 : Obsolescence 4-38-18 : Collocation 4-38-19 : Radio Frequency Standards dimmw RDINANCE NO. 4666 *Of 4-38-20 : Permit Limitations 4-38-21 : Alternates and Modifications 4-38-22i: Variances 4-38-23 : Appeals 4-38-24 : Violations and Penalties 4-38-25 : Severability 4-38-1 : PURPOSE AND INTENT A. Goals . The purpose of this Chapter is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications facilities, including towers and antennas . The goals of this Chapter are to: 1 . Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; 2 . Encourage strongly the joint use of new and existing tower sites; 3 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal ; 4 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas; and 5 . Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efficiently. B. Principal or Accessory Use . Antennas and towers may be considered either principal, accessory or conditional uses . A different existing use or an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or tower on such lot . For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna complies with zoning development regulations, including but not limited to setback requirements, lot coverage requirements, and other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control , even though the antennas or towers may be located on leased parcels within such lots . Towers that are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use or structure . 4-38-2 : DEFINITIONS Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meaning of terms used in this section shall be as follows : 2 4666 No.oRDINANCE NO. 44001 ACCESSORY ANTENNA DEVICE : An antenna which is less than twelve (12) inches in height or width, excluding the support structure (examples : test mobile antennas and global positioning (GPS) antennas) . ANSI : The American National Standards Institute . A non-profit, privately funded membership organization that coordinates the development of voluntary national standards in the United States . ANTENNA: Any system of poles, panels, rods, reflecting discs or similar devices used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals . Antennas include the following types : 1 . Dish antenna: see parabolic antenna . 2 . Omni-directional antenna (also known as a "whip" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a three hundred sixty (360) degree radial pattern, and which is up to fifteen (15) feet in height and up to four (4) inches in diameter. 3 . Directional antenna (also known as a "panel" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than three hundred sixty (360) degrees . 4 . Panel antenna: see directional antenna. 5 . Parabolic antenna (also known as a dish antenna) is a bowl-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 6 . Whip antenna: see omni-directional antenna. ADMINISTRATOR: The Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City, or any successor office with responsibility for management of the public properties within the City of Renton, or his/her designee. ATTACHED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY: A wireless communication facility that is affixed to an existing structure, for example, an existing building, tower, water tank, utility pole, etc . which does not include an additional wireless communication support structure . COLLOCATION: The use of a single support structure and/or site by more than one wireless communications provider. DEPARTMENT: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City of Renton. EQUIPMENT SHELTER OR CABINET: A room, cabinet or building used to house equipment for utility or service providers . FAA: The Federal Aviation Administration, which maintains stringent regulations for the siting, building, marketing and lighting of cellular transmission antennas near airports or flight paths . 3 RDINANCE NO. 4666 FCC : The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the licensing and practice of wireless, wireline, television, radio and other telecommunications entities . GUYED TOWER: A freestanding or supported wireless communication support structure which is usually over one hundred (100) feet tall, which consists of metal crossed strips or bars and is steadied by wire guys in a radial pattern around the tower. LATTICE TOWER: A wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than fifteen (15) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than one hundred (100) square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than four (4) feet in height (except omni directional antennas which may be up to six (6) feet in height) and with an area of not more than five hundred eighty (580) square inches in the aggregate (e .g. one (1) foot diameter parabola or two (2) feet x one and one half (1 . 5) feet panel) as viewed from any one point . The permitted antenna height includes the wireless communication facility support structure . MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than ten (10) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than fifty (50) square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . PROVIDER: A company providing telephone or other communications service. RELATED EQUIPMENT: All equipment ancillary to the transmission and reception of voice and data via radio frequencies . Such equipment may include, but is not limited to, cable, conduit and connectors . RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PARCEL: Any parcel of property with one of the following zoning designations : Resource Conservation (RC) , 4 4666 .wiR.D I NANCE NO. ..r Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential- DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) '. SUPPORT STRUCTURE : see Wireless Communication Support Structure . TOWER: see Wireless Communication Support Structure . WCF: see Wireless Communication Facility. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY (WCF) : An unstaffed facility for the transmission and reception of low-power radio signals usually consisting of an equipment shelter or cabinet, a support structure, antennas (e .g. omni-directional, panel/directional or parabolic) and related equipment, generally contained within a compound. For purposes of this ordinance a WCF includes antennas, support structures and equipment shelters, either separately or in combination. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SUPPORT STRUCTURE : The structure erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . Support structure types include, but are not limited to, stanchions, monopoles, lattice towers, wood poles or guyed towers . 4-38-3 : ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING AUTHORITY The Administrator and/or his/her designated representatives are responsible for the general administration and coordination of this Chapter. 4-38-4 : TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the City to comply with the following conditions . A. The City zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among wireless telecommunication providers that compete against one another. B. The City zoning requirements may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service . C. The City must act within a reasonable period of time on requests for permission to place or construct wireless telecommunications facilities . D. A decision by the City denying a request for permission to install or construct wireless telecommunications facilities must be in writing and must be based on evidence in a written record. 5 ORDINANCE NO. 4666 E. If a wireless telecommunications facility meets technical emissions standards set by the FCC, it is presumed safe . The City may not deny a request to construct a facility on grounds that its radio frequency emissions would be harmful to the environment or the health of residents if those emissions meet FCC standards . 4-38-5 : SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS In addition to the information required for a building permit, the following items shall be required for a Wireless Communications Facility permit application: A. Map of View Area: A diagram or map depicting where within a three mile radius any portion of the proposed facility could be seen. B. Photosimulations : Photosimulations of the proposed facility from affected residential properties and public rights-of-way at varying distances . C. Service Area: A map showing the service area of the proposed WCF and an explanation of the need for that facility. D. Inventory of Existing Sites : An inventory of the provider' s existing facilities with the Renton city corporate limits, and any other facilities outside the city limits that is within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed facility. The inventory is to include specific information about the location, height, and design of each facility. The Department may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional use permits under this Chapter or other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the City, provided, however that the Department is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable . E . Site Plan: A site/landscaping plan showing the specific placement of the WCF on the site; showing the location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features to be retained; and indicating type and locations of existing and new plant materials used to screen WCF components and the proposed color (s) for the WCF. F. Applicant Agreement Statement : A signed notarized statement indicating: 1 . The applicant agrees to allow for the potential collocation of additional WCF equipment by other providers on the applicant ' s structure or within the same site location; and 2 . That the applicant agrees to remove the facility within six (6) months after that site' s use is discontinued or 6 ,„RDINANCE NO. 4666 if the facility falls into disrepair, and restore the site to its pre-existing condition. G. Draft Lease Agreement : A draft lease agreement with the landholder that : H. 1 . Allows the landholder to enter into leases with other providers; and 2 . Specifies that if the provider fails to remove the facility upon six (6) months of its discontinued use, the responsibility for removal falls upon the landholder. I . Design of Support Structures : A report including a description of the support structure with technical reasons for its design. J. Structural Integrity of Support Structures : Documentation establishing the structural integrity for the support structure' s proposed uses . 4-38-6 : PERMIT FEES The Department shall be responsible for the permitting, inspection and acceptance of all improvements listed in this Chapter, and shall make charge therefor to the applicant . The charges are listed in the Fee Schedule, Chapter 1, Title V of City Code . 4-38-7 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MICRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than four (4) feet in height (except omni directional antennas which may be up to six (6) feet in height) and with an area of not more than five hundred eighty (580) square inches in the aggregate (e.g. one (1) foot diameter parabola or two (2) feet x one and one half (1 . 5) feet panel) as viewed from any one point . The permitted antenna height includes the wireless communication facility support structure . B. Permitted Use : Micro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all zones . C. Location on Building: A Micro Facility shall be located on existing buildings, poles or other existing support structures . A Micro Facility may , locate on buildings and structures provided that the interior wall or ceiling immediately adjacent to the facility is not designated residential space . D. Height : Antennas equal to or less than four (4) feet in height (except omni directional antennas which can be up .to six (6) feet in height) and with an area of not more than 7 4666 rrORDINANCE NO. five hundred eighty (580) square inches in the aggregate (e .g. one (1) foot diameter parabola or two (2) feet x one an one half (1 . 5) feet panel as viewed from any one point) are exempt from the height limitation of the zone in which they are located. Structures which are nonconforming with respect to height, may be used for the placement of omni directional antennas providing they do not extend more than six (6) feet above the existing structure . Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . E . Color: A Micro Facility shall be same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. F. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Micro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Micro Facilities of the same wireless provider: Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) . 4-38-8 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MINI FACILITIES A. Definition: MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than ten (10) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than fifty (50) square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . B. Permitted Use or Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be 8 4666 ,,,,eRDINANCE NO. allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the site is under one (1) acre or the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred (100) feet from any residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Buildings : A Mini Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space . D. Color: A Mini Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. F. Height : Mini Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Omni directional antennas may exceed the height limitation by ten (10) feet, or in the case of nonconforming structures the antennas may exceed the height limitation if affixed to the side of an existing nonconforming building and blends in architecturally with the building. In the case of a nonconforming structure the antennas may extend fifteen (15) feet above the existing structure . Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Micro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Micro Facilities of the same wireless provider: Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) . 9 4666 tompORDINANCE NO. 440, 4-38-9 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MACRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than fifteen (15) feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to one (1) meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than one hundred (100) square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . B. Administrative Conditional Use Permit/Permitted Use: Macro Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use in these zones if the site is under one (1) acre or the setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the setback for the facility is a minimum of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in these zones if the setback is less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Building: A Macro Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space . D. Color: A Macro Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E . Equipment Shelter or Cabinet : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. F. Height : Macro Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Omni directional antennas may exceed the height limitation by 10 4666 ORDINANCE NO. fifteen (15) feet, or in the case of nonconforming structures the antennas may extend fifteen (15) feet above the existing sti.ructure . Panel antennas may exceed the height limitation if affixed to the side of an existing building and architecturally blends in with the building. Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Macro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Macro Facilities of the same wireless provider: Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) . 4-38-10 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE I A. Definition: MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B . Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones, provided that the site is over one (1) acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones if the site is less than one (1) acre in size, or has minimum setbacks of less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. C. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an Administrative conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones if the minimum setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. 11 4666 rf)RDINANCE NO. D. Permitted Use : Monopole I Facilities are a primary permitted use in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones if the minimum setbacks are less than one hundred (100) feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. E . Maximum Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole I Facility shall be less than sixty (60) feet . F. Antenna Height : Antennas equal to or less than fifteen (15) feet in height or up to four (4) inches in diameter may be a component of a Monopole I Facility. Antennas which extend above the wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the Monopole I wireless communications support structure . For example, the maximum height for a Monopole I shall be sixty (60) feet and maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas seventy-five (75) feet (sixty (60) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . G. Antennas : Macro facilities are the largest attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole I Facility. H. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Monopole I facilities shall be concealed, camouflaged or placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. I . Landscaping: Monopole I Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 12 ,moRDINANCE NO. 4666 `.sr 4-38-11 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE II A. Definition: MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B. Prohibited Zones : Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones . C. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone . D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone . E . Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole II Facility shall be thirty-five (35) feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or one hundred fifty (150) feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole II facility. Antennas which extend above the Monopole II wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. For example, the maximum height for a Monopole II facility shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas one hundred sixty-five (165) feet (one hundred fifty (150) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . 13 4666 ORDINANCE NO. G. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Monopole II Facility support structure shall be concealed, screened, camouflaged or placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. H. Landscaping: Monopole II Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-12 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : LATTICE TOWERS A. Definition: LATTICE TOWER: A wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . B. Prohibited Zones : Lattice Towers are prohibited in the Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) , and Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zones . C. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the Residential Multi-Family (RM) , Center Neighborhood (CN) , Center Downtown (CD) , Center Office Residential (COR) and Convenience Commercial (CC) zones. Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone . D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the Commercial Arterial (CA) , Commercial Office (CO) , Light Industrial (IL) , Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones . Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within three hundred (300) feet of a Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 DU/AC (R-1) , Residential-5 DU/AC (R-5) , Residential-8 DU/AC (R-8) , Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) or Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zone . 14 4666 ORDINANCE NO. v✓ E . Height : The maximum permitted height for a Lattice Towers shall be thirty-five (35) feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or one hundred fifty (150) feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Lattice Towers . Antennas which extend above the Lattice Towers wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. For example, the maximum height for a Lattice Towers shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas one hundred sixty-five (165) feet (one hundred fifty (150) feet plus fifteen (15) feet) . G. Equipment Shelter or Cabinet : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Lattice Towers support structure shall be concealed, screened, camouflaged or placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. H. Landscaping: Lattice Towers shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-13 : ADDITIONAL PERMIT CRITERIA FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES The following criteria shall be met before a building permit can be granted: A. Visual Impact 1 . Antenna Height : Antennas may not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above their supporting structure, monopole, lattice tower, building or other structure. 2 . Existing Character: Site location and development shall preserve the preexisting character of the surrounding buildings and land uses and the zone district to the extent consistent with the function of the 15 4666 ORDINANCE NO. *100 communications equipment . Wireless communication towers shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site to the extent practical . Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized, unless such disturbance would result in less visual impact of the site to the surrounding area. 3 . Screening of Equipment Shelters and Cabinets : Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communications equipment should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. When they cannot be located in buildings, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. 4 . Exposed Metal Surfaces : Accessory equipment facilities may not be enclosed with exposed metal surfaces . A. Noise Levels : No equipment shall be operated so as to produce noise in levels above forty-five (45) dB as measured from the nearest property line on which the attached wireless communication facility is located. Operation of a back-up power generator in the event of power failure or the testing of a back-up generator between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. are exempt from this standard. No testing of back-up power generators shall occur between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. B. Fencing: Security fencing, if used, shall be painted or coated with a nonreflective color. Fencing shall comply with the requirements listed in City Code 4-31-15 (C) , Fences and Hedges . C. Lighting: Towers shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the governing authority may review the available lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views . Security lighting for the equipment shelters or cabinets and other on-the-ground ancillary equipment is also permitted, as long as it is appropriately down shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the site . D. Advertising: No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent roadway shall be placed on or affixed to any part of a telecommunications tower, antenna array or antenna, other than as required by FCC regulations regarding tower registration or other applicable law. 16 4666 .•dRD I NANO E NO. E. Building Standards : Wireless Communication Support Structures shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222 Revision F Standard entitled "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures" (or equivalent) , as it may be updated or amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit the building official shall be provided with an engineer' s certification that the support structure ' s design meets or exceeds those standards . A Wireless Communications Support Structure shall be located in such a manner that if the structure should fall along its longest dimension, it will remain within property boundaries and avoid habitable structures, public streets, utility lines and other telecommunications towers . 4-38-14 : CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicability: The governing authority may grant, with or without conditions, or deny the requested conditional use permit . The governing authority may limit the term and duration of the conditional use permit . Conditions imposed by the governing authority shall reasonably assure that nuisance or hazard to life or property will not develop. B. Conditional Use Criteria: The governing authority shall consider the following factors in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit, although the governing authority may waive or reduce the burden on the applicant of one or more of these criteria if the governing authority, concludes that the goals of this ordinance are better served thereby. 1 . Height of the proposed tower. 2 . Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries . 3 . Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties . 4 . Surrounding topography. 5 . Surrounding tree coverage and foliage . 6 . Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness . 7 . Proposed ingress and egress . 8 . Potential noise, light and glare impacts . 9 . Availability of suitable existing towers and other structures . 4-38-15 : AIRPORT RESTRICTIONS A. Airport Regulations : All wireless communications facilities and attached wireless communications facilities must comply with the Airport Zoning regulations, as listed in City Code 4-31-17 . 17 4666 ORDINANCE NO. *rr+` B. Notice to FAA: A Notice of Proposed Construction shall be submitted to the FAA a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the issuance of any building permit for any wireless communications support structure or attached wireless communications facilities . 4-38-16 : EXEMPTION A. Exemptions from Conditional Use Permit : The following are exempt from the requirement of a conditional use permit, and shall be considered a permitted use in all zones where attached wireless communications facilities are permitted: Minor modifications of existing wireless communications facilities, whether emergency or routine, so long as there is little or no change in the visual appearance, as determined by the Administrator. B. Amateur Radio, Receive Only Antennas : This Chapter shall not govern any tower, or installation of any antenna, that is under seventy (70) feet in height and is owned and operated by a federally licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only antennas . 4-38-17 : OBSOLESCENCE Any wireless communications facility or attached wireless communications facility that is no longer needed and its use is discontinued shall be reported immediately by service provider to the Administrator. Discontinued facilities shall be decommissioned and removed by the facility owner within six (6) months of the date it ceases to be operational or if the facility falls into disrepair, and the site restored to its pre-existing condition. 4-38-18 : COLLOCATION A. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers or Other Structures : No new wireless communications support structure shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the governing authority that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: 1 . No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area required to meet applicant ' s engineering requirements . 2 . Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant ' s engineering requirements . 3 . Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant ' s proposed antenna and related equipment . 4 . The applicant ' s proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the 18 4666 ORDINANCE NO. Nome existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant ' s proposed antenna. 5 . The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable . Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable . 6 . The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable . A. Cooperation in Collocation Efforts : A permittee shall cooperate with other WCF providers in collocating additional antennas on support structures and/or on existing buildings provided said proposed collocators have received a building permit for such use at said site from the City. A permittee shall exercise good faith in collocating with other providers and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a substantial technical level of impairment of the ability to provide the permitted use (i .e . , a significant interference in broadcast or reception capabilities as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden) . Such good faith shall include sharing technical information to evaluate the feasibility of collocation. In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or both the applicant and permittee. B. Reasonable Efforts : All applicants shall demonstrate reasonable efforts in developing a collocation alternative for their proposal . 4-38-19 : RADIO FREQUENCY STANDARDS A. Verification of Compliance : The applicant shall comply with Federal standards for radio frequency emissions . Within sixty (60) days after the issuance of its operational permit, the applicant shall submit a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency emissions of all antennas installed at the subject site and compares the results with established Federal standards . Said report shall be subject to review and approval of the Administrator for consistency with Federal standards . If on review, the City finds that the WCF does not meet Federal standards, the City may revoke or modify this permit . B. Interference with Local TV or Radio: The applicant shall ensure that the WCF will not cause localized interference with the reception of area television or radio broadcasts . If on review the City finds that the WCF interferes with such 19 4111101tRDINANCE NO. 4666 r reception, and if such interference is not remedied within thirty (30) days, the city may revoke or modify this permit . 4-38-20 : PERMIT LIMITATIONS A. Hold Harmless Agreement : The permittee/operator of a WCF shall and does, upon approval of the building permit, agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorneys ' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from: a) City' s approval and issuance of this building permit; b) City' s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein; and c) Applicant ' s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including, without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions . Permittee/operator compliance with this section is an express condition of the building permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of the permittee' s/operator' s successors and assigns . B. Maintenance : The applicant shall maintain the WCF to standards that may be imposed by the City at the time of the granting of a permit . Such maintenance shall include, but shall not be limited to, maintenance of the paint, structural integrity and landscaping. If the applicant fails to maintain the facility, the City may undertake the maintenance at the expense of the applicant or terminate the permit, at its sole option. C. Change of Ownership: The applicant shall notify the Department of all changes in ownership or operation of the facility within sixty (60) days of the change. 4-38-21 : ALTERNATES AND MODIFICATIONS A. Alternates : The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of construction not specifically prescribed by this Chapter, provided any alternate has been approved and its use authorized by the Administrator or his/her designee . The Administrator may approve any such alternate, provided he/she finds that the proposed design and/or methodology is satisfactory and complies with the provisions of this Chapter and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this Chapter in suitability, strength, effectiveness, durability, safety, maintainability and environmental protection. 20 .. RDINANCE NO. 4666 s The Administrator may require that sufficient evidence or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that may be made regarding its use . B. Modifications : Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Chapter, the Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided she/he shall first find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this Chapter impractical, that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Chapter, and that such modification: 1 . Will meet the objectives and safety, function, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the requirements of this Chapter, based upon sound engineering judgment . 2 . Will not be injurious to other property (s) in the vicinity. 4-38-22 : VARIANCES A. Variance Requirements : A variance from the requirements of this ordinance may be approved by the Hearing Examiner when undue hardship may be created as a result of strict compliance with the provisions of this ordinance . In recommending or approving any variance, the Hearing Examiner may prescribe conditions that he/she deems necessary to or desirable for the public interest . No variance shall be approved or recommended unless the Hearing Examiner finds : 1 . That there are special physical circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use or development of his land; and 2 . That the variance is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances; and 3 . That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. B. Applications Required: Application for any variance shall be submitted in writing by the applicant at the time the permit application is submitted to the Department . The application shall state fully all substantiating facts and evidence pertinent to the request . C. Variance Fees : The appropriate fees shall be paid at time of application as required in City Code Section 5-1-1 . 21 4666 rDRDINANCE NO. 44010 4-38-23 : APPEALS Any deoxision made in the administrative process described in this Chapter may be appealed pursuant to Section 4-8-11 of this Title. Any appellant must be seeking to protect an interest that is arguably within the zone of interest to be protected or regulated by this chapter, must allege an injury in fact, and that injury must be real and present rather than speculative . 4-38-24 : VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES Violations of the provisions of this Chapter will be a civil infraction and punishable under Chapter 33 , Title IV of the City Code . 4-38-25 : SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Chapter or its application to any person or property is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Chapter or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected. SECTION II . The City Council of the City of Renton hereby declares an emergency and this Ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 2nd day of June , 1997 . Marilyn . etersen, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 2nd day of June , 1997 . Jes Tanner, Mayor Approv d as to form: alAr^0A.A.e..00a7/04L.r."2,040.. Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: June 6, 1997 ORD. 659 : 6/04/97 :as . 22 APPROVED BY N.11110 CITY COUNCIL Date G— PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT Juneq, 1997 Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance (Referred March 10, 1997) The Committee recommends that the Council hold a Public Hearing on the proposed Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance on June 23, 1997. The proposed ordinance establishes guidelines for the siting of wireless communications facilities, including towers and antennas. Z Timothy- chl. ' hair King Parker, Member Kathy K kler-Wheeler, Cie. cc: Jim Hanson Mike Katterman • M..r;l y..Priem*. H:\\\Plan Review\P&D6-5 P&D6-5.DOC\ Nor, voe CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed June 23, 1997, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the second floor Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton 98055, to consider the following: Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance All interested persons are invited to attend the meeting and present oral or written comments in support or opposition to the proposal. The Municipal Building is fully accessible, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. Please call 235-2501 for additional information or 277-4453 TDD. ari yn sen City Cler Published: South County Journal June 13, 1997 Account No. 50640 CITY OF RENTON JUN041997 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: June 3, 1997 TO: City Clerk's File,Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance FROM: Gregg Zimmerman G SUBJECT: Emergency Situation During the June 2, 1997 City Council meeting,the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance was passed by Council on an emergency basis. An emergency-based exemption from SEPA review for this ordinance was used based upon the imminent threat of a proliferation of wireless communication monopoles being erected in and immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods throughout Renton. Unregulated construction of these structures in and near to residential neighborhoods could have an undue impact on aesthetics, standard of living, and property values in the affected neighborhoods. With seven of these monopole structures currently in the land use permitting pipeline, and new applications coming in on a weekly basis, on average, the City deemed that an emergency situation had arisen,justifying SEPA exemption for this ordinance. Meanwhile the ordinance is going through the SEPA review process and will be subject to the required public hearing before Council. Any changes made to the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance during this public process will be incorporated into the adopted ordinance. To help substantiate the emergency nature of this action, information pertaining to one of the seven monopoles currently in the land use review pipeline is attached to this memo. As can be seen by the computer simulation photograph of the proposed monopole (provided by the project applicant), the impacts of this proposed structure on the adjacent neighborhoods would be significant. Many of our neighboring jurisdictions, including Auburn, Kent, and Federal Way, and others, currently have enacted moratoriums on the construction of wireless communication monopole structures. It is possible that a contributing factor to the influx of submittals Renton has been seeing in recent weeks is the inability of the wireless communication companies to develop in these other cities until the moratoriums are lifted, thus focusing attention on Renton. At any rate, emergency adoption of the ordinance will allow protection of the neighborhoods on an interim basis until such a time as the final ordinance completes its public process and is adopted, while at the same time allowing wireless communication companies to build projects in Renton pursuant to the provisions of the ordinance. cc: Jay Covington Larry Warren Marilyn Petersen H:\W W 6ODOT1MEMO.DOT\bh ro 1-3 1.4 till it v lr { w • 441';Orr t �� hilt rt ",74,4 ' ' • fR f t atV f.ba ru "S .WF a t.e;wy r: 1/1 xw 1 COI 4 tITI of e i: ' , . ". ' : : r I uliiii 111 111 rill 0 , - . . . rzi 4 p le ci t "t x 0 �a 4.r ,� �. OPm 0*-4 � max.„_.:,____,,,.., ,L_ . _..,.: O 2° rn71 4 fr ,... „,...,,_:v.....,:,...,_.:,-:._.-, , -_-� ��. �#� '�;� x . ten- ' � + . .a,_ ", . a ` :',. ..,--,:::..77L-r.j-t-t'-'214- :'-'145'f'4:'-ell \. -, \ f f June 2. 1997 Renton City Council Minutes Page 184 SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution #3260 A resolution was read in support of the final transit center site selection. Transportation: Downtown MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, Transit Hub, Final Site COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Selection & Operational Scheme Resolution #3261 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Public Works: 1996 East interlocal cooperative agreement with other east King County water utility King County Coordinated providers and to execute the East King County Coordinated Water System Water System Plan Plan (water utility service area boundary agreement). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and advanced to second and final reading: Legal: Wireless An ordinance was read amending Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code Communications Facilities by adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL t.t). ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance #4666 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Legal: Wireless MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL Communications Facilities ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Lc.\i‘ The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading: Ordinance #4667 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification of 74 acres Annexation: May Valley (bounded by 148th Ave. SE on the east, NE Sunset Blvd. on the south, and Prezone, Phase I the Renton corporate boundary on the north and west) to be annexed to the City of Renton to Residential - One Dwelling Unit per Acre (R-1) and Residential - Five Dwelling Units per Acre (R-5) (May Valley Prezone, Phase I; File No. A-96-004). MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:38 p.m. ))/ %''� MARILY 6TERSEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Brenda Fritsvold 06/02/97 it June 2. 1997 Renton City Council Minutes Paae 181 Lease: Metricom Antenna Utilities Systems Division recommended approval of proposed five-year site Placement on Rolling Hills lease agreement with Metricom, Inc. to place antennas on the Rolling Hills Elevated Water Tank, Elevated Water Tank, located at 2401 Puget Drive SE. Council concur. LAG-97- Lease: Metricom Antenna Utilities Systems Division recommended approval of an option and site lease Placement on Highlands agreement with Metricom, Inc. to place antennas on the Highlands Elevated Elevated Water Tank, Water Tank, located at 3410 NE 12th Street. Council concur. LAG-97- CAG: 96-120, 1996 Wastewater Utility Division submitted CAG-96-120, 1996 Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Manhole Manhole Rehabilitation project; and requested approval of the project, Rehab, Gelco Services authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $86,913.67, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $4,194.67 to Gelco Services Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Added Item Transportation Division recommended approval of proposed operating permit Lease: Plane Space and lease amendment allowing the partnership of Cliff Howard and Fred Bahr Investments Lease to assume the lease assigned to Plane Space Investments, LAG-84-006 Assignment to Howard/ (previously assigned to Puget Sound Industries). The operating permit Bahr Partnership, includes an addendum for the operation of helicopters, subject to conditions. LAG-84-006 Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO ADD ITEM 8.k., AND TO REMOVE ADDED ITEM 8.1., FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommended adoption of an Legal: Wireless emergency ordinance governing wireless communications facilities. Communications Facilities Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman explained that the primary purpose of the ordinance is to protect neighborhoods by encouraging wireless communications providers to site their facilities in locations best suited for this type of use. It will also give predictability to the providers regarding requirements for wireless facilities. Staff is recommending that the ordinance be adopted on an emergency basis due to the proliferation of applications for monopoles (defined as freestanding structures erected to support wireless communication antennas). Mr. Zimmerman noted that one reason Renton is receiving so many applications of this kind may be because various other jurisdictions such as Kent, Federal Way, Burien, and Auburn have imposed moratoriums on these types of facilities. Continuing, Mr. Zimmerman said the City currently has seven applications pending for wireless communication facilities ranging from sixty to two hundred feet in height. Renton's Code currently requires that these uses obtain conditional use permits (and height variances, where applicable). The proposed ordinance would allow some wireless facilities outright as permitted uses, depending on the zoning category. Others would either be not allowed or would require an administrative conditional use permit or a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. Mr. Zimmerman reported that after adoption tonight, the ordinance will be presented to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on June 3rd and will then be transmitted to the Planning & Development Committee for review June 2, 1997 Renton City Council Minutes Page 182 on June 5th. A public hearing will be scheduled for June 23rd, and the ordinance will be amended, if required. Mr. Zimmerman explained the three components of wireless facilities, as follows: antennas (for micro, mini and marco facilities); support structures (monopole I, monopole II or lattice tower); and accessory equipment facilities. He stated that the proposed ordinance would provide for design criteria as well as a process by which the facilities would be allowed. Specifically, the ordinance will: * Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas, minimize the number of towers throughout the community, encourage joint use of towers and tower sites, encourage the use of towers in areas where the adverse impact on the communtiy would be minimal, and enhance the ability of the providers to effectively serve the community; * Conform to the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996; * Establish definitions; * Establish permit submittal requirements, fees, and development standards; * Establish in which zoning categories and under what circumstances facilities may be installed; and * Establish procedures for obtaining variances, alternates and modifications. Council President Keolker-Wheeler noted that the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed ordinance, and recommends its adoption. Responding to Councilman Parker, Neil Watts, Plan Review Supervisor, said that, of the pending applications for wireless facilities, one is vested. Mr. Watts assured Council that the facility associated with this application was compatible with the proposed ordinance. Councilman Corman suggested that the City clearly apprise property owners who consider leasing space on a residentially-zoned parcel for a wireless communications facility that such a decision could affect future development plans for their properties. This is because some of the facilities are primary permitted uses in residential areas only if the sites are over one acre in size and if the facility is accorded minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel. A homeowner who granted an easement for this type of facility thus might be prevented from subdividing their property unless or until the easement was revoked. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO ADOPT AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE GOVERNING WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. CARRIED. (See page 184 for ordinance.) CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Stanley Piha, Managing Venturer of Stanley Citizen Comment Piha - Real Estate, 2101 Fourth Ave. #250, Seattle, 98121. Mr. Piha expressed Graffiti Vandalism frustration that a building owned by him at 4th and Union is frequently targeted by graffiti vandals despite his compliance with City regulations that he immediately paint over any such vandalism. He suggested that the City increase police presence in this area in an effort to catch the perpetrators, and also suggested that the City require purchasers of spray paint to register as a deterrent to those who plan to use the paint illegally. t.v f r c,vt L'eN5 A r , &AJP4 OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA I. :, AI#: Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of: June 2, 1997 Dept/Div/Board.. Planning/Building/Public Works Staff Contact Gregg Zimmerman(x-6211) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing... Emergency Adoption of Interim Wireless Communications Facilities Correspondence.. Ordinance Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Interim Ordinance Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council adopt Interim Ordinance, First and Second Reading Legal Dept X Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: N/A Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. Summary of Action: Proposed adoption on an emergency basis of the interim Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance. Administration has been on the fast track with this ordinance, with a presentation to the Planning and Development Committee tentatively scheduled for June 5, and a Public Hearing before Council tentatively scheduled for June 23. In the mean time, applications for siting wireless communication monopoles between 80 and 125 feet tall and taller have been received in growing numbers by Administration. Some of these applications propose siting these monopoles in or immediately adjacent to residential areas. Administration believes that the Wireless Communication Ordinance has matured to a point where it can be used to protect residential and other neighborhoods from intrusion of these structures while still providing criteria for siting these facilities that can be used by the applicants. Administration believes emergency adoption is warranted due to the imminence of having these facilities sited in or adjacent to residential neighborhoods. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council adoption by first and second reading of the interim Wireless Communications Ordinance. Document2/ CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 1997 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Jesse Tanner,Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmerman,Administrator U STAFF CONTACT: Gregg Zimmerman(x-6211) SUBJECT: Emergency Adoption of Interim Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance ISSUE: Administration recommends the emergency adoption of the attached interim Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance. This Ordinance is tentatively scheduled for formal presentation to the Council Planning and Development Committee on June 5, 1997, and for a Public Hearing before Council on June 23, 1997. Adoption by the Council of this Ordinance will supersede the interim Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance. Administration believes that emergency adoption of this interim ordinance is warranted to protect residential and other neighborhoods from the unregulated intrusion of these facilities, and to provide firm criteria for siting these facilities that can be used with reliability by the applicants. RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt on an emergency basis the interim Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance. MAIN PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE: • The purpose of the Ordinance is to encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and minimize the number of towers throughout the community,encourage joint use of towers and tower sites, encourage use of towers in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal, and to enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunication services to provide effective service to the community. • The Ordinance recognizes the provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and is drafted to conform to those guidelines. • Establishes definitions. June 2, 1997 `"e "r' Page 2 • Establishes permit submittal requirements, permit fees, and development standards for micro facilities,mini facilities, and macro facilities. Establishes development standards for support structures (monopoles and lattice towers). • Establishes in which zoning and under what circumstances facilities may be established. See the attached matrix labeled"Wireless Communications Ordinance". • Establishes procedures for obtaining variances and alternates and modifications. cc: Jay Covington City Clerk Neil Watts Jana Huerter MEMO_CC.DOT/ WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ORDNANCE The intent of this new ordinance is to encourages wireless industry to develop infrastructure for Renton community in locations suitable for such facilities. Rather than attempt to be very restrictive, or mandate specific locations, the ordinance attempts to encourage use of prefered locations and facilities through the "carrot and stick" approach. By defining more desirable situations as permitted uses, as opposed to conditional use permits for less desirable locations and facilities, the wireless communications service providers are encouraged to use more acceptable alternatives. The ordinance regulates three components of wireless facilities: Antennas, Support Structures and Accessory Equipment Facilities. Antennas: Micro Facility,Mini Facility and Macro Facility Support Structures: Monopole I, Monopole II and Lattice Towers Definitions: Micro Facility: 4 foot height, or 580 square inches. Mini Facility: 10 foot height, 1 meter diameter, or 50 square feet. Macro Facility: 15 foot height, 1 meter diameter, or 100 square feet. Monopole I: 60 foot height or less. Monopole II: 60 foot to 150 foot height. Lattice Tower: Metal crossed strips or bars,up to 150 foot in height. \Zone Type Single Family Multi Family Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Use\ Micro Antenna Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Mini Antenna Permitted* Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Macro Antenna Admin C.U.P.* Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Monopole I Not Allowed* Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Permitted Permitted Monopole II Not Allowed HEX C.U.P. HEX C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Lattice Tower Not Allowed HEX C.U.P. HEX C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. Admin C.U.P. The ordinance also includes submittal requirements, setback requirements, landscaping requirements, obsolescense clause (if not used for 6 months, must be removed), co-location requirements, noise standards, spacing requirements and radio frequency standards. WIRELES2.DOC\ •$ 1w ,r,CITY F RENTON .� f Office of the City Attorney Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren MEMORANDUM To: Gregg Zimmerman From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date: May 29, 1997 Subject: Ordinance Amending Title IV (Building Regulations) by Adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities I am enclosing a copy of the above-referenced Ordinance. The original of this Ordinance has been forwarded to the City Clerk. Lawrence J. Warren LJW:as. End. cc: Jay Covington Marilyn J. Petersen A8:132.02. Post Office Box 626 - 100 S. 2nd Street- Renton, Washington 98057 - (206)255-8678 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) , OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY ADDING CHAPTER 38, WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I . Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the _City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding Chapter 38, Wireless Communications Facilities, which reads as follows : CHAPTER 38 WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES SECTION: 4-38-1 : Purpose and Intent 4-38-2 : Definitions 4-38-3 : Administering and Enforcing Authority 4-38-4 : Telecommunications Act of 1996 4-38-5 : Submittal Requirements 4-38-6 : Permit Fees 4-38-7 : Development Standards for Antennas : Micro Facilities 4-38-8 : Development Standards for Antennas : Mini Facilities 4-38-9 : Development Standards for Antennas : Macro Facilities 4-38-10 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole I 4-38-11: Development Standards for Support Structures : Monopole II 4-38-12 : Development Standards for Support Structures : Lattice Towers 4-38-13 : Additional Permit Criteria for Wireless Communication Facilities 4-38-14 : Conditional Use Permit Criteria 4-38-15 : Airport Restrictions 4-38-16 : Exemption 4-38-17 : Obsolescence 4-38-18 : Co-Location 4-38-19 : Radio Frequency Standards 'Name ORDINANCE NO . ,ar• 4-38-20 : Permit Limitations 4-38-21 : Alternates and Modifications 4-38-22 : Variances 4-38-23 : Appeals 4-38-24 : Violations and Penalties 4-38-25 : Severability 4-38-1 : PURPOSE AND INTENT A. Goals . The purpose of this Chapter is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications facilities, including towers and antennas . The goals of this Chapter are to: 1 . Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; 2 . Encourage strongly the joint use of new and existing tower sites; 3 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 4 . Encourage users of towers and antennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas; and 5 . Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efficiently. B. Principal or Accessory Use . Antennas and towers may be considered either principal, accessory or conditional uses . A different existing use or an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or tower on such lot . For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna complies with zoning development regulations, including but not limited to set-back requirements, lot coverage requirements, and other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even though the antennas or towers may be located on leased parcels within such lots . Towers that are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use or structure . 4-38-2 : DEFINITIONS Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meaning of terms used in this section shall be as follows : 2 rORDINANCE NO. ACCESSORY ANTENNA DEVICE: An antenna which is less than 12 inches in height or width, excluding the support structure (examples : test mobile antennas and global positioning (GPS) antennas) . - ANSI : The American National Standards Institute . A non-profit, privately funded membership organization that coordinates the development of voluntary national standards in the United States . ANTENNA: Any system of poles, panels, rods, reflecting discs or similar devices used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals . Antennas include the following types : 1 . Dish antenna: see parabolic antenna. 2 . Omni-directional antenna (also known as a "whip" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a 360 degree radial pattern, and which is up to 15 feet in height and up to 4 inches in diameter. 3 . Directional antenna (also known as a "panel" antenna) transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than 360 degrees . 4 . Panel antenna: see directional antenna. 5 . Parabolic antenna (also known as a dish antenna) is a bowl-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 6 . Whip antenna : see omni-directional antenna. ADMINISTRATOR: The Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City, or any successor office with responsibility for management of the public properties within the City of Renton, or his/her designee . ATTACHED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY: A wireless communication facility that is affixed to an existing structure, for example, an existing building, tower, water tank, utility pole, etc . which does not include an additional wireless communication support structure . CO-LOCATION: The use of a single support structure and/or site by more than one wireless communications provider. DEPARTMENT: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City of Renton. EQUIPMENT SHELTER OR CABINET: A room, cabinet or building used to house equipment for utility or service providers . FAA: The Federal Aviation Administration, which maintains stringent regulations for the siting, building, marketing and lighting of cellular transmission antennas near airports or flight paths . 3 ORDINANCE NO. FCC: The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the licensing and practice of wireless, wireline, television, radio and other telecommunications entities . GUYED TOWER: A freestanding or supported wireless communication support structure which is usually over 100 feet tall, which consists of metal crossed strips or bars and is steadied by wire guys in a radial pattern around the tower. LATTICE TOWER: A wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 15 feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to 1 meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than 100 square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 4 feet in height (except omni directional antennas which may be up to 6 feet in height) and with an area of not more than 580 square inches in the aggregate (e .g. one foot diameter parabola or 2 ' x 1 .5 ' panel) as viewed from any one point . The permitted antenna height includes the wireless communication facility support structure . MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 10 feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to 1 meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than 50 square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . PROVIDER: A company providing telephone or other communications service . RELATED EQUIPMENT: All equipment ancillary to the transmission and reception of voice and data via radio frequencies . Such equipment may include, but is not limited to, cable, conduit and connectors . RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PARCEL: Any parcel of property with one of the following zoning designations : RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R- 14 . 4 iii#ORDINANCE NO. *1000 SUPPORT STRUCTURE : see Wireless Communication Support Structure . TOWER: see Wireless Communication Support Structure . WCF: see Wireless Communication Facility. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY (WCF) : An unstaffed facility for the transmission and reception of low-power radio signals usually consisting of an equipment shelter or cabinet, a support structure, antennas (e .g. omni-directional, panel/directional or parabolic) and related equipment, generally contained within a compound. For purposes of this ordinance a WCF includes antennas, support structures and equipment shelters, either separately or in combination. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SUPPORT STRUCTURE: The structure erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . Support structure types include, but are not limited to, stanchions, monopoles, lattice towers, wood poles or guyed towers . 4-38-3 : ADMINISTERING AND ENFORCING AUTHORITY The Administrator and/or his/her designated representatives are responsible for the general administration and coordination of this Chapter . 4-38-4 : TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the City to comply with the following conditions . A. The City zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among wireless telecommunication providers that compete against one another. B. The City zoning requirements may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service . C. The City must act within a reasonable period of time on requests for permission to place or construct wireless telecommunications facilities . D. A decision by the City denying a request for permission to install or construct wireless telecommunications facilities must be in writing and must be based on evidence in a written record. E . If a wireless telecommunications facility meets technical emissions standards set by the FCC, it is presumed safe. The City may not deny a request to construct a facility on grounds that its radio frequency emissions would be harmful 5 ti✓ORDINANCE NO. to the environment or the health of residents if those emissions meet FCC standards . 4-38-5 : SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS In addition to the information required for a building permit, the following items shall be required , for a Wireless Communications Facility permit application: A. Map of View Area: A diagram or map depicting where within a three mile radius any portion of the proposed facility could be -seen. B. Photosimulations : Photosimulations of the proposed facility from affected residential properties and public rights-of-way at varying distances . C. Service Area: A map showing the service area of the proposed WCF and an explanation of the need for that facility. D. Inventory of Existing Sites : An inventory of the provider' s existing facilities with the Renton city corporate limits, and any other facilities outside the city limits that is within one-half mile of the proposed facility. The inventory is to include specific information about the location, height, and design of each facility. The Department may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional use permits under this Chapter or other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the City, provided, however that the Department is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable. E . Site Plan: A site/landscaping plan showing the specific placement of the WCF on the site; showing the location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features to be retained; and indicating type and locations of existing and new plant materials used to screen WCF components and the proposed color(s) for the WCF. F. Applicant Agreement Statement : A signed notarized statement indicating: 1 . The applicant agrees to allow for the potential co- location of additional WCF equipment by other providers on the applicant ' s structure or within the same site location; and 2 . That the applicant agrees to remove the facility within 6 months after that site ' s use is discontinued or if the facility falls into disrepair, and restore the site to its pre-existing condition. 6 %NOORDINANCE NO . ' ► G. Draft Lease Agreement : A draft lease agreement with the landholder that : H. 1 . Allows the landholder to enter into leases with other providers; and 2 . Specifies that if the provider fails to remove the facility upon 6 months of its discontinued use, the responsibility for removal falls upon the landholder. I . Design of Support Structures : A report including a description of the support structure with technical reasons for its design. J. Structural Integrity of Support Structures : Documentation establishing the structural integrity for the support structure' s proposed uses . 4-38-6 : PERMIT FEES The Department shall be responsible for the permitting, inspection and acceptance of all improvements listed in this Chapter, and shall make charge therefor to the applicant . The charges are listed in the Fee Schedule, Chapter 1, Title V of City Code . 4-38-7 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MICRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MICRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 4 feet in height (except omni directional antennas which may be up to 6 feet in height) and with an area of not more than 580 square inches in the aggregate (e .g. one foot diameter parabola or 2 ' x 1 .5 ' panel) as viewed from any one point . The permitted antenna height includes the wireless communication facility support structure . B. Permitted Use : Micro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all zones . C. Location on Building: A Micro Facility shall be located on existing buildings, poles or other existing support structures . A Micro Facility may locate on buildings and structures provided that the interior wall or ceiling immediately adjacent to the facility is not designated residential space . D. Height : Antennas equal to or less than 4 feet in height (except omni directional antennas which can be up to six feet in height) and with an area of not more than 580 square inches in the aggregate (e .g. one foot diameter parabola or 2 ' x 1 . 5 ' panel as viewed from any one point) are exempt from the height limitation of the zone in which they are located. Structures which are nonconforming with respect to height, may be used for the placement of omni directional antennas providing they do not extend more than six feet above the 7 weRDINANCE NO. ..+ existing structure . Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . E . Color: A Micro Facility shall be same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. F. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Micro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Micro Facilities of the same wireless provider: RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R-14 . 4-38-8 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MINI FACILITIES A. Definition: MINI FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 10 feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to 1 meter (39 .37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than 50 square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . B. Permitted Use or Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in the RC, R-1, R-5, R-8 , R-10 and R-14 zones, provided that the site is over one acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the site is under one acre or the setbacks are less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the facility has a minimum setback of 100 feet from any residentially zoned parcel . Mini Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use in these zones if the setbacks are less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Buildings : A Mini Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior 8 *✓ORDINANCE NO. wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space . D. Color: A Mini Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E . Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. F. Height : Mini Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Omni directional antennas may exceed the height limitation by ten feet, or in the case of nonconforming structures the antennas may exceed the height limitation if affixed to the side of an existing nonconforming building and blends in architecturally with the building. In the case of a nonconforming structure the antennas may extend fifteen (15) feet above the existing structure . Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Micro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Micro Facilities of the same wireless provider: RC, R-1, R-5, R-8 , R-10 and R-14 . 4-38-9 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ANTENNAS : MACRO FACILITIES A. Definition: MACRO FACILITY: An attached wireless communication facility which consists of antennas equal to or less than 15 feet in height or a parabolic antenna up to 1 meter (39 . 37 inches) in diameter and with an area not more than 100 square feet in the aggregate as viewed from any one point . B. Administrative Conditional Use Permit/Permitted Use : Macro Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R-14 zones, provided that the site is over one acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro_ Facilities may be allowed 9 ,,,«)RDINANCE NO. �.✓ with a Hearing Examiner conditional use in these zones if the site is under one acre or the setbacks are less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities are a primary permitted use in all other zones if the setback for the facility is a minimum of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Macro Facilities may be allowed with a administrative conditional use permit in these zones if the setback is less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . C. Location on Building: A Macro Facility may be located on buildings and structures provided that the immediate interior wall or ceiling adjacent to the facility is not a designated residential space . D. Color: A Macro Facility shall be the same color as the existing building, pole or support structure on which it is proposed to be located. E. Equipment Shelter or Cabinet : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment shall be contained wholly within a building or structure, or otherwise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. F. Height : Macro Facilities shall comply with the height limitation specified for all zones except as follows : Omni directional antennas may exceed the height limitation by fifteen (15) feet, or in the case of nonconforming structures the antennas may extend fifteen (15) feet above the existing structure . Panel antennas may exceed the height limitation if affixed to the side of an existing building and architecturally blends in with the building. Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure . G. Separation of Facilities : In the following residential zones, Macro Facilities for a specific wireless provider shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than one thousand three hundred twenty (1, 320) linear feet from other Macro Facilities of the same wireless provider: RC, R-1, R-5, R-8 , R-10 and R-14 . 4-38-10 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE I A. Definition: MONOPOLE I : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, 10 t ;rORDINANCE NO. Swe less than sixty (60) feet in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R-14 zones, provided that the site is over one acre in size, and the facility has minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities are prohibited in the RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R-14 zones if the site is less than one acre in size, or has minimum setbacks of less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. C. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an Administrative conditional use permit in the RM, CN, CD, COR and CC zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the RM, CN, CD, COR and CC zones if the minimum setbacks are less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. D . Permitted Use : Monopole I Facilities are a primary permitted use in the CA, CO, IL, IM and IH zones if the facility has minimum setbacks of 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel . Monopole I Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the CA, CO, IL, IM and IH zones if the minimum setbacks are less than 100 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned property. E . Maximum Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole I Facility shall be less than sixty (60) feet . F. Antenna Height : Antennas equal to or less than fifteen (15) feet in height or up to four (4) inches in diameter may be a component of a Monopole I Facility. Antennas which extend above the wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the Monopole I wireless communications support structure . For example, the maximum height for a Monopole I shall be sixty (60) feet and maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas seventy-five (75) feet (60 feet plus 15 feet) . G. Antennas : Macro facilities are the largest attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole I Facility. H. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Monopole I facilities shall be concealed, camouflaged or -placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or 11 JRDINANCE NO. underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34 , Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. I . Landscaping: Monopole I Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-11 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : MONOPOLE II A. Definition: MONOPOLE II : A wireless communication support structure which consists of a freestanding support structure, sixty (60) feet or greater in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connecting appurtenances . B. Prohibited Zones : Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in the RC, R-1, R-5 , R-8 , R-10 and R-14 zones . C . Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with an Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the RM, CN, CD, COR and CC zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within 300 feet of a RC, R-1, R-5 , R-8, R-10 and R-14 zone . D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Monopole II Facilities may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the CA, CO, IL, IM and IH zones . Monopole II Facilities are prohibited in these zones if located within 300 feet of a RC, R-1, R-5 , R-8, R-10 and R-14 zone . E . Height : The maximum permitted height for a Monopole II Facility shall be 35 feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or 150 feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole II facility. Antennas which extend above the Monopole II wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure . For example, the maximum height for a Monopole II facility shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the -maximum permitted height of the support 12 ,;ORDINANCE NO. structure and antennas one hundred sixty-five (165) feet (150 feet plus 15 feet) . G. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Monopole II Facility support structure shall be concealed, screened, camouflaged or placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. H. Landscaping: Monopole II Facilities shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-12 : DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUPPORT STRUCTURES : LATTICE TOWERS A. Definition: LATTICE TOWER: A wireless communication support structure which consists of metal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and related equipment . B. Prohibited Zones : Lattice Towers are prohibited in the RC, R-1, R-5 , R-8 , R-10 and R-14 zones . C. Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with an Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the RM, CN, CD, COR and CC zones . Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within 300 feet of a RC, R-1, R-5 , R-8 , R-10 and R-14 zone. D. Administrative Conditional Use Permit : Lattice Towers may be allowed with an administrative conditional use permit in the CA, CO, IL, IM and IH zones . Lattice Towers are prohibited in these zones if located within 300 feet of a RC, R-1, R-5, R- 8, R-10 and R-14 zone . E. Height : The maximum permitted height for a Lattice Towers shall be 35 feet higher than the regular permitted maximum height for the applicable zoning district, or 150 feet, whichever is less . F. Antennas : Macro Facilities are the largest permitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Lattice Towers. Antennas which extend above the Lattice 13 )RDINANCE NO. Towers wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure . For example, the maximum height for a Lattice Towers shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet and the maximum height of antennas which may be installed on the support structure could be fifteen (15) feet, making the maximum permitted height of the support structure and antennas one hundred sixth-five (165) feet (150 feet plus 15 feet) . G. Equipment Shelter or Cabinet : A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronics equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the Lattice Towers support structure shall be concealed, screened, camouflaged or placed underground. When they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. H. Landscaping: Lattice Towers shall be landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area of fifteen (15) feet shall be required surrounding the facility. Landscaping shall include trees, shrubs and ground cover. The required landscaped areas shall include an irrigation system. 4-38-13 : ADDITIONAL PERMIT CRITERIA FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES The following criteria shall be met before a building permit can be granted: A. Visual Impact 1 . Antenna Height : Antennas may not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above their supporting structure, monopole, lattice tower, building or other structure. 2 . Existing Character: Site location and development shall preserve the preexisting character of the surrounding buildings and land uses and the zone district to the extent consistent with the function of the communications equipment . Wireless communication towers shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site to the extent practical . Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized, unless such disturbance would result in less visual impact of the site to the - surrounding area. - 14 ORDINANCE NO. *1110 3 . Screening of Equipment Shelters and Cabinets : Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communications equipment should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. When they cannot be located in buildings, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped in conformance with City Code Section 4-31-34, Landscaping. Landscaping shall include a minimum fifteen (15) foot sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. 4 . Exposed Metal Surfaces : Accessory equipment facilities may not be enclosed with exposed metal surfaces . A. Noise Levels : No equipment shall be operated so as to produce noise in levels above 45 dB as measured from -the nearest property line on which the attached wireless communication facility is located. Operation of a back-up power generator in the event of power failure or the testing of a back-up generator between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. are exempt from this standard. No testing of back-up power generators shall occur between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. B. Fencing: Security fencing, if used, shall be painted or coated with a nonreflective color. Fencing shall comply with the requirements listed in City Code 4-31-15 (C) , Fences and Hedges . C. Lighting: Towers shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the governing authority may review the available lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views . Security lighting for the equipment shelters or cabinets and other on-the-ground ancillary equipment is also permitted, as long as it is appropriately down shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the site. D. Advertising: No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent roadway shall be placed on or affixed to any part of a telecommunications tower, antenna array or antenna, other than as required by FCC regulations regarding tower registration or other applicable law. E . Building Standards : Wireless Communication Support Structures shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222 Revision F Standard entitled "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures" (or equivalent) , as it may be updated or amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit the building official shall be provided with an engineer' s certification that the support structure ' s _design meets - or 15 ,,,,,ORDINANCE NO. ,.4•00 exceeds those standards . A Wireless Communications Support Structure shall be located in such a manner that if the structure should fall along its longest dimension, it will remain within property boundaries and avoid habitable structures, public streets, utility lines and other telecommunications towers . 4-38-14 : CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicability: The governing authority may grant, with or without conditions, or deny the requested conditional use permit . The governing authority may limit the term and duration of the conditional use permit . Conditions imposed by the governing authority shall reasonably assure that nuisance or hazard to life or property will not develop. B. Conditional Use Criteria: The governing authority shall consider the following factors in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit, although the governing authority may waive or reduce the burden on the applicant of one or more of these criteria if the governing authority, concludes that the goals of this ordinance are better served thereby. 1 . Height of the proposed tower. 2 . Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries . 3 . Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties . 4 . Surrounding topography. 5 . Surrounding tree coverage and foliage . 6 . Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness . 7 . Proposed ingress and egress . 8 . Potential noise, light and glare impacts . 9 . Availability of suitable existing towers and other structures . 4-38-15 : AIRPORT RESTRICTIONS A. Airport Regulations : All wireless communications facilities and attached wireless communications facilities must comply with the Airport Zoning regulations, as listed in City Code 4-31-17 . B. Notice to FAA: A Notice of Proposed Construction shall be submitted to the FAA a minimum of 30 days prior to the issuance of any building permit for any wireless communications support structure or attached wireless communications facilities . 4-38-16 : EXEMPTION A. Exemptions from Conditional Use Permit : The following are exempt from the requirement of a conditional use permit, and 16 tft,ORDINANCE NO. Nw, shall be considered a permitted use in all zones where attached wireless communications facilities are permitted: Minor modifications of existing wireless communications facilities, whether emergency or routine, so long as there is little or no change in the visual appearance, as determined by the Administrator. B. Amateur Radio, Receive Only Antennas : This Chapter shall not govern any tower, or installation of any antenna, that is under seventy (70) feet in height and is owned and operated by a federally licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only antennas . 4-38-17 : OBSOLESCENCE Any wireless communications facility or attached wireless communications facility that is no longer needed and its use is discontinued shall be reported immediately by service provider to the Administrator. Discontinued facilities shall be decommissioned and removed by the facility owner within 6 months of the date it ceases to be operational or if the facility falls into disrepair, and the site restored to its pre-existing condition. 4-38-18 : CO-LOCATION A. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers or Other Structures : No new wireless communications support structure shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the governing authority that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna . Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant ' s proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: 1 . No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area required to meet applicant ' s engineering requirements . 2 . Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant ' s engineering requirements. 3 . Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant ' s proposed antenna and related equipment . 4 . The applicant ' s proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant ' s proposed antenna. 5 . The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable . Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. 17 ORDINANCE NO. 6 . The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable. A. Cooperation in Colocation Efforts : A permittee shall cooperate with other WCF providers in co-locating additional antennas on support structures and/or on existing buildings provided said proposed co-locators have received a building permit for such use at said site from the City. A permittee shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other providers and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a substantial technical level of impairment of the ability to provide the permitted use (i .e. , a significant interference in broadcast or reception capabilities as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden) . Such good faith shall include sharing technical information to evaluate the feasibility of co- location. In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or both the applicant and permittee. B. Reasonable Efforts : All applicants shall demonstrate reasonable efforts in developing a co-location alternative for their proposal . 4-38-19 : RADIO FREQUENCY STANDARDS A. Verification of Compliance : The applicant shall comply with Federal standards for radio frequency emissions . Within sixty (60) days after the issuance of its operational permit, the applicant shall submit a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency emissions of all antennas installed at the subject site and compares the results with established Federal standards . Said report shall be subject to review and approval of the Administrator for consistency with Federal standards . If on review, the City finds that the WCF does not meet Federal standards, the City may revoke or modify this permit . B. Interference with Local TV or Radio: The applicant shall ensure that the WCF will not cause localized interference with the reception of area television or radio broadcasts . If on review the City finds that the WCF interferes with such reception, and if such interference is not remedied within thirty (30) days, the city may revoke or modify this permit . 4-38-20 : PERMIT LIMITATIONS A. Hold Harmless Agreement : The permittee/operator of a WCF shall and does, upon approval of the building permit, agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and 18 iv ORDINANCE NO. representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorneys ' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from: a) City' s approval and issuance of this building permit; b) City' s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein; and c) Applicant ' s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including, without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions . Permittee/operator compliance . with this section is an express condition of the building permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of the permittee ' s/operator' s successors and assigns . B. Maintenance : The applicant shall maintain the WCF to standards that may be imposed by the City at the time of the granting of a permit . Such maintenance shall include, but shall not be limited to, maintenance of the paint, structural integrity and landscaping. If the applicant fails to maintain the facility, the City may undertake the maintenance at the expense of the applicant or terminate the permit, at its sole option. C . Change of Ownership: The applicant shall notify the Department of all changes in ownership or operation of the facility within sixty (60) days of the change . 4-38-21 : ALTERNATES AND MODIFICATIONS A. Alternates : The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of construction not specifically prescribed by this Chapter, provided any alternate has been approved and its use authorized by the Administrator or his/her designee . The Administrator may approve any such alternate, provided he/she finds that the proposed design and/or methodology is satisfactory and complies with the provisions of this Chapter and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this Chapter in suitability, strength, effectiveness, durability, safety, maintainability and environmental protection. The Administrator may require that sufficient evidence . or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that may be made regarding its use. B . Modifications : Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Chapter, the Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided she/he shall first find that a special individual 19 ORDINANCE NO. ,, reason makes the strict letter of this Chapter impractical, that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Chapter, and that such modification: 1 . Will meet the objectives and safety, function, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the requirements of this Chapter, based upon sound engineering judgment . 2 . Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity. 4-38-22 : VARIANCES A. Variance Requirements : A variance from the requirements of this Ordinance may be approved by the Hearing Examiner when undue hardship may be created as a result of strict compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance . In recommending or approving any variance, the Hearing Examiner may prescribe conditions that he/she deems necessary to or desirable for the public interest . No variance shall be approved or recommended unless the Hearing Examiner finds : B. That there are special physical circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use or development of his land; and C. That the variance is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances ; and D . That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. E . Applications Required: Application for any variance shall be submitted in writing by the applicant at the time the permit application is submitted to the Department . The application shall state fully all substantiating facts and evidence pertinent to the request . F. Variance Fees : The appropriate fees shall be paid at time of application as required in City Code Section 5-1-1 . 4-38-23 : APPEALS Any decision made in the administrative process described in this Chapter may be appealed pursuant to Section 4-8-11 of this Title. Any appellant must be seeking to protect an interest that is arguably within the zone of interest to be protected or regulated by this chapter, must allege an injury in fact, and that injury must be real and present rather than speculative. - 20 ift0ORDINANCE NO. ' 1 4-38-24 : VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES Violations of the provisions of this Chapter will be a civil infraction and punishable under Chapter 33 , Title IV of the City Code . 4-38-25 : SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Chapter or its application to any person or property is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the- remainder of the Chapter or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected. SECTION II. The City Council of the City of Renton hereby declares an emergency and this Ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 1997 . Marilyn J. Petersen, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 1997 . Jesse Tanner, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 659:5/28/97 :as. - 21 STAFF City of Renton REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE June 02, 1997 Project Name US WEST PCS on Sunset Applicant US WEST Communications File Number LUA-097-049, CU, ECF Project Manager Jennifer Toth Henning 19 TN.. :J ST. V ,° r 'S( 23 rj ui _ ; •%'�• Y.. >NE ..!SRO. •. �, n frl 3a `� p�a r • .1 %— H MARS ,E{TRACTSc . es' � 4k70. :o o�v3^Ll^md'4T^,o49 3 WN1IMAN m kr ,-•: 44i 4, C3p P D._ f NE lint ,,•• S���rSE•- ' 'rl Gl3(, Q. •. I a 4_;.` SO ,0:1 S r s o�1 9qN Ec�,i ( �� + 7TH S 3 b-f /1 iQ < :y OLb DOOM N ce.,,;-.` •i ,,, .. LLll •'tJ i SEt� .. �e�y .�.•,, y SOH - CENTRAL el' ' HIGHLANDS PLAZA: ni NE ✓ 6 •a;: e. --•z— � 1 Ifi • Q 7 6 1.1 � C " 'uK� i iM, of Project Location Map ERCRPT.DOC City of Renton PB/PW Department %soronmental Review Committee Staff Report US WEST PCS on SUNSET LUA-93-049, CU,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OFMay 27,1997 Page2 of 4 Project Description The applicant proposes to install a PCS wireless communications facility consisting of six(6) antennas mounted on a 125-foot tall support monopole, and two equipment cabinets located inside an existing storage shed. The facility would be located at 4546 NE Sunset Boulevard. The proposal requires a Conditional Use Permit to exceed the 35 foot height limit of the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) Zone. The proposed monopole would be galvanized steel. Six antennas are proposed for mounting on the pole,these would be approximately 42 inches long, five inches wide, and four inches deep. The applicant is considering the addition of up to three antennas which could be installed on the monopole at a later date, if it was determined to be necessary to meet service demand. Each equipment cabinet would be five feet tall and 30 inches square at the base. Equipment cabinets would be installed on a 9-1/2 foot by 12 foot concrete pad. An additional cabinet may be placed on the pad at a later date to accommodate growth of the system. The cabinets would be completely hidden from view by being enclosed in the existing Sunset Highway Self Storage building. Accessory devices installed at the facility include a geostationary positioning system antenna (a few inches in length), a lightning rod, and parking bollards. The proposed facility would be unattended. USWest expects maintenance visits to the site to be no more than once each month, or as little as once per quarter. Since maintenance visits would be infrequent,the applicant is not proposing to provide additional parking. According to the applicant, the existing self storage building is 3 1/2 stories in height. Development along this portion of NE Sunset Boulevard is primarily commercial in character. Surrounding properties have dense vegetation that would help to screen views of the proposed monopole. The applicant has provided photo-simulations of the proposed monopole structure as viewed from streets in the vicinity of the proposal. While the monopole would be visible from the south, east and southeast, it would not appear to be visually incompatible to the degree that it should be excluded from consideration in this location. The applicant has stated that the proposed height of 125 feet would provide needed service coverage and allow for one other telecommunications purveyor to collate facilities on this monopole, given minimum height requirements of 115 feet and mandatory separation of collocated facilities. The applicant intends to begin construction upon the completion of the land use and environmental review process. Project Location 4546 NE Sunset Boulevard Exist. Bldg. Area gsf Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf Site Area 2.78 acres total Total Building Area gsf RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommend that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: ERCRPT.DOC City of Renton PB/PW Department :ronmental Review Committee Staff Report US WEST PCS on SUNSET •..r LUA-93-049, CU,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OFMay 27,1997 Page3 of 4 DETERMINATION OF X DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED. Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. X Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 da A••eal Period. a Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The applicant shall provide screening (fence and/or fence and landscaping) around the base of the monopole for those portions of the monopole not surrounded by the existing building. If ornamental plantings are proposed in combination with the fence, a landscape plan and irrigation plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Development Services Division's review and approval. The fence and/or fence and landscape plan must be submitted prior to the issuance of any other permits for the proposed facility. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the monopole site, including replacement of any security or Federal Aviation Administration required lighting, and prompt removal of graffiti or litter. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Building Official. 1. A soils report will be required prior to the issuance of any construction or building permits. Airport Manager. 2. The proposal is outside of the 14,000 foot runway area. Plan Review. 3. The standards outlined in the City's Draft Wireless Communications Ordinance should be used in reviewing this proposal. General. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any necessary approvals from other federal, state, and local agencies and districts. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. Whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development? 1. Aesthetics Impacts: The proposal would result in the installation of a 125-foot tall monopole in an area zoned for neighborhood commercial development including retail, services and multi-family residential housing. Photo-simulations provided by the applicant illustrate that the monopole would not result in significant detrimental visual impacts to the ERCRPT.DOC City of Renton PB/PW Department ktie "ronmental Review Committee Staff Report US WEST PCS on SUNSET 441110 LUA-93-049, CU,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OFMay 27,1997 Page4 of 4 surrounding area. While the monopole would be seen from areas to the south and east, it would not block views. Existing surrounding vegetation would absorb the monopole when viewed from the north and west. The height of the structure reflects the applicant's needs to provide service in the defined service area, but also reflects the applicant's willingness to allow eventual collocation for another telecommunications purveyor. The proposal does not make provisions for the aesthetic impacts of the facility to the immediate area. Security fencing around the open sides(non-building sides) of the monopole is recommended. The fencing should provide adequate screening from the base of the monopole on the north,west and south. The fencing should be considered in combination with landscaping. In addition, if any lighting is required to meet Federal Aviation Administration standards, it would be the responsibility of the applicant to maintain said lighting. Any litter, and/or graffiti are the responsibility of the telecommunications purveyor to remove. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall provide screening (fence and/or fence and landscaping) around the base of the monopole for those portions of the monopole not surrounded by the existing building. If ornamental plantings are proposed in combination with the fence, a landscape plan and irrigation plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Development Services Division's review and approval. The fence and/or fence and landscape plan must be submitted prior to the issuance of any other permits for the proposed facility. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the monopole site, including replacement of any security or Federal Aviation Administration required lighting, and prompt removal of graffiti or litter. Nexus: Environmental Ordinance, Code Section 4-6. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. ERCRPT.DOC CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: May 23, 1997 TO: City Council Mayor Tanner FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the staff recommended Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance. The Commission reviewed this ordinance at its meeting of May 22, 1997 and made a number of comments with which staff concurred. • The Commission requested that a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency emission be provided within 60 days. The initial proposal was within 6 months (Sec. 4-99-19 A). • The Commission also requested that the providers be required to correct any interference with TV or Radio broadcasts be corrected in a timely manner. The initial proposal was 60 days. The Commission requested that this time period be shortened( Sec. 4-99-19 C.). The Commission discussed the treatment of these facilities in residential zones ranging from Resource Conservation to Residential 14 dwelling units per acre in density and agreed with the staff recommended approach. There was discussion about collocation of facilities and of the need to insure that abandoned or discontinued facilities would be removed in a timely manner. The Commission agreed that the proposed ordinance adequately addresses these issues. For: Brosman, Lemke, Mehrens, Smith, Wagner Against: None Absent: Cameron, Franklin, Lukins Signed e Ledbury, Ch it 1 ing Commission