Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 2016-02-25 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director CHAIR, SHARON MANN; VICE - CHAIR, MIGUEL MAESTAS; COMMISSIONERS, MIKE HANSEN, LOUISE STRANDER, BROOKE ALFORD AND NHAN NGUYEN PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA FEBRUARY 25, 2016 - 6:30 PM TUKWILA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Miscellaneous Agenda Items I. Mayor Ekberg - Overview of 2016 priorities II. Present Thomas McLeod with certificate Public Hearing III. Call to order the public hearing W. Attendance V. Adoption of 08/27/15 Minutes PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING VI. CASE NUMBER: L15 -0014 TITLE: Update to TMC 18.58 Wireless Facilities TOPIC: Amendments to Tukwila's wireless communications facilities regulations to comply with the Spectrum Act and streamline technology updates by wireless carriers. LOCATION: Citywide VII. DIRECTOR'S REPORT - Nora Gierloff VIII. ADJOURN Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206- 433 -1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila Planning Commission BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW (BAR) MINUTE S Date: August 27, 2015 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Council Chambers Present: Chair, Mike Hansen; Vice Chair, Sharon Mann; Commissioners, Louise Strander, Brooke Alford, Thomas McLeod and Miguel Maestas Absent; Commissioner Nhan Nguyen Staff: Jack Pace, Director, Valerie Lonneman, Assistant Planner, and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretary Motion: Commissioner Mann made a motion to adopt the 7/23/15 minutes. Commissioner Strander seconded the motion, all were in favor. Chair Hansen called the public hearing to order. Valerie Lonneman, Assistant Planner, Department of Community Development, asked the Commission the appearance of fairness questions. There were no disclosures. Chair Hansen swore in those testifying and opened the public hearing. CASE NUMBER: L15 -0027 Design Review APPLICANT: Dale Sweeney, Architect REQUEST: Construct a five -story, 92 -unit Holiday Inn Express hotel LOCATION: 90 Andover Park E., Tukwila, WA 98188 Valerie Lonneman, Assistant Planner, Department of Community Development, gave the staff presentation. She provided an overview of the review process, and background information. She said a Development Agreement for a shared parking permit was approved in May, as well as a Shoreline Substantial Development permit in August. It was noted that this is the first project that has been reviewed by the BAR using the new Tukwila Urban Center Design Review Standards. A request was received from the applicant to modify the neighborhood corridor frontage standards along Christensen Road. The normal requirement is a 15 ft. sidewalk with street trees. However, staff has developed a cooperative agreement with the owner for street frontage of approximately 9 ft. of landscaping and a 9 ft. sidewalk in the area. Staff noted that the modification is feasible because the area is between two parking lots as Christensen Road is going to be used as a parking lot. The Development Agreement expanded the development to partially include a portion of the Christensen Road right -of -way. The right -of -way will be used as a joint public /private parking lot to meet the parking requirement; four stalls shall have signs indicating that they are reserved for Green River Trail use. The owners have agreed to provide maintenance for any offsite areas developed and related to the project, and they will make a river bank restoration payment. Staff noted this project does not look like the typical one -story structure developments in the surrounding area. However, staff believes the project fits into the Tukwila Urban 1 2 Public Hearing Minutes August 27, 2015 Plan vision and it reflects the new standards of development desired in the future. In order to develop the proposed 68 foot high hotel the applicant is applying for a height incentive, which allows a maximum 70 foot height. The frontage requirements for this height incentive have been included in the site design. The project also meets the landscape requirements. Staff recommends approval of the project with three conditions as listed in the staff report dated August 19, 2015, which will be approved prior to issuance of the building permit. Staff also recommends approval of the frontage modification request on Christensen Road. Staff addressed several questions for the Commission. Commissioner Mann suggested signage on Christensen Road indicating parking stalls are open to the public using the Green River Trail. Commissioner McLeod was in support of Commissioner Mann's suggestion. Commissioner Mann also inquired on whether the Hotel had on -site meeting facilities, and if so, do they have the ability to accommodate parking for meeting attendees if the hotel is full. Jack Pace, Director, Department of Community Development provided clarification regarding questions raised by Commissioner Strander on the developer's restoration payment. Dale Sweeney, Architect, for the applicant, responded to questions raised by the Commission. David Clark, for the applicant, provided some clarification for the type of uses the proposed facility provides. Trent Grantham, Landscape Architect, for the applicant also answered questions. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. The BAR deliberated. Commissioner Mann thanked the developer for taking on the project and improving the area visually. She said she would still like to address inviting the public to park in the stalls adjacent to the trail on Christensen Road. Commissioner McLeod said he thinks parking will be an issue and it's important to make good signage indicating where people can or cannot park. The Commission were all in consensus that it is a good project. Motion: Commissioner Maestas made a motion to approve Case Number L15 -0027 with staff's finding recommendations and conclusions with three conditions and the applicant's modification. Commissioner Alford seconded the motion. All were in favor. Director's Report: Jack Pace, Director, Community Development, noted the following: • The Washington Place project is in progress. • The Northwest Arena project is in progress. • The City Council adopted the recommendation that the Planning Commission forwarded to them for Medical Marijuana Regulations. • The City Council directed staff to prepare the final adoption Ordinance for the Comprehensive Plan Amendments for Neighborhoods, Tukwila International Boulevard and Housing elements. This item is scheduled to go to the City Council for adoption in October. Page 2 of 3 Public Hearing Minutes August 27, 2015 • Staff would like to meet with the Commission in the fall to discuss developing priorities for implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. • The City is exceeding new construction valuations for 2015. • Jack will follow up on questions raised pertaining to the current use on the old Lewis and Clark site. Adjourned: 7:53 PM Submitted by: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretary Page 3 of 3 3 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared February 17, 2016 HEARING DATE: February 25, 2016 FILE NUMBERS: L15 -oo14 Wireless Communications Update APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Updates to TMC 18.58, the Wireless Communication Facilities regulations, are needed to come into compliance with new Federal Communication Commission rules. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing on the code changes and forward a recommendation to the City Council for review and adoption. LOCATION: NOTIFICATION: Citywide Hearing Notice was published in the Seattle Times on February 11, 2016, and posted on the City of Tukwila website on February 17, 2016. SEPA DETERMINATION: Exempt STAFF: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Wireless Facilities Ordinance B. 2/8/16 Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting minutes Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206- 433 -1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 5 Page 2 BACKGROUND New regulations regarding wireless communication facilities were included in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act).' In that legislation Section 64o9(a) provides, in part, that "a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. "2 The intention was to streamline approval of technology updates by wireless carriers. The FCC elaborated this mandate into new rules that require cities to approve qualified applications within 6o days, allow limited expansion at these sites and clarify that these rules cannot be used to defeat any "stealthing" conditions that applied to the original approval of the site. The full text of the FCC Wireless Infrastructure Report and Order can be found at http: / /www.fcc.gov/ document /wireless- infrastructure - report- and -order . In order to comply with the mandate staff has prepared the code amendments in Attachment A. The draft ordinance was reviewed by CAP on February 8, 2016 and they forwarded it to the Planning Commission for a hearing and recommendation. FINDINGS Tukwila has three main categories of wireless facilities ranging from least to most obtrusive. The higher the category the more information is needed from the applicant to justify the installation. The proposed new permit type, eligible facilities modification, would be categorized as Type 1 because it is limited to colocations on towers and buildings with existing antenna arrays. These installations must also abide by any "stealthing" requirements placed on the original approval and must not constitute a substantial change to the site as defined in the ordinance. These rule changes can be accommodated by minor edits to Tukwila's existing zoning regulations for wireless communication facilities. The primary effect is to require that we issue permit decisions for affected proposals within 6o days, rather than the current 120 day clock. As our review is generally faster than that it should have little impact. Staff has made the draft ordinance available to wireless industry representatives for their comments. The issue of height exemptions for Bird Safety /Exclusionary devices was raised by the Port of Seattle, who requested that carriers install bird exclusionary devices on existing towers within 5 miles of SeaTac Airport to reduce the likelihood of bird strikes on airplanes and prevent injury to the birds. • 9o% of cell tower nests are Ospreys • 5% of cell tower nests are Bald Eagles • 2.5% of cell tower nests are Red - tailed Hawks • 2.5% of cell tower nests are Great Horned Owls See Spectrum Act § 6409(a). Section 6409(a) has since been codified in the Communications Act as 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a). 2 Spectrum Act § 6409(a)(1). 6 Page 3 AT &T also requested that we exempt single purpose cell towers from the Zoning building height limits. Staff does not support this change as there are other options including co- location on existing utility poles, building mounted installations and an existing height waiver process at 18.58.170 in the case of particular hardship. In addition to these changes we are proposing some housekeeping edits including: • Clarifying when updating antenna technology is exempt from wireless permit review • Replacing references to the Planning Commission with the Hearing Examiner per TMC 18.104.010 • Reflecting case law since 2006 when the chapter was rewritten REQUESTED ACTION The Planning Commission is asked to hold a hearing on the proposed ordinance, develop a recommended version and forward it to the City Council for final action. 7 ATTACHMENT A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §68, §69 AND §70, AND 2135 §1 (PART) AND §2 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 18.06.773, 18.58.030, 18.58.040, 18.58.050, 18.58.060, 18.58.070, 18.58.120, 18.58.130 AND 18.58.150, RELATING TO COLLOCATION, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF WIRELESS FACILITIES; ESTABLISHING NEW STANDARDS FOR ELIGIBLE FACILITIES MODIFICATIONS AND NEW REGULATIONS ON EXPIRATION OF WIRELESS FACILITY PERMITS, TO BE CODIFIED AS TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 18.58.200 AND 18.58.210 RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1934 Congress enacted the Communications Act of 1934, creating the Federal Communications Commission and granting it authority over common carriers engaged in the provision of interstate or foreign communications services; and WHEREAS, in 1996 Congress enacted Pub. L. No. 104 -104, 110 Stat. 70 (the "1996 Act "), amending the Communications Act of 1934 and implementing regulations applicable to both wireless and wireline communications facilities for the purpose of removal of barriers to entry into the telecommunications market, while preserving local government zoning authority except where specifically limited under the 1996 Act; and WHEREAS, in the 1996 Act, Congress imposed substantive and procedural limitations on the traditional authority of state and local governments to regulate the location, construction, and modification of wireless facilities and incorporated those limitations into the Communications Act of 1934; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted regulations that have been codified as Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.58, "Wireless Communication Facilities," establishing local requirements for the location, construction, and modification of wireless facilities; and W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Attachment A Page 1 of 14 9 WHEREAS, in 2012, Congress passed the "Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012" (the "Spectrum Act ") (PL- 112 -96; codified at 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a)); and WHEREAS, Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act (hereafter "Section 6409 ") implements additional substantive and procedural limitations upon state and local government authority to regulate modification of existing wireless antenna support structures and base stations; and WHEREAS, Congress, through its enactment of Section 6409, has mandated that local governments approve, and cannot deny, an application requesting modification of an existing tower or base station if such modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station; and WHEREAS, the 1996 Act empowers the Federal Communications Commission (the "FCC ") to prescribe such rules and regulations as may be necessary in the public interest to carry out the provisions of the 1996 Act, and subsequently added portions of the 1996 Act such as Section 6409; and WHEREAS, the FCC, pursuant to its rule- making authority, adopted and released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in September of 2013 (In re Acceleration of Broadband Deployment by Improving Wireless Facilities Siting Policies, WT Docket Nos. 13 -238, 13 -32; WC Docket No. 11 -59; FCC 13 -122), which focused in part upon whether or not the FCC should adopt rules regarding implementation of Section 6409; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 2014, the FCC issued its report and order, WT Docket Nos. 13 -238, 13 -32; WC Docket No. 11 -59; FCC 14 -153, in the above described proceeding (the "Report and Order" or "Order ") clarifying and implementing statutory requirements related to state and local government review of infrastructure siting, including Section 6409, with the intent of facilitating and expediting the deployment of equipment and infrastructure to meet the demand for wireless capacity; and WHEREAS, the rules adopted by the FCC in its Report and Order implementing Section 6409 are intended by the FCC to spur wireless broadband deployment, in part, by facilitating the sharing of infrastructure that supports wireless communications through incentives to collocate on structures that already support wireless facilities; and WHEREAS, the Report and Order also adopts measures that update the FCC's review processes under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ( "NEPA ") and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ( "NHPA "), with a particular emphasis on accommodating new wireless technologies that use smaller antennas and compact radio equipment to provide mobile voice and broadband service; and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2015, the FCC released an Erratum to the Report and Order making certain amendments to the provisions of the Report and Order related to NEPA and Section 106 of the NHPA; and W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs 10 Page 2 of 14 WHEREAS, that part of the Report and Order related to implementation of Section 6409 amends 47 C.F.R. Part 1 (PART 1 — PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) by adding new Subpart CC § 1.40001 and establishing both substantive and procedural limitations upon local government application and development requirements applicable to proposals for modification to an existing antenna support structure or an existing base station ( "Eligible Facility Request Rules "); and WHEREAS, the Order, among other things, defines key terms utilized in Section 6409, establishes application requirements limiting the information that can be required from an applicant, implements a 60 -day shot clock and tolling provisions, establishes a deemed approved remedy for applications not timely responded to, requires cities to approve a project permit application requesting modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station, and establishes development standards that govern such proposed modifications; and WHEREAS, the Report and Order provides that the Eligible Facility Request Rules will be effective 90 days following publication in the Federal Register; and WHEREAS, the Order was published in the Federal Register on Thursday, January 8, 2015, Federal Register; Vol. 80; No. 5, resulting in the Eligible Facility Request Rules becoming effective on April 8, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Order is subject to appeal; however, even if an appeal is filed, the appeal will not automatically result in delay of implementation of the Eligible Facility Request Rules; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is required under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act and the Eligible Facility Request Rules established in the Order to adopt and implement local development and zoning regulations that are consistent with Section 6409 and the Order; and WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106 and WAC 365- 196 -630, a notice of intent to adopt the proposed new development regulations was sent to the State of Washington Department of Commerce and to other state agencies to allow for a 60 -day review and comment period, which comment period ended prior to adoption of this ordinance; and WHEREAS, on the 25th day of February, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting related to the proposed zoning regulations set forth in the proposed ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the proposed zoning regulations on the 28th day of March, 2016; and W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 3 of 14 11 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed zoning regulations are reasonable and necessary in order to bring the City's development regulations into compliance with the mandate imposed upon the City by Congress pursuant to Section 6409 and the regulations imposed upon the City by the FCC pursuant to its Report and Order, and are therefore in the public interest; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC Section 18.06.773 Amended. Ordinance No. 2135 §2 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Section 18.06.773, is hereby amended to read as follows: "Significant Gap in Service, Wireless Communications" means a large gcographic_ar gap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that within a service area(s) of the applicant in which a large a substantial number of applicant's remote user subscribers are unable to establish connect or maintain a connection toreliable wireless service from the au-en-al + °l"ene— &twon through applicant's wireless te' t,r'' network. A "dead spot" (defined as c'r il-1es 4, Fier areas within a service area where the field strength is lower than the minimum level for reliable service) does not constitute a significant gap in service. Section 2. TMC Section 18.58.030, "Exemptions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.030, subparagraph 1, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Wireless communication facilities permits are not required for subparagraphs La through 1.e of this section; however a building permit may be required for work on buildings: Routine maintenance and repair of wireless communication facilities. This shall not include, excluding structural work or _changes in height or dimensions of antennas, towers or buildings; provided that the wireless communication facility received approval from the City of Tukwila or King County for the original placement, construction or subsequent modification. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is p tedexempt from wireless facilities permits, provided the total area of the new antennas and support structure is not increased more than 10% of the previous area or the area is reduced antennas must remain the same. Changing antennas within a concealed building mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible change from the outside. Bird exclusionary devices may be added to towers and are not subject to height limitations. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs 12 Page 4 of 14 Additional ground equipment may be placed within an approved equipment enclosure, provided the height of the equipment does not extend above the screening fence. Section 3. TMC Section 18.58.040, "Permits Required," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §68 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.040 subparagraph I, is hereby amended to read as follows: I. Any decision by the DCD Director, Director of Public Works, or Hearing Examiner Planning Commi "lion shall be given substantial deference in any appeal of a decision by the City to either approve, approve with conditions, or deny any application for a wireless communication facility. Section 4. TMC Section 18.58.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §69 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.050, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.58.050 Types of Permits — Priority— Restrictions A. Applications will be reviewed based on the type of wireless communication facilities requested to be permitted. Each wireless communication facility requires the appropriate type of project permit review, as shown in Table A. In the event of uncertainty on the type of wireless facility, the DCD Director shall have the authority to determine how a proposed facility is incorporated into Table TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(l) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Transmission tower location Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 co Adding antennas to an existing tower or utility pole Type 1(2) Type 1 (2) Type 1(2) Eligible facilities modification Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Utility pole replacement for co- location Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Concealed building attached Type 2(3) Type 2(3) Type 1 Non - concealed building attached Type 2 Type 2 Type 1 New tower or waiver request Type 3(4) Type 3(4) Type 3(4) (1) Zoning for any private /public property or right -of -way: Residential — LDR, MDR, or HDR. Commercial — O, MUO, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC, C /LI or TVS. Industrial — LI, HI, MIC /L, or MIC /H. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 5 of 14 13 (2) Provided the height of the tower or utility pole does not increase and the square footage of the enclosure area does not increase. (3) An applicant may request to install a non - concealed building attached facility, under TMC Section 18.58.1 540. In the event of uncertainty on the type of a wirele"s facility, the DCD Director shall have the authority to dctcrminc how a proposcd facility is incorporated into Table A. B. The priorities for the type of wireless communication facility shall be based upon their placement in Table A; most - desirable facilities are located toward the top and least- desirable facilities toward the bottom. Any application for a wireless communication facility must follow the hierarchy of Table A. For example, an applicant must demonstrate by engineering evidence that using a transmission tower co- location is not possible before moving to a utility pole co- location, and so forth, with the last possible siting option being a new tower or waiver request. C. The City's preferences for locating new wireless communication facilities are as follows: 1. Place antennas on existing structures, such as buildings, towers, water towers, or electrical transmission towers. 2. Place wireless communication facilities in non - residentially -zoned districts and non - residential property. 3. Place antennas and towers on public property and on appropriate rights -of- way if practical, provided that no obligation is created herein for the City to allow the use of City property or public right -of -way for this purpose. 4. City Property /Public Rights -of -Way. The placement of personal wireless communication facilities on City -owned property and public rights -of -way will be subject to other applicable sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code and review by other departments (i.e., Public Works, Parks and Recreation, etc.). 5. Wireless communication facilities shall not be permitted on property designated as landmark or as part of a historic district. D. Applicants shall submit all of the information required pursuant to TMC Section 18.104.060 and the following: 1. Type 1 — Applicant shall submit: a. A completed application form provided by the Department of Community Development. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs 14 Page 6 of 14 b. Four sets of plans prepared by a design professional. The plans shall include a vicinity map, site map, architectural elevations, method of attachment, proposed screening, location of proposed antennas, and all other information which accurately depicts the proposed project. Minimum size is 8.5" by 11". Plans shall be no greater than 24" x 36 ". c. A letter from the applicant outlining the proposed project and an evaluation from the applicant with regard to the City's Code requirements and whether the proposal qualifies for review under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act. d. Information sufficient to determine whether a proposed facilities modification per TMC Section 18.58.200 would be a substantial change to an existing eligible support structure. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." . SEPA Application (if required). 2. Type 2 — Applicant shall submit all information required for a Type 1 application, plus the following: a. Four sets of photo simulations that depict the existing and proposed view of the proposed facility. b. Materials board for the screening material. c. Landscaping - -plan. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State - licensed architect. d. Letter from a radio frequency engineer that demonstrates that the facility meets Federal requirements for allowed emissions. e. If the facility is located within a residential zone, a report from a radio frequency engineer explaining the need for the proposed wireless communication facility. Additionally, the applicant shall provide detailed discussion on why the wireless communication facility cannot be located within a commercial or industrial zone. and a Washington State licensed architect. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 7 of 14 15 3. Type 3 — The applicant shall submit all the information required for Type 1 and Type 2 applications, plus the following: a. All information required for new towers under TMC Section 18.58.060. b. The radio frequency engineer report shall include a discussion of the information required under TMC Section 18.58. '0060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table c. Provisions for mailing labels for all property owners and tenants /residents within 500 feet of the subject property. d. Engineering plans for the proposed tower. e. A vicinity map depicting the proposed extent of the service area. f. A graphic simulation showing the appearance of the proposed tower and ancillary structures and ancillary facilities from five points within the impacted vicinity. Such points are to be mutually agreed upon by the Director of DCD and applicant. All plans and photo simulations shall include the maximum build -out of the proposed facility. g. Evidence of compliance with minimum Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requirements for radio frequency emissions. h. Evidence of compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards for height and lighting and certificates of compliance from all affected agencies. i. Evidence that the tower has been designed to meet the minimum structural standards for wireless communication facilities for a minimum of three providers of voice, video or data transmission services, including the applicant, and including a description of the number and types of antennas the tower can accommodate. Section 5. TMC Section 18.58.060, "New Towers," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §70 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.060, subparagraphs A.2, B.7 and B.8, are hereby amended to read as follows: A. 2. Alternates — No existing tower or structure, or other feasible site other alterna,, ,e, technol not requiring a new tower in the City, can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless communication facility; and W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs 16 Page 8 of 14 tower, such as a cable microcell network using multiple low powered transmitters /receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be ores -tn-- B. 87. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites e - • . - • • : `e : unsuitable. All engineering .rid technologica' evidence must be provided and certified by a registered and qualified professional engineer and clearly demonstrate the evidence required. Section 6. TMC Section 18.58.070, "General Requirements," Amended. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.070, subparagraphs 2 and 10, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2. Business license requirement - Any person, corporation or other business entity that operates a wireless communication facility or owns a tower within the City shall have a valid business license issued annually by the City. The business license shall fist all facility locations owned or operated by that entity within the City. Any person, corporation or other business entity which owns a tower also required to 10. Equipment Enclosure - Each applicant shall be limited to an equipment enclosure of 360 square feet at each site. However, this restriction shall not apply to enclosures located within an existing commercial, industrial, residential or institutional building or eligible facilities modifications. Section 7. Title Change to Section 18.58.120. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.120, is hereby amended to change the title of TMC Section 18.58.120 to read as follows: 18.58.120 Utility Pole 'leplacemen* ¢t, Co- location Section 8. TMC Section 18.58.130, "Towers— Specific Development Standards," Amended. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.130, subparagraphs 1 and 3, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Height - Any proposed tower with antennas shall meet the height standards of the zoning district where the tower will be located. Bird exclusionary devices are not subject to height limitations. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 9 of 14 17 3. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities must meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district. If an exception is granted under TMC Section 18.58.1 -801 0 with regards to height, the setback of the proposed wireless communication facilities will increase 2 feet for every foot in excess of the maximum permitted height in the zoning district. Section 9. TMC Section 18.58.150, "Landscaping /Screening," Amended. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.150 subparagraph A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.58.150 Landscaping /Screening. A. The visual impacts of wireless communication facilities may be mitigated and softened through landscaping or other screening materials at the base of the tower, facility equipment compound, equipment enclosures and ancillary structures, with the exception of wireless communication facilities located on transmission towers, or if the antenna is mounted flush on an existing building, or camouflaged as part of the building and other equipment is housed inside an existing structure. The DCD Director, Director of Public Works or Hearing ExaminerPlanning Commission, as appropriate, may reduce or waive the standards for those sides of the wireless communication facility that are not in public view, when a combination of existing vegetation, topography, walls, decorative fences or other features achieve the same degree of screening as the required landscaping; in locations where the visual impact of the tower would be minimal; and in those locations where large wooded lots and natural growth around the property perimeter may be sufficient buffer. Section 10. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.58.200, "Standards for Eligible Facilities Modifications," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.58.200 Standards for Eligible Facilities Modifications A. This section implements § 6409 of the "Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012" (the "Spectrum Act ") (PL- 112 -96; codified at 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a)) which requires the City to approve any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. The intent is to exempt eligible facilities requests from zoning and development regulations that are inconsistent with or preempted by Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act while preserving the City's right to continue to enforce and condition approvals under this chapter on compliance with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes and with other laws codifying objective standards reasonably related to health and safety W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs 18 Page 10 of 14 B. Definitions 1. "Base station" shall mean and refer to the structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables wireless communications licensed or authorized by the FCC, between user equipment and a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined in this chapter or any equipment associated with a tower. a The term includes, but is not limited to, equipment associated with wireless communications services such as private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. b The term includes, but is not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber -optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including Distributed Antenna Systems and small -cell networks). c The term includes any structure other than a tower that, at the time an eligible facilities modification application is filed with the City under this chapter, supports or houses equipment described in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of TMC Section 18.58.200.B, and that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State, county or local regulatory review process, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing such support. d The term does not include any structure that, at the time a completed eligible facilities modification application is filed with the City under this section, does not support or house equipment described in paragraphs (a) (b) of TMC Section 18.58.200.B. 2. "Eligible facilities modification" shall mean and refer to any proposed facilities modification that has been determined pursuant to the provisions of this chapter to be subject to this chapter and that does not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure. 3. "Eligible support structure" shall mean and refer to any existing tower or base station as defined in this chapter, provided it is in existence at the time the eligible facilities modification application is filed with the City under this chapter. 4. "Existing" shall mean and refer to a constructed tower or base station was reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process and lawfully constructed. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 11 of 14 19 5. "Proposed facilities modification" shall mean and refer to a proposal submitted by an applicant to modify an eligible support structure the applicant asserts is sub[ect to review under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act, and involving: a collocation of new transmission equipment; b removal of transmission equipment; or c replacement of transmission equipment 6. "Site" shall mean and refer to the current boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding a tower (other than a tower in the public rights -of -way) and any access or utility easements currently related to the site and, for other eligible support structures, shall mean and be further restricted to, that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission equipment already deployed on the ground. 7. "Substantial Change" A proposed facilities modification will substantially change the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria: a. For towers not in the public rights -of -way, it increases the height of the tower by more than 10% or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed 20 feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than 10 feet, whichever is greater Changes in height should be measured from the original support structure in cases where deployments are or will be separated horizontally, such as on buildings' rooftops; in other circumstances, changes in height should be measured from the dimensions of the tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were approved prior to the passage of the Spectrum Act. b. For towers not in the public rights -of -way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than_20 feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than feet c. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed 4 cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights -of -way and base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre- existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 12 of 14 20 d. For any eligible support structure: (1) it entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site; (2) it would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or (3) it does not comply with conditions associated with the siting approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment provided however that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified in this section. 8. "Tower" shall mean and refer to any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any antennas and their associated facilities, licensed or authorized by the FCC, including structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated site. 9. "Transmission Equipment" shall mean and refer to equipment that facilitates transmission for any wireless communication service licensed or authorized by the FCC, including, but not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber - optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes equipment associated with wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. C. Proposed facilities modification applications are not subject to the application requirements set forth in TMC Section 18.104.060. D. City decisions on eligible facilities modifications shall be issued within 60 days from the date the application is received by the City, subtracting any time between the City notice of incomplete application or request for additional information and the applicant's resubmittal. Following a supplemental submission the City will respond to the applicant within 10 days stating whether the additional information is sufficient to complete review of the application. This timing supersedes TMC Section 18.104.130. E. If the City fails to approve or deny an eligible facilities modification within the time frame for review the applicant may notify the City in writing that the review period has expired and that the application has therefore been deemed granted. F. Applicants and the City may bring claims related to Section 6409 (a) to any court of competent jurisdiction. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 13 of 14 21 Section . Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.58.210, "Expiration of Wireless Facility Permits," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.58.210 Expiration of Wireless Facility Permits A wireless facility permit shall automatically expire one year after a Notice of Decision approving the permit is issued unless a building permit conforming to plans for which the wireless facility permit was granted is obtained within that period of time. If a building permit is not required for the proposed work such as changing antennas on an existing tower then the substantial construction of the proposed work shall be completed within one year after a Notice of Decision approving the permit is issued. The Director of Community Development may authorize longer period for completion of work if the applicant can demonstrate why additional time is required and submits a written request for extension prior to expiration of the wireless facilities permit. Section 12. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section /subsection numbering. Section 13. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 14. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2016. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Wireless facilities - collocation update strike -thru 1 -29 -16 NG:bjs Page 14 of 14 22 City of Tukwila City Council Community Affairs and Parks Committee COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes February 8, 2016 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers: Kathy Hougardy, Acting Chair; Joe Duffie, Thomas McLeod (Absent: De'Sean Quinn) Staff: David Cline, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, Valerie Lonneman, Evie Boykan, Stacy Hansen, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Elizabeth Willmott, Climate Solutions; Kim Allen and Carol Tagayun, AT &T CALL TO ORDER: Acting Chair Hougardy called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Presentation on Carbon Reduction Action Agenda Ms. Willmott of Climate Solutions presented the Committee with a summary of the New Energy Cities' Energy Map and Carbon Wedge analysis as well as potential near -term carbon reduction strategies for the City to explore. These strategies were identified in collaboration with City staff in fall of 2015, and are organized by themes of energy efficiency, transportation, and renewable energy. The Committee asked that the presentation materials be delivered to the full Council. INFORMATION ONLY. B. Ordinance: Updating Wireless Communication Facilities Regulations Staff is seeking Council approval of an ordinance that would amend Tukwila Municipal Code 18.58, Wireless Communication Facilities, to conform to new Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules. The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act) requires cities to approve qualified applications within 60 days, allow limited expansion and clarifies other rules. The primary effect to Tukwila's code will be to ensure the City issues permit decisions with 60 days rather than the current 120 day period. The draft ordinance includes other housekeeping edits and will have no financial impact. It was made available to wireless industry representatives for feedback and will next go to the Planning Commission, then return to Community Affairs and Parks. Councilmember Hougardy requested a map and list of wireless facilities in the City. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION. 23 24