The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-04-110STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Lily Nguyen, being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on Friday, 10/1/04 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $99.00 at the rate of $15.50 per inch for the first publication and NI A per inch for each s Lily Nguyen Legal Advertis{ng Representative, King County Journal SUb"rib~e !h;, [" d,y of Ootobe" 2004. ~ \\\\\\\\1111111/1/ :-.\\\\\ ~EAGA( III///. T A M h ~ ~. • ........ /2".6 ~ om . eag er ~....,.~ ..• ·\on £1(/)· .••• :r ~ Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Redmo~C:W~'flil~t~/""'\ ~ Ad Numb_er: 847104 P.O. Number: :: K itt ~\:; t.. _ \ z ~ Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge.:= : _. ~ : 0 :: ::: .• po\..\ : J..... :::: -:;. .r\', Uv t:::J":"':::: -::.-v'}.·. ~ .'~ ..:::-~ r •••• MAY 2. : ••• ~ ~ '/""'11'/2" ••••••••••• s~ ~ ///1// 0 F \I'J ~ \\\\~ 1/111/" III \ \ \ \ \ \' NOTICE OF Ef'..rvIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendment LUA04-110, ECF Location: City-wide in Residential Zones: RC, R-l, R-5, R-8, R-I0, and R-14. The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless! cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. The proposal would also permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zones with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Published in the King County Journal October I, 2004. #847104 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Lily Nguyen, being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on Friday, 10/1/04 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $99.00 at the rate of $15.50 per inch for the first publication and NJA per inch for each subsecwent insertion. Lily Nguyen Legal Advertisi6g Representative, King County Journal Subscribed a sworn to me this 1st day of October, 2004. ~ \\\\\\\\1111111/1/ . ",,\\ ~EAGAt ///~/. ~ \>-............ l:~ ;Z ".\-.. •• ' \00 E.>r '. -r ~ Tom A. Meagher :? ~ ... -:...... /:)/"$'" ~ Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Redmon~W¥J{ntg~~RY Il' \ % Ad Number: 847104 P.O. Number: ~ i U ~ _Cl-: z § Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge. '~ \ PU'O\..\~.I f2 § '"/ tP •• c".· C!J ...... /)\. () • ..x~ "8c ""9 ••• •• ...,AY 2. : •• ' ~ ~ 'l l'~ .......... '2:>~ ~ //////1 OF 'IN po.; \\\"" '/{II/IIII\\\\\\\ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendment LUA04-110, ECF Location: City-wide in Residential Zones: RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, and R-14. The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless! cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. The proposal would also permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zones with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentiMly MMd lAnd. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in' writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Published in the King County Journal October 1,2004. #847104 /j ... CITY OF RENTON PLANNING I BUILDING I PUBLIC W'()RKS MEMORANDUM Date: October 26, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M. Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: Wireless Communication Facilities Code AllIendments LUA (file) Number: LUA-04-110, ECF Cross-References: A~'s: Project Manager: Jennifer Henning Acceptance Date: September 16, 2004 Applicant: City of Renton Owner: Contact: City of Renton -Jennifer Henning PID Number: N/A ERC Decision Date: October 1, 2004 ERC Appeal Date: October 15, 2004 Administrative Approval: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Approval for preparation of Date: October 18, 2004 ordinance Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: Code amendments to allow wireless facilities in resic:i ential areas and within public right of ways. Location: City-wide Comments: Jennifer Henning City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 tel: 425-430-7286 (contact) Roger Smith Cingular Wireless PARTIES OF RECORD WIRELESS FACILITY CODE AMENDMT LUA04-11 0, ECF Ken Lyons JAB & Associates 14042 NE 8th Street ste: #210 Bellevue, WA 98007 tel: 425-378-8274 (party of record) Liz Carrasquero Wireless Facilities, Inc. Andrew Nenninger T-Mobile 19807 North Creek Parkway N ste: #101 Bothell, WA 98011 (party of record) 2445 140th Avenue NE ste: #202 575 Andover Park W ste: #201 Tukwila, WA 98188 Bellevue, WA 98005 (party of record) (party of record) (Page 1 of 1) , C " '1", •• '".' .,'.\ ' ... ;'" , , '. " ' '-.i .. . .. ;'. "'""'.,, , ',-, ~." " . ~. ," ': ,e) .. ", . .. ", .. , .... ' ' .• _' '. ,~'l-, .' .-~", ',-.:::;.' ",- ~ U;" ... ' J,: .,-.: "", ".' . ,;"1 __ .n ,'. <""','>::~ ',:;' .: .~ :-:.' :. -',' , ", ~; ",' -: .. r ": .' .: ... '" , " ~! : ' i~;' ~:'." '\' - .... , ... .' t . '. ,,' ' ... " .- . :, -~ 1 '\- '.1" . ~ . "<;:0' .,-; '-'0, ••• I-~ ,' .•.• , '. ~. ·',..:r .' . " I' •• : :'" " ~,: " ,',. , - I .~' :·f I.'''", , -' .... ' ..,' . \' " ~!.' . ,-, . ~ '. " •. :"-:.1 ... -"'.~' ., '~;. ," ~-.: ,',." , •. ',.. .f.,., ,)" .~ ..... , " '.\ "" .' ", .... • " ~t.! . "'.: ; , " ' , ' ) .. 0'1" • .. ~-,., :'.' :.:' .:. +, <' ",' "'. . ~-. " ''''h' '-i ",-i .,.; "".-•. : .. -roo',"" .' :., ' .. < -' .. f' >' :t -'.' ... ': .,' '.:..' .':' ,,-''':, ~ ',', " ~~ \ , .. , "",' " ' ~ ~ .;.';...... ~ J ,', , " "'<'" f':. ',~. ',r ~~ _:.~. ., .. '''' ..... '. ;.-"",' , ,;" ~. :. :-.-....... .- ;,..;' " -: .' :' -,"."; ~ ;'> " ' .... , _ .:' ":.: . ":-" .... ... ::"'; ........ ...... , ... . ".", :,~ ..l: '. ,"'-. .' . ~ ,'.' :s..' .-' .. ,~.' ~ , , • ,:; ..... J. .. ~ .. :\ '._~; .~>( >'.:', ~. <?Y:t;~~:: : .... -!., , :." " . '-" ;. , " " " " (;. ; "'. .. ~r ". ';;. ~ .. -." "',' '.'~ " . ~ , " ... " ~ . ' .. ~ : . , . . '-: . ,:", .-...... " '.", .. ".', . . ' ~:: ,. ~ • 'I , . .~. '4.\ ...... ',' . ~. . 'I: .', .. ',' '" , ';-. .. t'~ '.' _,. = -: t, , :~. . , .' .". ' , t"" , i ,.; . -r \ :: .. .... " . '\ "'.' -,'-,'" •• , ... ..t. ,~ ,,' U ")-'i ,', ; _ .... \~ "'" : ' " . :'. ~. ,,' ;",,'-", , . : .... , " : ' .: . ~. r .'~ " .. " );", ' . .J ....... : .... -:,-'." . .;~. ~.' .; ~. :.1. ,-~ -, :':c' :'1 "-',. ", .' '."' •• :.~.( • ::, • -• I " ~ '-;:-' l. >" , " .:., . .,' ;: , ...... . ', .• : .. .... ". r / ;0 't/." Agencies See Attached '" ~~JL}-.J\I "'II (Sign~ure~Sende0~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·~··~· ~\ ~ " STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING No)-((\\ 0 ~ , ;t. • ,,~~~:t. , ~ -I: ~.' .~ 3!: m ~ ~ ft\ ~ V'<?" :I:1: :TJ ~ ~ 0 .. ~... ~/C tJ',: "t'j : " ~ •• ~t9. ..: I, tz.:· •• :07 .•.. ;- I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker "". 'Al8;:'i···(;/r.·O~ ... _--.: signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act'fuh~~-and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Or. ! 01(otr NotarYbiiCin and fOrtheSateashington Notary (Print): _____ --;-;;MAriR~IL;;;;;YNi:iKAMC~:::H~E:!.LfF------------ My appointment expires: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07 Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendment LUA04-110, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology • Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region' Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers' Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor' Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, W A 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold' Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. clo Departmer:.t of Ecology . 3190 160th Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer Bellevue, WA 98008 39015 _172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA98092 Duwamish Tribal Office' Muckleshoot Cult: ural Resources Program 4717 W Marginal Way SW . Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172nd Avellue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division' Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation' Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackso:n ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Mich eal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Corrnmunity Development Acting Communit:y Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Aven'ue South Newcastle, W A 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster. Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 981 88 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, W A 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that: it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of thechec::klist, PMT's, and the notice of application. * Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Wireless Communication FaciilHles Code Amendment PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-110, ECF LOCATION: City-wide In Residential Zones: Re, R-l, ROS, R-B, R-l0 and R-14 DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wlreless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to exIsting utility poles andlor Ught standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would pennlt. on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards In residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently. tree-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not pennltted In areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. ExIsting utility potes and light standards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet In height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum sepal1lltlon requirements. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERG) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental detennlnation must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Addltlonallnfonnatlon regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office. (425) 43D-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING DATE WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOllCE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Include the proJectN",MBER when calling ,for, proper.file Identification. ... ......... "",'\ :-~:~~~:.~.~t .. .: ~~.~",\SS/ci.1;'" a I" - . 0 ~. ~', ! :'0 NO]: 7: ... ~~ ,.: ..q-9 ~~ -n ~ CERTIFICATION ~ ~ ~ ,0 ".",)..~;" ~ , • VI::> ())., ~~... Que ... 1 ~ {<\ "'~~ •• ':: '? " 0 "::~'07 ..... ~ .: .::> I. J(' W, ........ ~o _- I ~J.y;~1t:::.. RcJu:..", ,hereby certify that copies of thQ"JqSHING ............ -- , ? ~"~ above document were posted by me in ..> conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on I 0 -1 -oJ ~ ~ ~~A.V Signen~~~t'»~ ATTEST: Subscribed and ~w~~ b-:rorlA.e. a Notary Pubi?: ~~ Washington residing ~41-zh:w, . on the 'tVA day of C)cl 4aeJ~ MARILYN KAMCHEFF MY AP"'''''TMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Wireless Communication Faciilities Code Amendment PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-110, ECF LOCATION: City-wide in Residential Zones: RC, R-1, R05, R-8, R-10 and R-14 DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas,· and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light standards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum separation requirements. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section-4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING DATE WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CITY )F RENTON Kathy Kooiker-Wheeler, Mayor PlanningIBuilding/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator October 1, 2004 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the EnvirbrimeritalD'efermlnafion for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Co mmittee (ERG) on October 1, 2004: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-110, ECF LOCATION: Non-project Action -Not Applicable DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to' attach antennas to existing utiility poles andlorlight standards located in the right-of-way within' residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles andlor light standarc::ts in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas_ Presently, free-standing wireless towers (moraopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for resid:ential use. This code amendment would alic:>w collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light stan<iards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommod;ate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum separation requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned la nd. The cabinets would need to be sited undergrc»und, or be sufficiently screened. Appeals of the environmen~al determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 15,2004. Appeals must be filed in writihgtogether with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7286 For the Environmental Revievv Committee, /1/ /l _____ ~'></ L--f/ ~' .f.:it.. Jennifer Henning Principal Planner cc: King County Wastewater r reatrnent Division WDFW, Stewart Reinbold Enclosure David F. Dietzman, OepartJment of Natural Resources WSDOT, Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, MLJckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Stephanie Kramer, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 * This paper contains 50% recycled material. 30% post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE APPLICATION NO(S): PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT: ) CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ADVISORY NOTES LUA04-110, ECF Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments City of Renton LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Non-project Action -Not Applicable DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton proposes to amend the VVireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone compan i es to attach antennas to existing utility poles and.lor light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a. limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendm ent would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light standards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum separation requirements. The proposal vvould also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-o"f-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened. LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Wo .... ks Development Planning Section Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunctiol7 with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning 1. Individual proposals would be subject to separate Administrative Conditional Use Permits at the time of the projeCt application. 2. Permission would need to be 9 ranted from either Puget Sound Energy or the City of Renton to either change out power poles/light standards. Plan Review 1. A Master Use Agreement will I:>e required for those applicants who do not have one on file with the City of Renton. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA04-110, ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT NAME: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton proposes to amend tl1e Wireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zo nes. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendm·ent would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light standards are approximately 35 feEt in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in heig ht, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting rn inimum separation requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of'-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: Non-project Action -Not applicable City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public VVorks Development Planning Section This Determination of Non-Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or befe>re 5:00 PM October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, W A 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed b-y City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: October 1, 2004 DATE OF DECISION: October 1, 2004 SIGNATURES: Dennis Culp, A ministr DATE! Community Services artment 44WLL# DATE Renton Fire Department STAFF REPORT • City 0# Renton DeparTment of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERe MEETING DATE Project Name: Applicant: Owner: File Number: Project Manager: Project Description: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area gsf: Site Area: RECOMMENDA TlON: October 1 , 2004 Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments City of Renton, P/S/PW Department Ren ton City Hall-6th Floor 105~ South Grady Way Re ..... ton, WA 98055 ATTN: Jennifer Henning N/A LU~-04-110, ECF Jennifer Henning The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and.Jor light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wirel ess towers (monopoles) are not penrnitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow coll<>cation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utiliity poles and light standards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum ser>aration requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets ~o be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened. Non-Project Action, City-wide in Residential Zones N/A Proposed NeVIl Bldg. Area: N/A N/A Total Building Area gsf: N/A St~ff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of NOIl-Significance (DNS). ERC Staff Report City of Renton PIBIPW Department Envirr gntal Review Committee Staff Report Wireless Communication Facilities Code ,... .. Iendments LUA-04-110, ECF REPORT OF October 1, 2004 Page 20'3 B. RECOMMENDA TION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: xx DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE xx Issue DNS with 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINA TION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGA TED. Issue DNS-M with 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. 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. 1. LIGHT & GLARE Impacts:. The non-project action is expected to result in additional height for replacement power poles and light standards located in the right-of-way, within residential zoning districts. The added height would accommodate wireless panel antennas in addition to street lights and electric wires. Street lights would continue to be mounted at the same level above the ground; therefore, glare would not increase. Mitigation Measures:. None recommended. Policy Nexus:. Not Applicable 2. Aesthetics Impacts:. Views from surrounding properties may be incrementally altered as wireless providers take advantage of the additional pole height to mount panel antennas. The antennas would be mounted parallel and flush to the pole, reducing the impact to individual properties. An administrative conditional use permit would be required for each installation, providing an opportunity for individual surrounding property owners to comment on a proposal to increase the pole height and affix panel antennas. Proposals could be conditioned, if appropriate, to reduce the impact to views. Mitigation Measures: No,.turther mitigation is recommended. Policy Nexus: Not Applicable D. MITIGA TION MEASURES None 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. ~ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 15, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the ERe Staff Report City of Renton PIBIPW Department Envirr 9ntal RevieVN Committee Staff Report Wireless Communication Facilities Code A,lIe ndments LUA-04-110, ECF REPORT OF October 1, 2004 Page 3 0'3 Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.8. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction wittr the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning 1. Individual proposals would be subject to separate Administrative Conditional Use Permits at the time of the project application. 2. Permission would need to be granted from either Puget Sound Energy or the City of Rentc:m to either change out power poles/light st~ndards. Plan Review 1. A Master Use A reement will be re uired for those a licants who do not have one on file V'Vith the Cit of Renton. ERe Staff Report City of Re'L .1 Department of Planning / Building / Public Ilk .•. S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-110, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 16,2004 APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer Hennin PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA ross: N/A LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: BUILDING 0I1,I18,'O/,,, SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential areas and within public right-of-ways. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth HousinG Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wher. dditional inforomation is needed t properlr, assess this proposal. s· Date r City of Re"con Department of Planning / Building / Public wtJrks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: "Fh.r1c.s COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-110, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 16,2004 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer Henning PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian SITE AREA: NlA BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless tacilities in residential areas and within public right-ot-ways. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing_ Air Aesthetics Water UghtlG/are Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS articular a ention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or Signature of Direct ed to, erly assess tho -. Cj /l.() ( ~ 1 Date City of RehAon Department of Planning / Building / Public Wurks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: APPLICANT: Cit of Renton PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments SITE AREA: NlA BUILDING AREA-,.,...,. ....... <"\"'1I.rTI1- LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential areas and within public right-of-ways. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Sign,,",e 01 Dl'~.Weep",,,,,,,,,tive Date City of Re,,,on Department of Planning / Building / Public Wurks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1~41C'\("\ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 " APPLICATION NO: LUA04-110, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 16,2004 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer Henning PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian " .... L.I SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA (gross): NlA C:Cn .... LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: -... , I ( tUO. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential areas and within pu~~/h~@-G~/ON A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in -which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Rein Department of Planning / Building / Public WorKs ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT· COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-110, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 16,2004 APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Jennifer !-Iennin PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments SITE AREA: NlA LOCATION: Citywide SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential areas ar«JlVYf:il:61~~M~~-/~f-ways. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code..J COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probabr41 Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary EnvIronment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Li.ahtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attel7tion to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is eeded to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Autho . Date ,~ a City of Re. I Department of Planning / Building / Public .s ENVIROI\IMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REV'IEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'Ao.n ~\ €A.J.J APPLICATION NO: LUA04-110, ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT TITLE: VVireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments SITE AREA: N1A LOCATION: Citywide COMMENTS DU~: SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 DA.. TE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 16,2004 ~\o f'\ PFlOJECT MANAGER: Jennifer HennilJ9,. oyl'\~\.\ ~ "" PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian BLJ ILDING AREA (gross): N/A c.t=. ~ 1. \) &.-.,,' SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: ,_,,0) Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential areas and within ,5bblic right-of-ways. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable .Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Afajor Information Impacts .Impacts Necessary Earth Housino Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS / Signature of Director or A Date City of Re. , Department-of Planning / Building / Public ~_, t(s ENVIROIVMENTAL & DEVELOPIWENT APPLICATION RE"VIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: n ~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBE~ 30, 2004 APPLICATION NO : LUA04-110, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEM~4 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: JennifJI ~~ rr: ~ ___ ! I f')) I ~./ '-'rm PROJECT TITLE: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendmenls PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian i/i I . ./ ~I/~ fA.' i U! SE? 7,. SITE AREA: NlA BUILDING AREA (Qross): Nt"'" ; LOCATION: City\vide WORK ORDER NO: / ~ u 2004 fIU/J SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Code Amendments to allow wireless facilities in residential arealanQ..WJ!~}!!:if,~b\fi~~ "-.../ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMEN7S ---.:.:.:.:; .~i"JT -~ / Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment to,OOOFeet t4,OOOFeet ) B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS f Aj" ~~ td~ fit (PI / We have reviewed this application . particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addit, nal information seeded to properly assess this proposal. Date I DATE: LAND USE NUMBER: APPUCATION NAME: September 16, 2004 LUA-04-110, ECF Wireless Communication Feclllt&es Code Amendment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton propol" to ar.w1end the Wireless Regulations to allow wlrelesalcellular telephone companies to attach antennas to exlstlngr utility poles and/or light standards located In the right-of-way within residential zonea. In addition, the proposa. would permit, on a limited bas's, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards In residential lonlng ·dlstrlcts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, tree-standlng wirelasEI: towers (monopoles) are not permitted In areas zoned for residential usa. This code amendment would allow c.,Uocatlon of utilities. wlreles. antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light atanda.:rda are approximately 35 feet In height. The propoeal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet In height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas. while maeUng minimum lepan!!!!ltlon requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located In the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide In AesldentialZones: AC, R." R-5, R-8, R·10. and R-'4 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the 'Lead Agency, the Cily of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the prop<:Jsed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C., 1 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional ONS process to give notice that a DNS Is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determtnatiolrl of Non-Significance (ONS). A 14-day appeal period wm follow the issuance of the DNS. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLINI G FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION PERMIT APPUCATION DATE: September 1 ~ 2004 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 3D, 2004 APPLICANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: JannHer HennlngIDeV'elopmenl Services Permlts/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review Other Permits which may be required: NlA Requested Studies: None Location where application may PlannlnglBuildlngIPublic Work.!s Division, Development Services Department, be reviewed: 1055 Sou1h Grady Way, Renl."n, WA 98055 Comments on the above application must be submlt1ed In _riling 10 Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, PIBIPW Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renlaon, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 30, 2004. If you have questions about this proposal. or wish to be nnada a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Gil Cerise, Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notifIed of ar.ay decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jennifer Henning Tel: (425)430-7286 e-mail: jhennlng@cl.renton.wa.u& If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further lnforTllatlon on this proposed project. complete this form and retum to: City of Renton, Development Planning. 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File NoJName: LUA04·110, ECF I Wireless Communication Facilities; Code Amendments NAME: ________________________________________________ __ " ..... "~",,~ ADDRESS: __ ..... ~ .... \\..YR-J IG-ct--"',., TELEPHONE NO.: ,\ A_ "' f-~ .... ~\S===s;O·-·::Q .." .: ",O~ ~~'" ~ ~ CERTIFICATION [ /0 N:-'-4tt-+S-~~ =<I~ iI (J):" .~ rr-:: iI ~ -" ~ "'U ~. ~ , "Y ~ '13 LI C .:: ~ :A' • ..a _-~ I, ~ ·.u,~ .._ I. Oerede -Jorc&n ' hereby certify that S copies of t~~~~~~~~\~G~--- above document were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places on or nearby I, ,\\,~\,,, ... ~ ...... --. ttIe described property on Sept lG I d...Ooy , Signe:·=-I-LJ.LL~;e.---2~~~~-~g A-'TTEST: Subscribed and swom»efore me, a Notary Public, in and for the W' ashington residing ~~ , on the 7...j}. day of ......... ~o...!..-_---=::::...=:=:...L.._ MARILYN KAMCHEFF MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-{)7 DATE: September 16, 2004 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-04-110, ECF APPLICATION NAME: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located In the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards In residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted In areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light standards are approximately 35 feet In height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum separation requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide in Residential Zones: RC, R·1, R-5, R-8, R-10, and R·14 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: September 16, 2004 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 30, 2004 APPLICANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Jennifer Hennlng/Development Services PermitslReview Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: Environmental (SEPA) Review N/A None Planning/Building/Public Works Division, Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, P/B/PW Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 30, 2004. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Gil Cerise, Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jennifer Henning Tel: (425) 430-7286 e-mail: jhenning@ci.renton.wa.us If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File No.lName: LUA04-110, ECF I Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments NAME: ________________________________________________ ___ ADDRESS: ____________________________________________ ___ TELEPHONE NO.: ________________ __ Date: To: From: CITY OF RENTON MEMOR~NDUM September 16, 2004 City of Renton -Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jennifer Henning Subject: Wireless Communication Facilities Code Amendments LUA04-110, ECF The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. You vvill be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at 430-7286 if you have any questions. Acceptance Memo 04·11 O.doc ~AOLf-tIO City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: t:DlAe W"r~/f~~ CDM~~kic.?fiOI1 /7Jt;ilif1.cJ (Z.C.V"SfD~S ADDRESS: CITY: ... ---. ----ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: AP FllCANT (if other than owner) NAME, c;. i t--r of ~e tlj-Ol'\ ~~·fw H~~(j tJ COMPANY (if applicable): PI;3~ VliVlj/ ~r~ I rIA bite w or~ tlt'pt-. ADDRESS: IOli? 110 if~~ r W4 I b~tJo~ CITY: ~CM t-o Vl i vJA ZIP: q ~ 0 c; 'i TELEPHONE NUMBER Lf~tf· Lf7JO 1 "L~{p CONTACT PERSON . . \ CITY; , ~fo'~ INA ZIP: ~i ()t], TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: 11 '7 ", LI~" 11.-~(p jl1enf1i~ctoi. r~.Jof1. I' {..7 r Wf(.LlS Q:\WEBIPW\DEVSERV\Forms\P\anning\masterapp,doc08I29/03 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)iLOCATION AND ZIP CODE: '+y -d 6t~~I..z.~w~ . -. 61 Wi e, -r(~'· . ...... . .. J2.V, 12--11 ~-~ J2..tb., #e.-I 0 , F?--I ~ KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): fJ/A EXISTING LAND USE(S): vaY'iou~ --, , ' , PROPOSED LAND USE(S): • N IA. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: All ~~~Gvth'al J2e'?t1M:fiO(.1e, PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION rtf applicable): N/A EXISTING ZONING': ~, ~;.I·,f?,~9"rz.·~,"I=--IO, fa-Ill : '. '" • .'·'.f ,'t "'. t ,/ -., N/A PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): ,N/A , . SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS To'BE DEDICATED , FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): N/A PROPOSED RESID~NTIAL ~i:SITY IN UNITS FER NET ACRE (if applicable): N A NUMBER OF PROPOSE~/)TS (if applicable): NA NUMBER OF NEW DW15/~G UNITS (if applicat>le): P. JJECT INFORMATION (cont"-.~ed) ~~ __ ~ ________ -L ____________________ ~ . . NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJ ECT VALUE: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (it applicable): 0 AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO BUILDINGS (if applicable):: 0 FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN Cit applicable): 0 GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA OF NON·RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if 0 HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. applicable): 0 SHORELINE STREAMS AND lAKES sq. ft. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (ifapplicabie): ' .. ' , . I • i , " '! i ... '.,., • • f ~ " . , , o WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY .. (Attacf':l.le9al ~e~cription on, separate sheet with the following information in'eluded) , , -~-" '. Q,UARTER OF SECTION -' .OWNSHIP ~, RANGE-, IN THE CITY SITUATE, IN-THE .'. ; OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. .., , ,', TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List alrland use appl ications being applied for: .. .' ", :' <.',-ECt= ' .. ~ (.II lI'. 1. 3. . .. " , " .. , t· "-• 'f ' .. . '. I ., 2. ;".' \ 0" 4. ;'1,\, . '" , . -:;; .. , J' t , -4 , . ; . ,. " " -I ~ , , . Staff will calculate applicable Je~s and postag~: ,$/. . , f ,. ..... ,,' "." . ' , , " AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP. , "i " . , , , , . I .. I, (Pririt N~eiS)' "tJe"'~I·f~Y" Hel.1~itlL " declare that I ~ (please check one) ~,the,Curre",t,~er·<:>f.the'property involved in this application or ~L1he authorized ~ntative to act for a corporatiol'l (please attach proof of authorization) and that the'foregoIng statements and answe.~ h"ereira contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, , ' I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ~u ~ ~~ .. .( , ~~' -' / signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislh~ voI~<9{.~ _ _ _ _ -~.~ ......... C..t.'1 ~~ • ~ uses and purposes mentioned in the instru~e,n!-. , i " . i..-.-7:"'~;'''''N KA~'III. .: ~""~SSION ~ ••• ~ I, (Signature 0 erlRepresentai ) -, f ~:~~~ OT :f--i ... ~\ ~ .~\.' "" _."," .. : :() ~ AI1I.";S)~ ~ .. " : r fTl. '-, ~. ~ : _._ en: ~ " ': " -----L--':>O<"";'---;F-"'-----'-.....;:;;.;;..--'--;-"""'---"--A-++---~ (f) \ ,oUSUC f : ~-., ,~:;.: .. '. ...~; (Signature of OwnerlRepresenta-we) , '\ r • . ~'''. ' Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Pbmning\masterapp,doc08I29/03 Notary Public in for the State of Washington , ' ", ~· •• 8-29 01 ••• .... 0.: . '" -. . ..~,-. ' •••• ,O~·W;:~;:;..\~c-:. .. ---" ...... .... , ,~\\\"""" ... .... MARILYN 'KAMCHEFF .' . Notary (Print), ___ .....:;MY::.:....:.:AP:....:.P-=O~lN:.:.;TM~ENT.:..:EX::.:P:....:;IR:.::;ES:=..~=-:29-0~7.:....-__ _ 'j' .' My appointment expires: __ -=,:..!.. "':'-'-' _____ _ Project Narrative Wireless Communication Facilities Code Revisions The City of Renton proposes to amend the Wireless Regulations to allo"" wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to eXisting utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless alntennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. EXisting utility poles and light standards are approximately 3:5 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with p<>les of up to 60 feet in heigh"t, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meetin·g minimum separation requirements. The proposal would also allow eqUipment cabinets to be located in the right-of--way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 42 5-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CH ECKLlST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a p raposal before making decisions. A., Environmental Impact: Statement (EIS) must be prep ared for all proposals with probabl E significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environrment. The purpose of this checklist is t<> provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reducE or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether aln EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposa.1. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are Significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise informati,on known, or give the best descripti<ln you can. You must answer eacl"l question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project pia,", s without the need to hirre experts. If you really do not kn<>w the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposed, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to th e questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questiol"ls apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will helJp describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to expl ain your answers or provide addit:ional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PR'OPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even th ough questions may be answered "does not apply." IN AD DITION, complete the SUPPLEIVIENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Post·it" Fax Note To ~ For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the .-eferences in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Wireless Communications Code Amendments 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Contact: Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way -6th Floor Renton, WA 98055 4. Date checklist prepared: September 15, 2004 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Adoption anticipated to occur in December, 2004 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. N/A 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. N/A 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. N/A 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City Council approval 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. This proposal would allow wireless/cellular telephone companies to attach antennas to existing utility poles and/or light standards located in the right-of-way within residential zones. In addition, the proposal would permit, on a limited basis, changing out of utility poles and/or light standards in residential zoning districts with taller support structures to accommodate wireless antennas. Presently, free-standing wireless towers (monopoles) are not permitted in areas zoned for residential use. This code amendment would allow collocation of utilities, wireless antennas, and street lights on the same pole. Existing utility poles and light standards are approximately 35 feet in height. The proposal could allow for the existing utility poles to be replaced with poles of up to 60 feet in height, that could also accommodate wireless antennas, while meeting minimum separation requirements. The proposal would also allow equipment cabinets to be located in the right-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned land. The cabinets would need to be sited underground, or be sufficiently screened 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. This is a non-project action city code amendment affecting the Wireless Regulations (RMC 4-4- 140F, G) and Zoning Use Table (RMC 4-2-060), Residential Districts Use Tables (RMC 4-2-070 A through R), Conditions Associated with Zoning Use Tables (RMC 4-2-080A), and Definitions (RMC 4-11-230). B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____ _ N/A b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) N/A c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. N/A d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. N/A 2. e. N/A f. N/A g. N/A h. N/A AIR a. N/A Describe the purpose, type, and approximate <luantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. About what percent of the site will be cover·ed with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Proposed measures to reduce or control erosi on, or other impacts to the earth, if any: What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (Le., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N/A 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. N/A 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. N/A 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. N/A b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. N/A 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: N/A 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: __ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other __ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs __ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N/A c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N/A d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other ________ _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other _________ _ Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ______ _ b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N/A. . c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain N/A d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N/A 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. N1A b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. N/A c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Equipment cabinets may contain back up power supplies, including batteries. The cabling and other equipment will need to be enclosed in a cabinet and may be either within a vault or above-ground in the public right-of-way or in a leased area on private property. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? N/A 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. N/A 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N/A 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Public right-of-ways in residentially zoned areas of the City. classifications include: RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 and R-14 zones. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Affected zoning • N/A c. Describe any structures on the site. N/A d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? N/A e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Residential zoning classifications: Re, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Resi·dential designations: Residential Rural (RR), Residential Single Family (RSF), Resi dential Options (RO), Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) . g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environrrlentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. NIP>... i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? N/A j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? N/A k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is cc>mpatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: 9. H<lUSING a_ Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. ~JA b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be e'liminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. • '. N/A c. Proposed lTileasures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure{s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. Proposal affects antennas attached to existing or new utilitY'" poles and street light standards. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or -obstructed? Maximum building height in the residential zones is limited to 30 feet at the mid-point of a pitched roof. Prop-osal would result in the potential extension of existing utility poles or the change out of utility poles with taller poles to permit the attachm'Ent of wireless antennas. Poles could be ex~ended to a height of just below 60 feet for the antennas. Some views from could be altered by the proposal, but would not likely be obstructed. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. Proposals would be evaluated through an Administrativ·e Conditional Use Permit process which would consider impacts on nearby uses. Eacil1 application would likely require the applicant to submit photosimulations illustrating impacts from surrounding areas. 11. LIGHT AND GLA.RE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposal is expected to result in additional height for utility poles. The height at which light standards are mounted would remain unchanged. The p raposal is not expected to add additionalligl1t and glare, but to add height to the utility poles and light standards. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The proposal is expected to result in additional height for utility poles. The height at which light standards a.re mounted would remain unchanged. The proposal could incrementally affect views due to added pole height and the addition of anten nas. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12 _ RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? N/A b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A 1 3. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? IF so, generally describe. N/A b. Generally describe any landl'Tlarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and hi'ghways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. N/A b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? l-Iow many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not includ,jng driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? The proposal could result in equipment cabinets being located in the public right-of-way. Each installation of antennas/equipment cabinets or change out of utili1ty poles would be reviewed separately at a site specific ileve!. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) "Water, rail, or air transportation? If so, genera!lly describe. N/A f. How many vehicular trips pe r day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: N/A 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. N/A b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Wireless/cellular facilities would be attached to existing or new utility poles or street light standards. c. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Date: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets should only be used for actions involving decisions on pOlicies, plans and ro rams. You do not need to fill out these sheets for ro·ect actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in c<> njunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware .of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emlSSIOI'lS to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposal would not likely increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The proposal would not likely affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: None 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposal would not likely deplete energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? The proposal would not likely use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for governmental protection. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce inlpacts are: None 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing pi ans? The proposal would result in the collocation of utilities on the same support pole. For example, utility poles and light standards would also be able to accommodate panel antennas for wireless facilities. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? N/A Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: N/A 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal does not conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: --,Jelll1,\W U~Iit~1j 2 Name Printed: cJ~ ~4 Date: ~{l (J fO V ENVCHLST.DOC REV City of Renton PUBLIC INFORM A TION HANDOUT September 13, 2004 Wireless Communication Facilitie:s Code Revisions For additional information, pl'ease contact: Jennifer Henning, Project Manager; City of Renton Development Services Division; (42~) 430-7286 ISSUE: Current City Code does not permit monopoles or extension of existing utility poles for cellular/wireless antennas in residentially zoned neighborhoods. Wireless/cellular companies are having difficulty providing good phone coverage in certain Renton neighborhoods as a result of this restriction. Staff have developed draft a.mendments to Chapter 4 of Title 4 during review of the existing Wireless Regulations. These recommended amendments respond to the expressed needs of the wireless purveyors, allowing the replacement of existing power poles or light standards with taller poles on a limited basis in order 10 accommodate wireless antennas. These limited pole replacements would only be allovved if the need is clearly demonstrated by the service provider, and phone coverage ca lnnot be provided using other permitted antenna locations. RECOMMENDATION: The Development Services !Division recommends amending the Wire less Regulations. The amendments would: 1. Allow wireless communication antennas (of up to 16 feet) to be placed on existing power poles (subject to approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or existing City street light standards. 2. Allow replacement of e)dsting power poles (subject to the approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or replacement of existing City street lights with taller support structures in order to allow the installation of antennas up to 16 feet in height. 3. Permit new antenna gre,ater than 10 feet in height, or pole replacement for use as a monopole, only when it is demonstrated by the service provider that no practical alternative is available to provide the same level of phone service. 4. Allow the installation of associated equipment cabinets within pu blic street right-of- way or on abutting re sidentially zoned properties. These structures would be required to be located underground, or in suitable locations with appropriate screening. DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: STAFF CONTACT: SUBJECT: ISSUE: • CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGIBUILDINGIPUBLIC --WORKS MEMORANDUM March 10, 2004 I>on Persson, Council President Members of the Renton City CouncIl Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Gregg Zimmenn,,~inistrator Neil Watts, Development Services Director, x-721S Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner, x-7294 Wireless Communication Facilities in Residential Neighborhoods The City of Renton Municipal Code does not currently per:Jnit monopoles or extensions of existing utility poles for cellular antennas in residentially zone<l neighborhoods. Cellular phone companies are having difficulties providing good phone coverage in certain Renton neighborhoods as a result of this restriction. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approvrl of changes to the City's existing wireless regulations to allow for new monopoles in residential neighborhoods, on a very limited basis. New monopoles in residential neighborhoods '\;'Vould be limited to replacing existing power poles or light standards with taller poles. These liIDited pole replacements would onl-y be allowed if the need is clearly demonstrated by the service provider, and phone coverage cannot be provided using other permitted antenna locations. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The City's existing wireless regulations were adopted in 1997. The regulations are protective of residential neighborhoods, and do not allow for new mon~-poles, including replacing existing power poles to install cellular antennas.. Since that ti:Il1e, use of cellular phones has significantly increased. The wireless service carriers have reported capacity problems due to the limited number of exi sting wireless towers and the amount of calls these existing towers can handle. Wireless service providers have requested code amendments that would allow the wireless network to better function. Problems identified by tile wireless industry include: Evaluation of "Wireless Communication Facilities January 26, 2004 Page 2 • Inadequate coverage in residential neighbor hoods: Some residents don't have "in- home coverage" at all. In some cases, where t here is in-home coverage, drop}>ed calls can also be a problem (e.g. a call is lost when walking down to the basement). • Overall capacity issues: During times of peak use (e.g. when there is a traffic jam on 1-405), the wireless network may become o"erloaded. If additional, smaller scale facili ties can be added to supplement the existiI1g tower (monopole) system, the number of "s ystem busy"/error messages and droppecl calls will be reduced. Currently, calls may be lost during the hand off from one large tower to another. CONCLUSION: We request the Council refer this code amendment request to the Planning and Development Committee to evaluate the feasibility of amendin.g the wireless regulations peJ staff's recommendation. The Committee is requested to review and approve code changes to address the following issues: Within residential areas: L Allow wireless communication antennas (of up to 16 feet) to be placed on eXIstmg povver poles (subject to approval of Puget S <mnd Energy) and/or existing City street lights. 2. Allow replacement of existing power poles (subject to approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or replacement of existing City street ligh 1:s with taller support structures in order to allow the installation of antennas up to 16 feet in height. 3. Any new an~enna greater than 10 feet in height, or any pole replacement for use as a monopole, would only be aI10wed if it were <lemonstrated by the service pro-vider that no ]?ractical alternative is available to provide the same level of phone service. 4. AIl<lw the installation of associated equipmen~ cabinets within public streetrigl1t-of-way or on abutting residentially zoned properties. These structures would be required to be located underground, or to be in a suitable Ioe ation with appropriate screening. Cc: Jay CoviDlgton. Chief Administrative Officer Jennifer Henning. Principal Planner The purpose of the attached amendments to our Wireless Communication Facility regulations is to comply with the Council Planning and Development Committee's request to d raft regulations permitting wireless communication facilities within public rights-of-ways in residential areas and to incorporate three pre-existing administrative determinations, clarifying the wireless regulations, attached. Amend RMC Section 4-2-060P, Zoning Use Table; and Sections 4-2-070A through R, Residential District Use Tables to read as shown on Exhibit A, attached. Amend note #45 of Section 4-2-080A to read as follows: 45. For Monopoles Proposed on Private Property: May be allowed via a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit provided that the site is over one acre in size and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel; otherwise the use is prohibited. For Monopoles Proposed on Public Right of Way: May be allowed via an Administrative Conditional Use Permit and Right of Way Use Permit. 48. A Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit is required. However, this use is typically pProhibited if located within three hundred feet (300') of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone, unless the Development Services Division determines that all residentially zoned property within three hundred feet (300') of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to critical areas regulations (RMC 4-3- 050), then the new wireless support structure can be reviewed asotherwise may be allowed \\'ith a Hearing Examiner Csonditional HUse Pf:}ermit. F. STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL TYPES OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES: 1. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets~ ~----~--------~ F J:-1o -+ G AU: ,0 FoU:ND l,.f 4 -4 -1'10 '. ru Location: Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communication equipment and associated cabling should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. A shelter or cabinet used to house radio electronic equipment and the associated cabling connecting the equipment shelter or cabinet to the support structure shall be contained wholly 'Nithin a building or structure, or otheANise appropriately concealed, camouflaged or located underground. However. in those cases where it can be demonstrated by the applicant to the reviewing official that the equipment VVhen they cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and/or landscaped to the satisfaction of the reviewing official. in conformance 'Nith RMC 4 4 070, Landscaping. b) Landscaping and Screening: Landscaping. for accessory equipment located on private property shall include a minimum fifteen foot (15~) sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building need not be landscaped but shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. Accessory equipment located on public right of way shall be screened and/or landscaped as determined by the reviewing official through the Conditional Use Permit Process. Accessory equipment facilities may not be enclosed with exposed metal surfaces. c) Size: The applicant must provide documentation to the reviewing official that the size of any accessory equipment is the minimum possible necessary to meet the provider's service needs. 2. Visual Impact: Site location and development shall preserve the pre-existing 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 01' Accessory Equipment Shelters and Cabinets: Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communication equipment should be located 'Nithin buildings or pia ced underground 'Nhen possible. 'Nhen 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 RMC 4 4 070, Landscaping. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shielded fro m vie¥l. Accessory equipment facilities may not be enclose d with exposed metal surfaces. {Editor's note: Deleted as redundant to content of previous page}. 4. Maximum 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 generators shall occur between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a. tn. 5. Fencing: Security fencing, if used, shall be painted or coated with n<>nreflective color. Fencing shall comply with the requirements listed in RMC 4-4-040, Fences and Hedges. 6. Lighting: lowers 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. 7. Advertising Prohibited: 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. 8. Building Standards: Wireless communication support structures shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic Industries AssociationlTelecommunications Industries Association (EIAlTIA) 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 within property boundaries and avoid habitable structures, public streets, utility lines and other telecommunications towers. 9. Radio Frequency Standards: 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 thett:Hs-permit. 10. Special Requirements for Equipment Shelters/Cabinets within the Public Right-of-Way: G. STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF WIRELESS FACILITIES: For definitions of specific types of wireless communication facilities, see RMC 4-11-230. Development standards for specific types of wireless communication facilities shall be as follows: STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES O~ WI~~L~SS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES In addition to individual zone requirements unless otherwise specified below c=J1 MICRO FACILITY II MINI FACILITY II MACRO FACILITY II MONOPOLE I r MONOPOLE 11--11 LATTICE TOWERS II :g, A Micro Facility shall be A Mini Facility may be located A Macro Facility may be NA NA NA I oS located on existing buildings, on buildings and structures located on buildings and ;g poles or other existing provided that the immediate structures provided that the I cil support structures. A Micro interior wall or ceiling Immediate interior wall or c Facility may locate on adjacent to the facility is not a ceiling to the facility Is not a ~ buildings and structures designated residential space. designated residential space . . 2 provided that the Interior wall ~ or ceiling immediately o adjacent to the facility is not ..J designated residential space. All wireless communication All wireless communication All wireless communication All wireless communication All wireless communication All wireless communication facilities and attached facilities and attached facilities and attached facilities and attached facilities and attached facilities and attached wireless communication wireless communication wireless communication wireless communication wireless communication wireless communication facilities must comply with the facilities must comply with the facilities must comply with the facilities must comply with the facilities must comply with the facilities must comply with L Airport zoning regulations, as Airport zoning regulations, as Airport zoning regulations, as Airport zoning regulations, as Airport zoning regulations, as Airport zoning regulations, as listed in RMC 4-3-020. listed in RMC 4-3-020. listed in RMC 4-3-020. listed in RMC 4-3-020. listed in RMC 4-3-020. listed In RMC 4-3-020. I Micro Facilities shall comply Mini Facilities shall comply Macro Facilities shall comply Monopole I Facility Maximum Monopole II Facility Maximum ~~TowerkHI .with the height limitation with the height limitation with the height limitation Height: Less than 60 feet for Height: 35 feet higher than Facility Maximum Height: 35 specified for all zones except specified for all zones except specified for all zones except all zones. the regular permitted feet higher than the regular m as follows: Micro Facilities as follows: Mini Facilities may as follows: Macro Facilities . . . maximum height for the permitted maximum height for ci may exceed the height exceed the height limitation may exceed the height Macro FaCIlities are the applicable zoning district, or the applicable zoning district, 'tl limitation by 6 feet, or in the by 10 feet, or in the case of limitation by 16 feet, or in the largest a~tac.hedf ... 150 feet, whichever is less. or 150 feet, whichever is less. ; case of existing structures the existing structures the case of existing structures the communication aCllities :E antennas may extend 6 feet antennas may extend 10 feet antennas may extend 16 feet allo~ed on a Monopole I .~ above the existing structure. above the existing structure. above the existing structures. FaCIlity. :x: E Placement of an antenna on a ~ nonconforming structure shall ')( not be considered to be an co expansion of the == nonconforming structure. c=J1 MICRO FACILITY II MINI FACILITY II MACRO FACILITY II MONOPOLE I ....------" h " Ii ca ~ " c ca 1: CI 'Q) -. :t:" E l!l "'c E:o: .-c lU Q ==~ m (, " c ca 1: CI 0; _ :t:" E!j ::J C E:o: .-c ~o :t~ See above. See above. Placement of an antenna on a nonconfonning structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconfonning structure. See above. Placement of an antenna on a nonconfonnlng structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconfonnlng structure. See above. AnleflAa-l=lei#.Ant~flflas maY-flet·exGeed-more-tt-lafl-1·5 feet abe'le their suppertffi€t strl,lctl:JFe. mono~ole, lattice tewer, building er ether s\ruGture,. Antenna~ eqval to or less than Hi feet in height or lolp to 4 inches In diameter may be a component of a Monopole I Facility. Anteflflas which extend above the wireless commlolnications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height-ef...tl:le-MaflGpGIe.+ wireless-commtlnicatiens suppart structlolre. For example, the maximum height €If antennas ' .... hich may be iAstalleG-GA-lt:le-suppart stfucture-wuld·be-1~ maI«AQ-the-ma~m permitted height of the SI'~r"Gt .. re and antennas 75 feet (eO feet ~llolS 4Mee~ See above. MONOPOLE II JI LATTICE TOWERS Macro Facilities are the largest pennitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Monopole II facility. Antenna HeiB~f\aS may not exceed more than 15 feet above their sl;J~~ortlng stFuct*lr-e,mooepele,lattice tawef;-OOildifl~thef strlolcture. Antenna/Structure Height: ." AnteAfl3s-whfch-ex\eflG-aeave the-Maflopele-ll-wireless cornmuniGati9fl&-suppart structureAntennas that extend above the Monopole II wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. f"ar al(amf)le. the maximllm AeigAI far a Menopele-II-facilfty-shall-be 4aQ-f~et-aflG-·th&fAaxlmum hei§Rt-Gf-aflteflflas-wAiGh-may be installed on tAe support stFucWr-e could be 15 feet. making the maximum pefffiitletl-heigt:lt-of...tl:le SUppeFt-slfuc!ure-aoo 3fltennas-f-'\.e€i-feet4W-feet ...... 1 ..... -t r:::. 1,..,. ....... \ Macro Facilities are the largest pennitted attached wireless communication facilities allowed on a Lattice Tower. Af>tBRna-l=leight: I' ntennas may not eKceed more than 15 feel abO'J9 their sl:lp~orUM structure,manapele,lattice tower,..Glolildffig-ar-other struGtu~ Antenna/Structure Height: AnteAnas-whiGhAntennas that extend above the Lattice Tower wireless communications support structure shall not be calculated as part of the height of the wireless communications support structure. Far:.-example,tt:le maximlolm height for a Lattir~ TO'o\Jer BRall l;Je 150 feet an the ffiaxiffil;lffi helBht af 3Atenfl3s-whiGi+-may-be lnslalled-oo-!hu~~M! struGture-couid-Ge45-feet, making the maximum permitted height of the s~pport structure and aflt9flAas-(-1.€)5-feet4W-feet I'lus-1-5·fBst-j, c=J1 MICRO FACILITY II MINI FACILITY fM-ACRO FACILI'Ty-lr----MONOP()LE I r---MONOPOI...E II II LATTICE TOWERs-l I ~:u 2:1-5 feet. 10:1-5 feet. 1645 feet. 1615 feet. 16:1-5 feet. 164G feet. o ~ ~~ 8.i .-0 "0. ~ 0 .-c: ~~ ;C c::s !t) ~2 Euq :::It:~ E 8.-')( C:c ~~! GJ Shall be same color as the Shall be same color as the Shall be same color as the NA NA NA. I ~building, pole or 6*i&tiflg-bullding, pole or ~building, pole or .. support structure on which it support structure on which it support structure on which it ~ is proposed to be located. is proposed to be located. is proposed to be located. to) N/A N/A N/A See subsection F of this See subsection F of this See subsection F of this ---Section, Standards. Section, Standards. Section, Standards. See-slcleseGtioo-f-t)f-tnis See-s\,lsseGtiGJ+-f-t)f-tnis See-sOOseGtiGl'l-F-9f..this SeGtleA,-StaOOal'G&, Seotion. StaAGaro&, SeGl:k:m,-Standards. Sl:IalI-ee landscaped in Shall ee landscaped in Shall be landsGapeG-ffi oonformanoe with R~4C 4 4 oonformanoo '''ith RMC 4 4 conformance with with R~4C 070, Landscaping. A 070, LanescafliA@. A 4 4 070, Landscaping. A minimum landscaping area 0/ mInimUM IMd~~pina arga of minimum landscaping area of ~ 15 feet shall be required 15 feet shall be required 15 feet shall be required .~ surrounding the facility, or surrounding the facility, or surrounding the facility, or :c equivalent screening as equivalent screening as equivalent screening as ti approved by the Reviewing approved by the Reviewing approved by the Reviewing ~ Official.A.dministrator. Officiail\dministrator. Officiall\dministrator. ~ Landscaping shall include Landscaping shall include Landscaping shall include 'Q. trees, shrubs and ground trees, shrubs and ground trees, shrubs and ground ~ cover. The required cover. The required cover. The required '0 landscaped areas shall landscaped areas shall landscaped areas shall 16 include an automated Include an automated include an automated ..J irrigation system. irrigation system. irrigation system. 4-11 -230, Definitions W WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES -TERMS RELATED TO: 4-11-230 B. 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 degree (360°) radial pattern, and which is up to sixteen feet (16') in height and up to four inches (4") 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 degrees (360°). 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. a)Parabolic Antenna, Large: A parabolic antenna greater than 39.37 inches in diameter but not to exceed 200" in diameter. 6. Whip Antenna: see Omni-Directional Antenna. ~ ~ < tn' 2- N " ::: I\:) ..... CD I ZONING USE TABLE Communication broadcast and rela towers Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, where not otherwise listed In Use Table Blank.Not Allowed P.Permltted Use P#.Permltted provided condition can be met H3B H29 H66 H66 AD.Admlnlstratlve Conditional Use HaHearlng Examiner Conditional Use H3B H66 ~ J + 11\ H H H H66 H66 H66 AC.Accessory Use #.Condltlon(s) H H H66 H66 H66 I H66 Uses may be further restricted by: RMC 4-3-020, Airport Related Height and Use Restriction; RMC 4-3-050C, Aquifer Protection Regulations; RMC 4-3-040C, Uses Permitted In the Automalilmprovement Districts; RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Requirements I c,.- f'a( OP::> (; c. ~1'1ttS) L-CM"t>e.. . AO IA1/ lAP IA~ 4~ 45 45 AT? lAP I AD 4-5 45 A-5 PMIP4-4 H45\H45 Itt4-S I H45\ H4S \ H45 ~ IpM-lp44lp4+ IA~I,% " 4-L·~/LlA -nC0VUn\...C \...VI'I0CMVI\IIVI'I \t1\...} (Ord. 4-773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4840, 5-8-2000; Arnd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003) TYPES = {>{&J Nee;D -ro ArtaJD AU--~ INV.VIOVA\... VS£ .. ~ ~ 13£ (pf..lSl ,,~.. Wtrlt 4 J Z -000 ) iJcrU:f~ ZOtJ (f0(d U~ TASL£ ~ A -2 -070A A' z.. ~ 070 B C " P ~ r q H ( 3 K L- M N o p ex R Blank = Not Allowed P=Pennittec:l Use AC=Accessory Use H=Hearing Examiner Conditional Use AD~Adminlstnitive Cc.nditional Use #=Conclition(s) P,=Permitted provided condition can be met Uses may be further restricted by: RMC 4-3-020, Airp<>rt Related Height and Use Restrictions; RMC 4-3-OSOC, Aquifer Protection Regulations; RMC 4-3-04OC, Uses Permitted in the A.'utomall Improvement Districts; RMC 4-3-090, Shorefine Master Program Requirements (Revised 3/03) 2 -20 .~ . MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: REFERENCE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: section 4-2-()6()J,Zoning Use Table, of the City of Renton Municipal Code RMC) and RMC section 4-11-230, Definition of "Parabolic Antenna, Large) under the classification "Wireless Communication Facilities". N/A zoning districts permitting large ParabolicAntennasand definition of "ParabofIC Antennas, Large". Parabolic antennas that are 39.37" in diameter or smaller are classified as "Macro", "Mini" or "Micro Facilities" and the City's Development Regulations dear1y stipulate which zones permit these facilities. However,tl1eDevebpment Regulations presently do not stipulate which zones would accommodate parabolic antennas larger than 39.3r in diameter. The definitiOn of Parabolic Antenna is: "a bo\NI-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission {of} radio communications signals in a spedflc directional pattern. JUSTIFICATION: The gap in the development regulations between the smaller antenna structures and the larger support structures should be clarified. Since the impacts of a larger parabolic antenna would begreaterthan those ofa "Macro Facility" but less than those of a large support structure such as a "Monopole 1", the use should be pennitted in the varioUs zones subject to a greater level of consideration than for Macro Facilities, but requiring less reviewthan fora support structure. DECISION: "Parabolic Antennas, Large" shall be defined as: "A parabolic antenna greater than 39.3r in diameter but not to exceed 200" in diameter. A parabolic antenna greater than 2CX)" in diametershall be considered asa Monopole 1"for the purposes of determining permissible zoning districts. AParabolic Antennas, Large" shall be allowed in the various zoning districtsas shown on the attached zoning table. ZONING ~ ~{,J~ &IA~ ADMINISTRATO~' U(h 1111YtJ= APPROVAL ~ . DATE: 'l-{ '2./ 0 1 APPEAL PROCESS: To appeal this determination, a written appeal-aa::ompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee-must be filed with the City's Hearing EXaminer (1055 SOuth Grady way, Renton, WA 98055, 425-430-6515> nO more than 14 days from the date of this decision. Your submittal should explain the basis for the appeal. section 4-8-110 of the Renton Municipal Code provides further infonnation on . the appeal process. ~ 076 § .) .) ~ BlankllNot Allowed AD.Admlnlatratlv. CondItIonal U •• .. XZ391H I X23ilH I X2391M I X23QIH I X23QIH I X2~gM I ~ X' X x x x X X X x P.Prlmary U •• H-H .. arlnsa Examl.ner Cond.ltlonal U •• x x x S.leoondary U •• t.Co.ndltlon(.) ACaAco •••. ory U •• XlJProhlblted Sp.,clflcaUy TaTemporary Use \0 " MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: REFERENCE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: JUSTIFICATION: DECISION: FUTURE CODE UPDATE: RMC Section 4-2-080A, Wireless Communication Facilities Zoning Condition (#241). N/A Determining the applicability of the prohibition of wireless support structures within 300 feet of undevelopable sites with residential zoning (RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14). The City has received a proposal to replace an existing wireless support structure within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone with a new taller wireless support structure capable of co-tocating additional wireless facilities. Section 4-2-080A (zoning condition #241) states: [W"treless support structures are] prohibited if pn the CA zone and] located within three hundred feet (300') of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-B, R-10, or R-14 Zone, unless the Monopole /I Facility is to be constructed on property where wireless communication support structures presently operate, and the new Monopole 1/ facility wl/ not exceed the height of the existing support structures. Otherwise,. may be aI/owed with an administrative conditional use permit." The intent of this cBndition was to prohibit wireless support structures from being located in close proximity to existing or Mure residential uses throughout the city. However, within the Renton City limits there are numerous cases where undevelopable properties with sensitive areas have been given residential zo.,ing. The goals of the Wireless Communication regulations are t.o: -encourage the location of towers in nonresidential areas and minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; encourage strongly the joint use of new and existing tower sites; and enhance the <Jbility of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effeciively, and efficiently (RMC4-4-140B): Where wireless support structures are proposed within 300 feet of a residential zone, these structures should not be outright prohibited in cases where the sites are not developable due to critical areas associated with the site. Since many residentially zoned sites are essentially undevelopal>le, the Development Services Division should be allowed to revieVY wireless support structures located within 300 feet of residential ZOAe through the administrative conditional use permit process. If the site is considered to be undevelopable, this would assist in achieving the code's goals of co- location without resulting in negative impact to existing or future residential uses. Request for approval of wireless support structures located within 300 feet of aRC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 zone may be processed as Administrative Conditional Use Pennits if the residential zones in question are detennined to be undevelopable by the Development Services Division. This determination should also be incorporated into the Rente> fl Municipal Code during the next code housekeeping effort by amending Section 4-2- 080A , Wireless Communication Facirlties Zoning Condition (~41) to read as follows: -. 'j I ZONING ADIVIINISTRA TOR APPROVAL: DATE: APPEAL PRDCESS: 241. Prohibited if located within three hundred feet (300') of a residentially developable RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone·;·; however. m~~!!9.wed by an Administratiye ConditionalJlse Permi!jfuRle&o 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. If the Development Services Division determines that the property within 300 feet of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to critical area regulations. then the new wireless support structure can be reviewed as· an Administrative Conditional Use. OtttePNise,may.be-aUowed-With-an-administJ:ativ oonditioRal yse permit. To appeal this determination, a written appeaJ-accomp.anied by the required $75.00 filing fee-must be filed with the City's Hearing Examiner (1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055,425-430-6515) no more than 14 days from the date of this decision. Your submittal should explflin the basis for the appeal. Section 4-8-110 of the Renton Municipal Co~~ provides further information on the appeal process. MUNICJPAl- CODE SECTIONS: REFERENCE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: JUSTIFICATION: DECISION: FUTURE CODE UPDATE: RMC Section 4-4-140F3, Screening of Accessory Equipment Shelters and Cabinets. NlA Determining the applicability of screening requirements for accessory wireless equipment shelters and cabinets. The City has received several proposals to co-locate wireless facilities on existing monopole structures throughout the City. Section 4-4-140F3 states: "accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communication equipment should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. When they cannot be located in buifdings, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and landscaped to screen views from adjacent residential or commercial zoned properties.· This provision could be interpreted to require applicants to fence, screen and landscape all new equipment shelters and cabinets, regardless of co-location or existing site conditions. However, section 4-4-140G, which refers to Standards for Specific Types of Wireless Facilities, gives the Administrator greater flexibility in determining the screening requirements for monopole and lattice tower structures. It seems reasonable to anow the same fleXIbility for smaller accessory structures. Therefore, an interpretation is necessary to determine the screening requirements for accessory eq~ipment shelters and cabinets associated with proposed co-/ocation wireless facilities in all zones. The goals of the Wireless Communication ordinance are to: -encourage the location of towers in nonresidential areas and minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; encourage strongly the joint use of new and existing tower sites; and enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such servi,.,e-s to the community quickly, effectively, and efficienffy.· Based on those goals indicated in section 4-4-140B the Administrator should have the same fleXIbility for accessory equipment shelters and cabinets as provided in the Standards for Specific Types of Wireless Facilities for new monopoles and lattice towers. Therefore, the screening provisions listed under section 4-4-140F3 should be interpreted to allow sight-obscuring fences and/or landscaping, or, screening as otherwise approved by the Administrator for all new accessory equipment shelters and cabinets. Accessory wireless equipment shelters or cabinets, regardless of zoning designation, shall be screened by a sight-obscuring fence and/or landscaping, or, as otherwise approved by the Administrator. This determination should also be incorporated into the Renton Municipal Code during the next code housekeeping effort by amending Section 4-4- 140F3 to read as follows: 3. Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communication equipment should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. When they cannot be located in buildings, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be screened by a sight-obscuring fence feooed;-GGf-eened-and I or landscapedl!:!g. or, as otherwise approved by the Administrator to screen ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL: DATE: APPEAL PROCJ:SS: views from abutting or adjacent residential or commercial zoned properties or public right-of-way. ,To appeal this determination, a written appeal-aCCQmpanied t>y the required $75.00 filing fee-must be filed with the City's Hearing Examiner (1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, 425-43O-E515) no more than 14 QaYs from the date of this decision. Your submittal s"o~d explajn the basjs for the appeal. Section 4-8-110 of the Renton Municipal Code provides further information on the appeal process. .. City of Renton PUBLIC INFORMA.TION HANDOLLT SeptemtJer 13, 2004 Wireless Communication Fa'cili~ies Code Revis;ions For additional information, please contact: Jennifer Hem,ing, Project Manager; City of Renton Development Services Division; (425) 430-7ZS6. ISSUE: Current City Code does not permit monopoles or extension of existing utility poles for cellular/wireless antennas in residentially zoned neighborhoods _ Wireless/cellular companies are having difficulty providing good phone coverage in certain Renton neighborhoods as a result of this restriction. Staff have developed draft amendments to Chapter 4 of Title 4 during review of the existing Wireless Regulations. These recommended amendme nts respond to the expressed needs of the wireless purveyors, allowing the replacement of existing power poles or light standards with taller poles on a limited basis in order to accommodate wireless antennas. These limited pole replacements would only be allowed if the need is clearly demonstrated by the service provider, and phone coverage cannot be provided using other permitted antenna locations. RECOMMENDATION: The Development Services Division recommends amending the Wireless Regulations. The amendments would: 1. Allow wireless communication antennas (of up to 16 feet) to be placed on existing power poles (subject to approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or existing City street light standards. 2. Allow replacement of existing power poles (subject to the approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or replacement of existing City street lights with taller support structures in order to allow the installation of antennas up to 16 feet in heig ht. 3. Permit new antenna greater than 10 feet in height, or pole replacement for use as a monopole, only when it is demonstrated by the service provi der that no practical alternative is available to provide the same level of phone service. 4. Allow the installation of associated equipment cabinets within public street right-of- way or on abutting residentially zoned properties. These structures would be required to be located underground, or in suitable locations with appropriate screening. DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: STAFF CONTACT: SUBJECT: ISSUE: CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGfBUILDINGIPUBLIC WORKS ME MORANDUM March 10, 2004 Don Perss<>n, Council President Members o-t the Renton City Council Mayor KatJ-ty Keolker-Wheeler Gregg ZimElerm",~nistrator Neil Watts, Development Services Director, x-721 8 Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner, x-7294 Wireless Communication Facilities in Residential Neighborhoods The City of Renton Municipal Code does not currently permit monopoles or extensions of existing utility poles for cellular antennas in residentially zoned neighborhoods. Cel1ular phone companies are having difficulties providing good phone coverage iB certain Renton neighborhoods as a result of this restri ction. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of changes to the City'S existing wireless regulations to allow for new monopoles in residential neighborhoods, on a very limited basis. ~ ew monopoles in residential neighborhoods would be li:nrited to replacing existing power poles or light standards with taller poles. These limited pole replacements would only be allowed if -the need is clearly demonstrated by the service provider, and phone coverage cannot be pro-vided using other permitted antenna locations. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The City's existing wireless regulati<>ns were adopted in 1997. The regulati.ons are protective of residential neighborhoods, and do IlOt allow for new monopoles, including replacing existing power poles to instal1 cellular an1::ennas. _ Since that time, use of cellular phones has significantly increased. The wireless service carriers have reported capacity problems due to the limited number of existing wireless towers and the amount of calls these existing towers can handle. Wireless service providers have requested code amendments th:at would allow the wireless network to better function. Problems identified by the wireless indu stry include: Evaluation of Wireless Communication Facilities January 2&,2004 Page 2 • Inadequate coverage in residential neighborhoods: Some residents don't have "in- home coverage" at all. In SOIrle cases, where there is in-home coverage, dropped calls can also be a problem (e.g. a ca.]] is lost when walking down to the basement). • O""Verall capacity issues: During times of peak use (e.g. when there is a traffic jam on 1-405), the wireless network may become overloaded. If additional, smaller scale facilities can be added to supplement the existing tower (monopole) system, the number of "system busy"/error messages and dropped calls wi1J be reduced. Currently, calls m-ay be lost during the hand of1" from one large tower to another. CONCLUSION: We request the Council refer this code amendment request to the Planning and Development Committee to evaluate the feasibility of amending the wireless regulations per staff's recommeDdation. The Committee is requested to review and approve code changes to address the folloY'Ving issues: Within residential areas: 1. AJlow wireless communicatiDn antennas (of up to 16 feet) to be placed on existing power poles (subject to approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or existing City street lights. 2. AJlow replacement of existing power poles (subject to approval of Puget Sound Energy) and/or replacement of existing City street lights with taller support structures in order to allow the installation of antennas up to 16 feet in height. 3. A.ny new antenna greater than 10 feet in height, or any pole replacement for use as a rr::lonopole, would only be allDwed if it were demonstrated by the service provider that n<> practical alternative is available to provide the same level of phone service. 4. A.llow the installation of associated equipment cabinets within public street right-of-way OI on abutting residentially zoned properties. These structures would be required to be located underground, or to be in a suitable location with appropriate screening. Cc: Jay Covingtoo, Chief Administrative Officer Jennifer Henning. Principal Planner