Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit PL15-0009 - WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY UPDATES - ZONING CODE AMENDMENTCOMP PLAN ZONE AMEND ZONING CODE AMEND Parent Project: P L15-0009 APPROVED This File: L15-0014 STATE OF WASH NGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Sire • PO Box 42525 • Olympia, Washington 98504-2525 • (3b0) 775-4000 www.con? nterce.wa.gtw May 19, 2016 Nora Gierloff Depty DCD Director City of Tukwilla 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100 Tukwilla, Washington 98188 Dear Ms. Gierloff: Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this procedural requirement. City of Tukwila - Adopted amendment to modify Tukwila's existing Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter to comply with Spectrum Act requirements for eligible facilities modifications. These materials were received on May 19, 2016 and processed with the Material ID # 22421. We have forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies. If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106. If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment, then final adoption may occur no earlier than July 01, 2016. Please remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten (10) days of adoption. If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov, or call Dave Andersen (509) 434-4491. Sincerely, Review Team Growth Management Services City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. D. q uI z7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §68, §69 §70 AND §72, 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, 18.58.150 AND 18.58.170, 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; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2135 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18.58.180, 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 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 1 of 15 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 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 2 of 15 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 Faciluty 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 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 3 of 15 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 gap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that a substantial number of applicant's remote user subscribers are unable to establish or maintain reliable wireless service from the applicant's wireless network. A "dead spot" (defined as less than significant 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 facilitiies permits are not required for subparagraphs 11.a through 1.e of this section; however, a building permit may be required for work on buildings: a. Routine maintenance and repair of wireless communication facilities. This shall not include changes in height or dimensions of 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. b. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is exempt 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. c. Changing or adding additional antennas within a previously permitted concealed building -mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible change from the outside. d. Bird exclusionary devices may be added to towers and are not subject to height limitations. e. Additional ground equipment may be placed within an approved equipment enclosure, provided the height of the equipment does not extend above the screening fence. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 4 of 15 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 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 A. TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(1) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial 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 building attached Type 2(3) Type 2(3) Type 1 _Concealed Non -concealed building attached Type 2(4) Type 2 Type 1 New tower or height adjustment request Type 3(4) Type 3 Type 3 (1) Zoning for any private/public property or right-of-way: Residential — LDR, MDR, or HDR. Commercial — 0, MUO, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC, C/LI or TVS. Industrial — LI, HI, MIC/L, or MIC/H. (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 18.58.140. (4) MDR and HDR only. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 5 of 15 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 utlity pole replacement for 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. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 6 of 15 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. e. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). f. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." g. 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. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State -licensed landscape 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. 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 18.58.060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table A. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 7 of 15 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 and B.7, are hereby amended to read as follows (thereby eliminating subparagraph B.8): A. 2. Altemates — No existing tower or structure, or other feasible site not requiring a new tower in the City, can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless communication facility; and B. 7. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites unsuitable. All engineering 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, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following shall apply to all wireless communication facilities regardless of the type of facility: 1. Noise — Any facility that requires a generator or other device which will create noise must demonstrate compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise". A noise report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted with any application to construct and operate a wireless communication facility that will have a generator or similar device. The City may require that the report be reviewed by a third party expert at the expense of the applicant. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 8 of 15 2. Signage — Only safety signs or those mandated by other government entities may be located on wireless communication facilities. No other types of signs are permitted on wireless communication facilities. 3. Parking — Any application must demonstrate that there is sufficient space for temporary parking for regular maintenance of the proposed facility. 4. Finish — A tower shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA or FCC, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce its visual obtrusiveness. 5. Design — The design of all buildings and ancillary structures shall use materials, colors, textures, screening and landscaping that will blend the tower facilities with the natural setting and built environment. 6. Color — All antennas and ancillary facilities located on buildings or structures other than towers shall be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and ancillary facilities as visually unobtrusive as possible. 7. Lighting — Towers shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the reviewing authority shall review the lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding areas. No strobe lighting of any type is permitted on any tower. 8. Advertising — No advertising is permitted at wireless communication facility sites or on any ancillary structure or facilities equipment compound. 9. 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 Replacement for 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 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 9 of 15 3. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities must meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district. If an exception is granted under TMC Section 18.58.170 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 Examiner, 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. TMC Section 18.58.170, "Height Waivers," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §72 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.170, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.58.170 Adjustment to Height Standards. A. Where the Hearing Examiner finds that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve an adjustment to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the adjustments are consistent with the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following: 1. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of an adjustment. Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of alternative site locations; W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 10 of 15 c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co - location. B. In approving the adjustment request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to assure consistency with the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and to ensure that the granting of the height adjustment will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest. C. A petition for any such adjustment shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the adjustment and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. Section 11. 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. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 11 of 15 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 subparagraphs (a) and (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 that was reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process and lawfully constructed. 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 subject 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 12 of 15 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 6 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. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 13 of 15 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's 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. Section 12. 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 a 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 14 of 15 Section 13. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.58.180, "Expiration," is hereby repealed, thereby eliminating TMC Section 18.58.180. Section 14. 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 15. 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 16. 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 COUN CIOF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 11\ , 2016. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: y 94,1 Passed by the City Council: Published: 'ci Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Effective Date: Ordinance Number: 4lj Cl W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update 4-27-16 NG:bjs Page 15 of 15 City of Tukwila Public Notice of Ordinance Adoption for Ordinance 2498. On May 2, 2016 the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington, adopted the following ordinance, the main points of which are summarized by title as follows: Ordinance 2498: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §68, §69 §70 AND §72, 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, 18.58.150 AND 18.58.170, 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; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2135 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18.58.180; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this ordinance will be provided upon request. Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Published Seattle Times: May 5, 2016 iiA wqs. 1,111 ' am 41„ z 190$.-� Monday, April 25, Tukwila City Council Agenda • •: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE• Allan Ekberg, Mayor Counci/members ❖ Dennis Robertson ❖ Verna Seal David Cline, City Administrator ❖ Kathy Hougardy ❖ De'Sean Quinn Joe Duffle, Council President ❖ Kate Kruller ❖ Thomas McLeod 2016; 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CITIZEN COMMENT At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda (p/ease limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. (Refer to back of agenda page for additional information.) 3. PUBLIC HEARING An ordinance 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. Pg.1 4. SPECIAL ISSUES a. An ordinance 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. b. Review of the "Tukwila, City of Opportunity Scholarship" recipients. c. Council consensus on the 2017-2018 budget priorities. d. Teens for Tukwila update on National League of Cities (NLC) conference. Pg.1 Pg.35 Pg.67 Pg.83 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. City Attorney e. Intergovernmental 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. ADJOURNMENT City Tukwila Tukwila City Hall is ADA accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the Clerk's office (206-433-1800 or TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.gov). This agenda is available at www.tukwilawa.gov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Council meetings are audio/video taped (available at www.tukwilawa.gov) HOW TO TESTIFY If you would like to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to 5 minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens but may not be able to take immediate action on comments received until they are referred to a Committee or discussed under New Business. CITIZEN COMMENTS At each Council meeting, citizens are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are not included on the agenda during CITIZEN COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. SPECIAL MEETINGS/EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters as prescribed by law. Executive Sessions are not open to the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Citizens who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at that time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings - The Mayor, elected by the people to a four-year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. and Special Meetings. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular or Special Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings - Councilmembers are elected for a four-year term. The Council President is elected by the Councilmembers to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one-year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed there are forwarded to Regular or Special Council meetings for official action. / COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 04/25/16 NG AA- j X 05/02/16 NG ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 3& 4.A. STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 4/25/16 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Wireless Communication Facilities Zoning Changes CATEGOR I Discussion 4/25/16 ❑ Motion Mtg Date 1 Resolution // Ordinance ►1 Bid Award I Public Hearing ❑ Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 5/2/16 Mtg Date Mtg Date 4/25/16 SPONSOR ❑ Council 1 Mayor ❑ HR II, DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police a PWY/ SPONSOR'S Updates to TMC 18.58, the Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter, are needed to SUMMARY come into compliance with new Federal Communication Commission rules. The intention of these new rules is to streamline approval of technology updates by wireless carriers. The Council is being asked to consider and approve the ordinance. *Per direction at the March 28, 2016 CAP Meeting, two additional attachments have been included in the aaenda materials.* REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ Utilities Cmte DATE: 2/8/16, 1 CA&P Cmte ❑ F&S Cmte ❑ Parks ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. CHAIR: QUINN • Arts Comm. 3/28/16 COMMII`I'LE RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Comm' Department of Community Development Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole I FEE Unanimous COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 4/25/16 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 4/25/16 Informational Memorandum dated 3/21/16 with Attachments A Ordinance in Draft Form B Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 2/8/16 C Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of 2/25/16 D Map of Wireless Communications Facilities Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 3/28/16 E. Table of Wireless Facility Permits 1996-2016 as requested by CAP Committee F. Examples of Stealth Wireless Installations as requested by CAP Committee 5/2/16 1 ( City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Affairs and Parks CC: Mayor Ekberg FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director DATE: March 21, 2016 SUBJECT: Wireless Communication Facilities Updates ISSUE Updates to TMC 18.58, the Wireless Communication Facilities regulations, are needed to come into compliance with new Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules related to the Spectrum Act. 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 6409(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 60 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 . The draft ordinance was reviewed by CAP on February 8, 2016 and they forwarded it to the Planning Commission for a hearing and recommendation. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 25th and their recommended ordinance is Attachment A to this memo. DISCUSSION 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 ' 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). 3 INFORMATIONA Page 2 MEMO permit decisions for affected proposals within 60 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. • 90% 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 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 written FINANCIAL IMPACT These changes will not create a financial impact on the City as they do not affect the type or cost of our wireless facility permitting. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward this ordinance to the April 25, 2016 Committee of the Whole meeting for a public hearing and subsequent May 2 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Ordinance Amending TMC 18.58 B. Community Affairs and Parks Minutes from 2/8/16 C. Planning Commission Minutes from 2/25/16 D. Map of Wireless Communication Facilities 4 DRAFT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §68, §69 §70 AND §72, 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, 18.58.150 AND 18.58.170, 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; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2135 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18.58.180, 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 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 1 of 15 5 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, VVT 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 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 2 of 15 6 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 Faciliity 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 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 3 of 15 7 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 awe-geographic_area gap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that the applicant in which a large a substantial number of applicant's remote user subscribers are unable to establish connect -or maintain reliable wireless service from the national telephone network through applicant's wireless telecommunications -network. A "dead spot" (defined as small -less than significant 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 1.a through 1.e of this section; however, a building permit may be required for work on buildings: a. Routine maintenance and repair of wireless communication facilities. This shall not include, 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. b. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is per-mittedexempt 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 reducedhave +-Asa„ a a;ea-or Iess-thoseremoved. The total n„mber-of antennas-mustr-emain the same. c. Changing or adding additional antennas within a previously permitted concealed building -mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible change from the outside. d. Bird exclusionary devices may be added to towers and are not subject to height limitations. e. Additional ground equipment may be placed within an approved equipment enclosure, provided the height of the equipment does not extend above the screening fence. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 4 of 15 8 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 A.; TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(" Type of Facility Residential Commercial industrial Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Adding antennas to an existing tower or utility pole Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Type 1(�) 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 -height adjustment Type 3(4) Type 3(4) Type 3 request (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. (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 18.58.1540. (4)DCD Director Shall have the MDR and HDR only. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 5 of 15 9 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 replacement for 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. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities-colilocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 6 of 15 10 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. de. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). ef. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." and fg. 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 landscape 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 Stato_linenced architect 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 18.58.070060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table a- A. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 7 of 15 11 i 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. Altercates — No existing tower or structure, or other feasible site or other not requiring a new tower in the City, can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless communication facility; and B. 7, That an alternative technology that does not require the use of a new tower, such as a cable microcell network using multiple low powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of B. 87. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites unsuitable. All engineeringevidence 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, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following shall apply to all wireless communication facilities regardless of the type of facility: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 8 of 15 12 1. Noise — Any facility that requires a generator or other device which will create noise must demonstrate compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise". A noise report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted with any application to construct and operate a wireless communication facility that will have a generator or similar device. The City may require that the report be reviewed by a third party expert at the expense of the applicant. 2. Business license requirement Any person, corporation or entity that license issued annually by the City. Any person, corporation or other business entity 32. Signage — Only safety signs or those mandated by other government entities may be located on wireless communication facilities. No other types of signs are permitted on wireless communication facilities. 43. Parking — Any application must demonstrate that there is sufficient space for temporary parking for regular maintenance of the proposed facility. 54. Finish — A tower shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA or FCC, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce its visual obtrusiveness. 65. Design — The design of all buildings and ancillary structures shall use materials, colors, textures, screening and landscaping that will blend the tower facilities with the natural setting and built environment. 76. Color — All antennas and ancillary facilities located on buildings or structures other than towers shall be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and ancillary facilities as visually unobtrusive as possible. 87. Lighting — Towers shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the reviewing authority shall review the lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding areas. No strobe lighting of any type is permitted on any tower. 98. Advertising — No advertising is permitted at wireless communication facility sites or on any ancillary structure or facilities equipment compound. 409. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 9 of 15 13 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 Replacement for 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. 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.E-80170 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 Examiner , 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. TMC Section 18.58.170, "Height Waivers," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §72 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.170, are hereby amended to read as follows: W: Word Processing \Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 10 of 15 14 / 18.58.170. Height-W erg Adjustment to Height Standards. A. Where the Hearing Examiner finds that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve an adjustment height waiver to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the adiustments are consistent with the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following: 4, The granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest; and 21. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of an adjustment -waiver. Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of alternative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co - location. B. In approving the waiver adjustment request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to substantially sect ire the assure consistency with the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and to ensure that the granting of the height waiver adjustment will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or incurious to other property, and will promote the public interest. C. A petition for any such waiver -adjustment shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for thewaiver-adjustment and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. Section 11. 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 11 of 15 15 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. 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 subparagraphs (a) and (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 that was reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process and lawfully constructed. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 12 of 15 16 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 subject 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 6 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 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 13 of 15 17 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's 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 Ciity 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. Section 12. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.58.210, "Expiration of Wireless Facility Permits," is hereby established to read as follows: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 14 of 15 18 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 a 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 13. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.58.180, "Expiration," is hereby repealed, thereby eliminating TMC Section 18.58.180. Section 14. 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 15. 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 16. 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 4-11-16 NG:bjs Page 15 of 15 19 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. Attachment B 21 City of Tukwila Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION (PC) MINUTES Date: February 25, 2016 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Council Chambers Present: Chair, Sharon Mann; Vice Chair, Miguel Maestas - arrived at 6:40; Commissioners, Mike Hansen, Louise Strander, Brooke Alford and Nhan Nguyen Staff: Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director; and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretary Mayor Ekberg presented a certificate to former Planning Commissioner McLeod, who has been appointed to the Tukwila City Council. The Mayor said that it was a pleasure to have Mr. McLeod serve on the Planning Commission and he thanked Mr. McLeod for his 6 years of service on the Board. The Mayor said that Councilmember McLeod's help on the City Council is already being recognized. The Mayor also expressed his appreciation to the other six Commissioners for their service on the Planning Commission Board. Mr. McLeod said he appreciated his six years on the Commission. He said he enjoyed collaborating with the Commissioners who are wonderful, talented, professional and intellectual people, and beyond that he appreciates the friends he made. Chair Mann said on behalf of the Commission they appreciated working with Mr. McLeod. Commissioner Mann also said that Mr. McLeod had great insight on the cases that came before the Commission and she thanked him for his time and efforts. Chair Mann called the public hearing to order: Motion: Commissioner Strander made a motion to adopt the 08/27/15 minutes. Commissioner Hansen seconded the motion and all were in favor. Chair Mann opened the public hearing and swore in those wishing to provide testimony. 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 Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director, Department of Community Development gave the presentation. She said the wireless regulations were originaliy adopted in 2006 and there have been considerable changes to technology since that time. After the passage of the Spectrum Act the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) created new rules for how the City can regulate telecommunication carriers and sets certain parameters for existed permitted sites. Carriers are allowed to update their facilities if they meet the parameters, which the City must approve within 60 days. The City currently has three types of permits in the code, and these eligible facilities modifications fall under the least regulated Type I permit. The City wants to encourage carriers and make it easier for them to make the best use of existing sites instead of moving on to new monopoles or new sites. Therefore, the attempt to streamline the process for previously approved sites works well with the existing code. The proposal does not change the general scheme, and the Spectrum Act does not change the concept of how wireless facilities are regulated. Additionally, some housekeeping clarifications were proposed to streamline the process, as well as changes to come into compliance with current case law. Attachment C 1 22 The Port raised the issue of exclusionary devices to discourage birds from nesting on the cell antennas, which is dangerous for the birds and the public. In order to encourage the bird nesting exclusionary devices staff is proposing to exempt them from the tower height limits so carriers are not penalized. There was a walkthrough of the proposed language. Following are the additional proposed changes: Page 12, section 2, 1 c, suggested language — "changing or adding additional antennas within a previously permitted concealed building mounted installation..." Page 13, Table A, add footnote 4 to "Non -concealed building attached" in the residential district column. Page 14, replace footnote 4 to read, "Multi -family zones only." Page 14, paragraph B, revise — delete "co -location" and insert the word, "replacement" following the word "pole" in the last sentence. Page 15, 2e - A question was raised on whether a facility would be allowed to be located within a residential zone, and if there are particular standards. Other questions also raised: Will there be an opportunity for citizen input; would the facilities be located on City owned property; would the neighborhood be notified if the facilities are located in a residential neighborhood; would there be a limit to the number of facilities located in a proximity; could there be multiple towers in an area? There was extensive discussion and several clarifying questions asked. The Commission had an interest for further discussion regarding this issue, as well as an interest in some proposed language Staff said the regulations have been in place since 2006 and there has been pretty good success in keeping the facilities in the commercial and industrial zones. Chair Mann proposed if a new tower is constructed in a residential zone that it automatically trigger SEPA. She said it would give citizens in the community an opportunity to provide input on how the tower will look and where it would be located. Staff said residents would be notified independently of SEPA if a new tower is constructed. Public Testimony: Kimberly Allen, Bush Law Firm, industry representative thanked staff for working with them on the code amendments. Ms. Allen said that the majority of the changes are being driven by the new Federal law, the Spectrum Act. She provided some background on the requirement as stipulated by law and responded to questions raised by the Commission. Ms. Allen went over a document, which was handed out at the public hearing requesting additional code modifications. She said that it deals with a code section that was previously called a height waiver. Changes she recommended are as follows: 2 23 Page 3 Public Hearing Minutes February 25, 2016 18.58.170. Height Waivers Adjustment to Height Standards Where the Hearing Examiner fords that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve an adjustment height -waiver to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that thel substantially secure adjustments are consistent with the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following:I r welfare s to of a ert, a will t tt t /' t d ���„ � r~�Y J. Y P 21. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of an adjustment. waiver, Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of alternative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co -location. 2. In approving the waiver adjustment request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to substantially -secure -the -assure consistency with the objectives of the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 3. A petition for any such waiver adjustment shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the adjustmentwaiver and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. (Ord. 2251 §72, 2009; Ord. 2135 § 1 (part), 2006) Staff said that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed language and after some minor changes was comfortable with the language. It is up to the Commission whether they approve these policy changes. Ms. Allen answered several questions from the Commission. In response to a question raised by Commissioner Alford Ms. Allen rescinded her request to delete the following language from paragraph 1, "of the Zoning Code." There was no further testimony. The public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission deliberated. Commissioner Mann was opposed to deleting the following language "the granting of the height waiver, will not be detrimental to the public..." from the first paragraph as requested by the applicant. She said that it gives direction to the Hearing Examiner on what the City is looking for. The Commissioners were in consensus (note: Commissioner Alford was not in the Court Room at present.) Ms. Allen proposed that the paragraph be moved from paragraph one to paragraph two so it could be a Hearing Examiner's decision. Chair Mann asked for a motion accepting the green line document received from the applicant with the following exceptions: 1. The proposal to delete "of the Zoning Code"— denied, language will remain 24 2. The proposal to delete paragraph 1 was approved, but the language inserted instead at the end of the sentence at 2 "and to ensure that the granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest." Commissioner Maestas made a motion to approve the applicant's green line document as revised, as noted by Chair Mann. Commissioner Hansen seconded the motion. All were in favor. Commissioner Hansen made a motion to forward the recommendations for Case Number L15-0014 to the City Council for their approval with staffs findings, conclusions, and the approved noted revisions. Commissioner Strander seconded the motion. All were in favor. Director's Report: • Upcoming agenda item - A Design Review for a hotel on West Valley • Upcoming agenda item - Housekeeping amendments, changes to the SEPA Ordinance, and additional updates to the Zoning Code • The City Council approved Phase I of the Osterly Park Townhomes • The City Council has put the Regional Fire Authority on hold — they were unable to complete research in time to make the November ballot date. • The Tree and National Environment Committee is going to reconvene to work on the policies to make changes to the Zoning Code this summer. The intent is for this item to come to the Planning Commission in October and go to City Council early 2017. • Interviews for the vacant Planning Commission position are wrapping up, hopefully someone will be selected and start by the March. Adjourned: 8:05 PM Submitted by: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretary 4 25 r 1 Legend Parcels Zoning Tukwila Parcels with Wireless Facilities Permits Attachment D N 27 l� `JJ CommunityAffairs and Parks Committee Minutes March 28, 2016 B. Ordinance: Wireless Communication Facilities 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 draft ordinance includes other housekeeping edits and will have no financial impact. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 25th. Staff distributed a list of existing wireless communications facilities. The Committee requested examples of "stealth" facilities. An additional amendment has been identified in Section 4, 18.58.050, Table A, last row to read "New tower orwaiver height adjustment." This amendment will be reflected in the draft ordinance before the Committee of the Whole. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO APRIL 25, 2016 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION. C. Code Enforcement Update: 2015 Abatements Staff provided the Committee with an update on abatement work performed since the addition of a Code Enforcement Officer in March 2015. Prior to 2015, 2-3 nuisance properties were abated per year. The additional staffing resulted in the closure of 27 cases from the backlog, including voluntary abatements and City abatements. The Committee requested to be kept informed on staffing and responsibilities in the Code Enforcement Department. INFORMATION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Work Plan Chair Quinn led a discussion of the Committee's work plan, and the following ideas were mentioned: • Offsite meetings at locations relevant to the agenda • Code Enforcement update, including rental housing inspection program • Multifamily issues, concerns, opportunities • Neighborhood outreach regarding Comprehensive Plan implementation • Information about the scope of committee involvement in Fire Department organizational issues • Healthy Tukwila updates • Allentown resident comment on Doak Homes development The Community Affairs and Parks Committee Meeting adjourned at 6:37 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, April 11, 2016 Committee Chair Approval Minutes by LH 29 3 luewgoe}}y Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits Main Key Field PROJECTTYPE Address SITE_APN PLANNER PROJECT NAME MAIN_TA BLE SUBT L01-011 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 MINNIE DHALIWAL QWEST WIRELESS- ROOFTOP ANTENNAE TYPE 2 L01-045 USE PERMITS 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S 0003200009 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOF TOP WIRELESS FACIL TYPE 2 L02-002 USE PERMITS 5301 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200140 MINNIE DHALIWAL AT&T rooftop wireless communication faci TYPE 2 L02-007 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 CAROL LUMB INSTALLATION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICA TYPE 2 L02-011 USE PERMITS 57115152 ST 1157200370 CINGULAR WIRELESS IS PROPOSING ANUNSTAFF TYPE 2 L02-027 USE PERMITS 14800 INTERURBAN AVE S 3597000005 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOFTOP FACILITY TYPE 2 L03-002 USE PERMITS 40205140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL CUP FOR NEXTEL ROOFTOP WIRELESS FACILITY TYPE 2 L03-005 USE PERMITS 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-Mobile/Voicestream roof top wireless f TYPE 2 L03-024 USE PERMITS 14404 51 AVE S 7999600160 MILES, BRANDON Install a wireless communications facili TYPE 2 L03-040 USE PERMITS 4020 S 140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-mobile wireless communication facility TYPE 1 L05-019 USE PERMITS 15215 52 AVE S 1157200017 MILES, BRANDON Roof top wireless cellular facility for TYPE 2 L05-078 USE PERMITS 13134 44 AVE S 7349200345 BRANDON MILES CO -LOCATING ANTENNAS FOR WIRELESS INTERN TYPE 1 L06-065 USE PERMITS 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 BRANDON MILES CUP TO LOCATE WIRELESS INTERNET FACILITY TYPE 2 L08-047 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 CHRIS BEALS VERIZON WIRELESS PROPOSES TO MODIFY ITS TYPE 2 L09-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 BRANDON MILES DIGITAL FOREST - INTERGATE WEST BLDG C TYPE 2 L09-016 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE 5 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON Modification of existing antenna. Reloc TYPE 1 L09-025 WIRELESS FACILITY 15920 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800024 BRANDON MILES REPLACING ANTENNAS TYPE 2 L09-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 COURTNEY THOMSON wireless communication device on doulble TYPE 2 L09-044 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE S 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON TYPE 1 L09-045 WIRELESS FACILITY 1232 ANDOVER PARK W 3523049074 COURTNEYTHOMSON TYPE 2 PERMIT FOR CONCEALED ROOFTOP ANTE TYPE 2 L09-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEY THOMSON VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA BRISCO/ORILLIA RD TYPE 1 L10-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEYTHOMSON VERIZONE WIRELESS S-SEA BRISCO TYPE 1 L10-057 WIRELESS FACILITY 13134 44 AVE 5 7349200345 COURTNEY THOMSON CLEARWIRE ATC SOUTHGATE TYPE 1 L10-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 2800 SOUTHCENTER MALL 9202470010 CAROL LUMB VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA SOUTHCENTER DAS TYPE 2 L10-066 WIRELESS FACILITY 3458 S 146 ST 0040000315 Brandon Miles CLEARWIRE SEA0264 RIVERTON TYPE 2 L11-003 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 JAIMIE REAVIS REALCOM ASSOCIATES TYPE 2 L11-011 WIRELESS FACILITY 11030 EAST MARGINAL WAY 5 0323049057 STACY MACGREGOR SUNNY AUSINK TYPE 1 L11-014 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T MOBILITY SSO5 SOUTHCENTER TYPE 1 L11-021 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T TYPE 2 L11-022 WIRELESS FACILITY 57115 152 ST 1157200370 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T MOBILITY TYPE 2 L11-027 WIRELESS FACILITY 12228 51 PL S 0179001955 JAIMIE REAVIS AT&T WIRELESS AT ALLENTOWN 2 TYPE 1 L11-028 WIRELESS FACILITY 6874201170 JAIMIE REAVIS VERIZON WIRELESS TYPE 1 L12-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA158 ROXBURY TYPE 1 L12-012 WIRELESS FACILITY 13400 INTERURBAN AVE 5 0003000115 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA145 ALLENTOWN TYPE 1 L12-030 WIRELESS FACILITY 0223400020 STACY MACGREGOR VERIZON SEA EAST ANDOVER TYPE 1 L12-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51 PL S 0003800003 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT NV TUKWILA SE03XC408 TYPE 1 L12-039 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 STACY MACGREGOR REALCOM ASSOCIATES TYPE 2 Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits L12-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 REBECCA FOX REALCOM ASSOCIATES TYPE 2 L12-041 WIRELESS FACILITY 16038 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800005 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT SPECTRUM TYPE 2 L13-0046 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 Max Baker VERIZON @ SEAQ ORILLIA AWS MODIFICATION TYPE 1 L13-023 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING WAYS 0323049026 COURTNEYJOHNSON SPRINT SE25XC333 MCQUEEN TYPE 2 L14-0005 WIRELESS FACILITY 12901 BEACON -COAL MINE RD S 0001400003 Minnie Dhaliwal BNSF RAILWAY COMMUNICATIONS TOWER 7YP1. r L14-0014 WIRELESS FACILITY 14240 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 Max Baker SEA INTERRUB TYPE 2 1.14-0017 WIRELESS FACILITY 2223049102 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 WEE SE63XC332 TYPE 1 L14-0018 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51ST PI 5 0003800003 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 TUKWILA SE03XC408 TYPE 1 L14-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44TH AVE 5 7349200345 Max Baker VERIZON WIRELESS SEA RIVERTON TYPE 1 L14-0020 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 Max Baker SEA EASTANDOVER TYPE 1 L14-0038 WIRELESS FACILITY 10825 E MARGINAL WAY S 0323049198 Max Baker SPRINT SE03XC409-SR-599 TYPE 1 L14-0068 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 LAURA BENJAMIN AT & T WA158 ROXBURY TYPE 1 L14-0069 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 LAURA BENJAMIN VERIZON TYPE 1 L14-0073 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR WAY S 0323049026 COLIN POFF MCQUEEN SPRINT WIRELESS TELECOMM TYPE 1 L14-0074 WIRELESS FACILITY 10868 EAST MARGINAL WAY S 0323049057 COLIN POFF AT&T MOBILITY TYPE 1 L14-0078 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 COLIN POFF 5505 SOUTHCENTER TYPE 1 L15-0016 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 VALERIE LONNEMAN DIGITAL FORTRESS SATELLITE ANTENNA PROJ TY�`3 L15-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 COLIN POFF SEA EASTANDOVER TYPE 1 L15-0029 WIRELESS FACILITY 14220 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 VALERIE LONNEMAN T-MOBILE SE03563D TYPE 2 L15-0039 WIRELESS FACILITY 5476800305 DILLON ROTH T-MOBILE SE03556D BEACON & BANGOR SCL TYPE 2 L15-0040 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 LAURA BENJAMIN SPRINT CLEARWIRE EVOLUTION TYPE 1 L15-0041 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 LAURA BENJAMIN SE03545A T-MOBILE TIB & 116TH TYPE 1 L15-0050 WIRELESS FACILITY 4030 S 140TH ST 7360600465 LAURA BENJAMIN T-MOBILE @ BIRCH CREST & 142ND/SCL/LEE TYPE 2 L15-0059 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 LAURA BENJAMIN SE04000B SOUTHCENTER PLACE TYPE 2 L15-0060 WIRELESS FACILITY 130 ANDOVER PARK E 0223100040 VALERIE LONNEMAN SE04001A PARK EAST L700/SECTOR SPLIT TYPE 2 L99-0062 USE PERMITS 18700 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 MICHAEL JENKINS 60 FOOT MONOPOLE WITH 2 ANTENNAE L97-0055 USE PERMITS 15820 TUKWILA INTL BL 2223049001 MICHAEL JENKINS CONSTRUCTION OF 100 FT MONOPOLE L96-0070 USE PERMITS 6100 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 3597000221 MICHAEL JENKINS AT & T WIRELESS TYPE 2 t N, Wireless Facility Stealth Examples These examples are from Larson Camouflage, web site http://utilitycamo.com/ Attachment F 33 City of Tukwila Community Affairs & Parks Committee O De'Sean Quinn, Chair O Kathy Hougardy O Thomas McLeod RECEIVED MAR 24 2016 Community Development AGENDA Distribution: D. Quinn K. Hougardy T. McLeod J. Duffle D. Robertson Mayor Ekberg D. Cline C. O'Flaherty R. Turpin L. Humphrey N. Gierloff R. Bianchi H. Mai MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2016 — 5:30 PM HAZELNUT CONFERENCE Room (formerly known as CR #3) at east entrance of City Hall Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a. An ordinance for wireless communication facilities. a. Forward to 4/25 C.O.W. Pg.1 Nora Gierloff, Deputy Community Development and 5/2 Regular Mtg. Director Consent Agenda. b. A platform to enhance the ability for residents and stakeholders to flag issues. b. Information only. Pg.27 Rachel Bianchi, Communications and Government Relations Manager c. An update on 2015 code enforcement abatement. c. Information only. Pg.37 Hoa Mai, Code Enforcement Officer 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. MISCELLANEOUS 2016 Community Affairs & Parks Committee Information only. Pg.41 Work Plan Laurel Humphrey, Council Analyst Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, April 11, 2016 It> The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate those with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800(TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaVVA.gov) for assistance. 4z-A Air\ 0,0 are— ( 4_ _) czt TDr\`61---- 1 0,A7 c_orv#0,". 7 I ,- -- C JUG (c "-I - rf r 5 ��- '\/AJ✓S�r cnc�{vn ?20 j \\L(Ai) ex Cw o( 700,k(-- i n4 l \ City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Affairs and Parks CC: Mayor Ekberg FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director DATE: March 21, 2016 SUBJECT: Wireless Communication Facilities Updates ISSUE Updates to TMC 18.58, the Wireless Communication Facilities regulations, are needed to come into compliance with new Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules related to the Spectrum Act. 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 6409(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 60 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 . The draft ordinance was reviewed by CAP on February 8, 2016 and they forwarded it to the Planning Commission for a hearing and recommendation. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 25th and their recommended ordinance is Attachment A to this memo. DISCUSSION 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 ' 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). 1 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 permit decisions for affected proposals within 60 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. • 90% 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 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 written FINANCIAL IMPACT These changes will not create a financial impact on the City as they do not affect the type or cost of our wireless facility permitting. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward this ordinance to the April 25, 2016 Committee of the Whole meeting for a public hearing and subsequent May 2 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Ordinance Amending TMC 18.58 B. Community Affairs and Parks Minutes from 2/8/16 C. Planning Commission Minutes from 2/25/16 D. Map of Wireless Communication Facilities 2 DRAFT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §68, §69 §70 AND §72, 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, 18.58.150 AND 18.58.170, 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; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2135 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18.58.180, 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 3-8-16 NG:bjs Attachment A Page 1 of 15 3 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 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 2 of 15 4 7 \ l \ 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 govemment 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 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 3 of 15 5 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 geographic arca gap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that within a service area(s) of the applicant in which a largo a substantial number of applicant's remote user subscribers are unable to establish connect or maintain a connection toreliable wireless service from the national telephone network through applicant's wireless network. A "dead spot" (defined as small less than significant 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 1.a through 1.e of this section; however, a building permit may be required for work on buildings: a. Routine maintenance and This shall not includ , antennas, towers or buildings; provided received approval from the City of Tukwila construction or subsequent modification. b. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is permittedexempi: 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 reducedhavc the same arca or less of those removed. The total number of armor ins m''uct romain the -same. c. Changing or adding additional antennas within a previously permitted concealed building -mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible change from the outside. d. Bird exclusionary devices may be added to towers and are not subject to height limitations. e. Additional ground equipment may be placed within an approved equipment enclosure, provided the height of the equipment does not extend above the screening fence. repair of wireless communication facilities. _changes in height or dimensions of that the wireless communication facility or King County for the original placement, W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 4 of 15 6 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 1, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Any decision by the DCD Director, Director of Public Works, or Hearing Examiner Planning Commission 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(1) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Transmission tower co location Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 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 r`placement 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 34) (1) Zoning for any private/public property or right-of-way: Residential — LDR, MDR, or HDR. Commercial — 0, MUO, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC, C/LI or TVS. Industrial — LI, HI, MIC/L, or MIC/H. (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 18.58.1540. (4) authority to determine how a proposed facility is ` .MDR and HDR only. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 5 of 15 7 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 replacement for co -location, and so forth, with the last possible siting option beig 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 o* 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. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 6 of 15 8 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. de. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). ef. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." and fg. 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.lf landscaping is proposed. four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State -licensed landscape 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 f. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State licensed architect. 3. Type 3 — The applicant shalt 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 18.58.070060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table I- A. 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. W: Word ProcessinglOrdinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 7 of 15 9 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 or other not requiring a new tower in the City, can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless communication facility; and tower, such as a cable microcell network using multiple low powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wircline system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new towc presumed to render the technology unsuitable; and B. 87. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites or alternative technologies unsuitable. All engineering and technological 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, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following shall apply to all wireless communication facilities regardless of the type of facility: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 8 of 15 10 1. Noise — Any facility that requires a generator or other device which will create noise must demonstrate compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise". A noise report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted with any application to construct and operate a wireless communication facility that will have a generator or similar device. The City may require that the report be reviewed by a third party expert at the expense of the applicant. 2. Business license requirement Any person, corporation or entity that license iscued annually by the City. Any person, corporation or other business entity 82. Signage — Only safety signs or those mandated by other government entities may be located on wireless communication facilities. No other types of signs are permitted on wireless communication facilities. 43. Parking — Any application must demonstrate that there is sufficient space for temporary parking for regular maintenance of the proposed facility. 54. Finish— A tower shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA or FCC, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce its visual obtrusiveness. 65. Design — The design of all buildings and ancillary structures shall use materials, colors, textures, screening and landscaping that will blend the tower facilities with the natural setting and built environment. 76. Color — All antennas and ancillary facilities located on buildings or structures other than towers shall be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and ancillary facilities as visually unobtrusive as possible. 87. Lighting — Towers shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the reviewing authority shall review the lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding areas. No strobe lighting of any type is permitted on any tower. 98. Advertising — No advertising is permitted at wireless communication facility sites or on any ancillary structure or facilities equipment compound. 109. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 9 of 15 11 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 Replacement for 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. 3. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities must meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district. If an exception is granted under TMC Section 18.58.180170 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 Examiner , 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 Tots and natural growth around the property perimeter may be sufficient buffer. Section 10. TMC Section 18.58.170, "Height Waivers," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §72 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.170, are hereby amended to read as follows: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 10 of 15 12 18.58.170. Height Waiverz Adjustment to Height Standards. A. Where the Hearing Examiner finds that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve an adjustment height waiver to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the waiyor(e) win cubstantinlly comma adiustments are consistent with the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following: 1- The granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest; and 21. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of an adjustment -waiver. Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of alternative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co - location. B. In approving the waiver adjustment request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to substantially secure the assure consistency with the objectives of -the -values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and to ensure that the granting of the height ai Z will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to of r property, and will promote the public interest. C. A petition for any such waiver adjustment shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the waiver -adjustment and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. Section 11. 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 11 of 15 13 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. 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 subparagraphs (a) and (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 that was reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process and lawfully constructed. W: Word Processing\ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 12 of 15 14 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 subject 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, shalt 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 iinvolves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than 6 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 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 13 of 15 15 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 supportinq 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's 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. Section 12. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.58.210, "Expiration of Wireless Facility Permits," is hereby established to read as follows: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 14 of 15 16 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 a 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 13. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.58.180, "Expiration," is hereby repealed, thereby eliminating TMC Section 18.58.180. Section 14. 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 15. 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 16. 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 Attomey 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 3-8-16 NG:bjs Page 15 of 15 17 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 Councitmembers: Kathy Hougardy,ActingChair; Joe Duffle, Thomas McLeod (Absent: De'Sean Quinn) Staff: David Cline, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, Valerie Lonneman, Evie Boykan, Stacy Hansen, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Elizabeth Wiltmott, 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. Wiltmott 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. Attachment B 19 LOCATION: City of Tukwila Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION (PC) MINUTES Date: February 25, 2016 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Council Chambers Present: Chair, Sharon Mann; Vice Chair, Miguel Maestas - arrived at 6:40; Commissioners, Mike Hansen, Louise Strander, Brooke Alford and Nhan Nguyen Staff: Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director; and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretary Mayor Ekberg presented a certificate to former Planning Commissioner McLeod':who has been appointed to the Tukwila City Council. The Mayor said that it was a pleasure to have Mr. McLeod serve on the Planning Commission and he thanked Mr. McLeod for his 6 years of service on the Board. The Mayor said that Councilmember McLeod's help on the City Council is already being recognized:`. ,The Mayor also expressed his appreciation to the other six Commissioners for their service on the Planning Commission Board. Mr. McLeod said he appreciated his six years on the Commission. He said he enjoyed collaborating with the Commissioners who are wonderful, talented, professional and intellectual people, and beyond that he appreciates the friends he made. Chair Mann said on behalf of the Commission they appreciated working with Mr. McLeod. Commissioner Mann also said that Mr. McLeod had great insight on the cases that came before the Commission and she thanked him for his time and efforts. Chair Mann called the public hearing to order. Motion: Commissioner Strander made a motion to adopt the 08/27/15 minutes. Commissioner Hansen seconded the motion and all were in favor. Chair Mann opened the public hearing and swore in those wishing to provide testimony. 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. Citywide Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director, Department of Community Development gave the presentation. She said the wireless regulations were originally adopted in 2006 and there have been considerable changes to technology sincethat time. After the passage of the Spectrum Act the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) created new rules for how the City can regulate telecommunication carriers and sets certain parameters for existed permitted sites Carriers are allowed to update their facilities if they meet the parameters, which the City must approve within.60 days. The City currently has three types of permits in the code, and these eligible facilities modifications fall under the least regulated Type I permit. The City wants to encourage carriers and make it easier for them to make the best use of existing sites instead of moving on to new monopoles or new sites. Therefore, the attempt to streamline the process for previously approved sites works well with the existing code. The proposal does not change the general scheme, and the Spectrum Act does not change the concept of how wireless facilities are regulated. Additionally, some housekeeping clarifications were proposed to streamline the process, as well as changes to come into compliance with current case law. Attachment C 1 21 The Port raised the issue of exclusionary devices to discourage birds from nesting on the cell antennas, which is dangerous for the birds and the public. In order to encourage the bird nesting exclusionary devices staff is proposing to exempt them from the tower height limits so carriers are not penalized. There was a walkthrough of the proposed language. Following are the additional proposed changes: Page 12, section 2, lc, suggested language — "changing or adding additional antennas within a previously permitted concealed building mounted installation..." Page 13, Table A, add footnote 4 to "Non -concealed building attached" in the residential district column. Page 14, replace footnote 4 to read, "Multi -family zones only." Page 14, paragraph B, revise — delete "co -location" and insert the word, "replacement" following the word "pole" in the last sentence. Page 15, 2e - A question was raised on whether a facility would be allowed to be located within a residential zone, and if there are particular standards. Other questions also raised: Will there be an opportunity for citizen input; would the facilities be located on City owned property; would the neighborhood be notified if the facilities are locatedin a residential neighborhood; would there be a limit to the number of facilities located in a proximity; could there be multiple towers in an area? There was extensive discussion and several clarifying questions asked. The Commission had an interest for further discussion regarding this issue, as well as an interest in some proposed language Staff said the regulations have been in place since 2006 and there has been pretty good success in keeping the facilities in the commercial and industrial zones. Chair Mann proposed if a new tower is constructed in a residential zone that it automatically trigger SEPA. She said it would give citizens in the community an opportunity to provide input on how the tower will look and where it would be located. Staff said residents would be notified independently of SEPA if a new tower is constructed. Public Testimony: Kimberly Allen, Bush Law Firm, industry representative thanked staff for working with them on the code amendments. Ms. Allen said that the majority of the changes are being driven by the new Federal law, the Spectrum Act. She provided some background on the requirement as stipulated by law and responded to questions raised by the Commission. Ms. Allen went over a document, which was handed out at the public hearing requesting additional code modifications. She said that it deals with a code section that was previously called a height waiver. Changes she recommended are as follows: 2 22 Page 3 Public Hearing Minutes February 25, 2016 18.58.170. Height Waivers Adjustment to Height Standards Where the Hearing Examiner fords that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve an adjustment height waiver to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the waiver(s) will substantially secure adjustments are consistent with the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter. TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following:I 3 : T-h 21. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of an adjustment. waiver. Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b_ Availability of alternative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co -location. 2. In approving the waiver adjustment request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to substantially secure the assure consistency with the objectives of the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 3. A petition for any such adjustment shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the adjustmentwaiver and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. (Ord. 2251 §72, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) Staff said that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed language and after some minor changes was comfortable with the language. It is up to the Commission; whether they approve these policy changes. Ms. Allen. answered several questions from the Commission. In response to a question raised by Commissioner Alford Ms. Allen rescinded her request to delete the following language from paragraph 1, "of the Zoning Code." There was no, further testimony. The public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission deliberated. Commissioner Mann was opposed to deleting the following language "the granting of the height waiver, will not be detrimental to the public..." from the first paragraph as requested by the applicant. She said that it gives direction to the Hearing Examiner on what the City is looking for. The Commissioners were in consensus (note: Commissioner Alford was not in the Court Room at present.) Ms. Allen proposed that the paragraph be moved from paragraph one to paragraph two so it could be a Hearing Examiner's decision. Chair Mann asked for a motion accepting the green line document received from the applicant with the following exceptions: 1. The proposal to delete "of the Zoning Code"— denied, language will remain 3 23 2. The proposal to delete paragraph 1 was approved, but the language inserted instead at the end of the sentence at 2 "and to ensure that the granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest." Commissioner Maestas made a motion to approve the applicant's green line document as revised, as noted by Chair Mann. Commissioner Hansen seconded the motion. All were in favor. Commissioner Hansen made a motion to forward the recommendations for Case Number L15-0014 to the City Council for their approval with staff's findings, conclusions, and the approved noted revisions. Commissioner Strander seconded the motion. All were in favor. Director's Report: • Upcoming agenda item - A Design Review for a hotel on West Valley • Upcoming agenda item - Housekeeping amendments, changes to the SEPA Ordinance, and additional updates to the Zoning Code • The City Council approved Phase I of Osterly Park Townhomes • The City Council has put the Regional Fire Authority on hold — they were unable to complete research in time to make the November ballot date. • The Tree and National Environment Committee is going to reconvene to work on the policies to make changes to the Zoning Code this summer. The intent is for this item to come to the Planning Commission in October and go to City Council early 2017. • Interviews for the vacant Planning Commission position are wrapping up, hopefully someone will be selected and start by the March. Adjourned: 8:05 PM Submitted by: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretary 4 24 f 7- Tukwila Parcels with Wireless Facilities Permits Attachment D N 25 Cft y of Mimi§ 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 IV. 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 L,1o3J-d 1.-c.1 f �7 Pc-_ rir\L- /n�a6)�--� ; .1 A .4-3)—=`' t~r.... �"`/v ?e/-tA, Of\ VV4C.,k lily �C �jG,c t- T t-�✓ ;''' OcA, 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) MINUTES 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 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 staffs 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. 2 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 r� Ciey of Trkcball 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: L15-0014 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).1 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. • 90% 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 3.8.58.1.7o 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 3.8.104.0so • 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 Attachment A W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 1-29-16 NG:bjs 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 Page 2 of 14 10 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 geographic. afea qap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that with-i ser oe-area(c) of YY i1lTITf-fr �C' 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 national telephone network through —applicant's wireless network. A "dead spot" (defined as s alt-less than significant 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 1.a through 1.e of this section, however, a building permit may be required for work on buildings: a. 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. b. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is permittedexempt 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 reducedhave the same area or less of thou antennas must remain the same (7'fM of c. Changingt-antennas within anconcealed buildinq-mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible chanqe from the outside. d. 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 Page 4 of 14 12 e. 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 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 A. TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(1) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Typc 1 Type 1 Type 1 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 ('I) Type 2 Type 1 New tower or waiver request _ Type 3 _ Type 3(44 Type 33 (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. () M 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 18.58.1640. 44) 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 se-leeatien, and so forth, with the last possible siting option being a new tower or waiver request. L> 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 Page 6 of 14 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. Informatiion 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. de. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). ef. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." aa4 #2. 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 faciliity. 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 f. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping t-preep Fad by. 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 18.58.97-0060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table A. 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 pllans 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 or er 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 Page 8 of 14 16 B. 7. That an alternative technology that does not require the use of a new tower, such as a cable microcell-network using -multiple low powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of B. g7. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites unsuitable. All engineering an--tes#nslegie 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 list all facility locations owned or operated by that entity within the City. Any is 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 Replacement for 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 18.58481170 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 Examiner , 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 requlations 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 Page 10 of 14 18 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 subparagraphs (a) and (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 that 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 subject 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 existinq 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 addinq an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than 6 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 s ., iri 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 i by tilt, `it,', 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 i 1. 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 a 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 J ATTACHMENT B 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. 1. 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 18.58.170 Height Where the Hearing Examiner finds that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations. or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve ,to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the E the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following: A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of .Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of alternative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co -location. In approving the request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to objectives of the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. A petition for any such :shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for I the and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant. (Ord. 2251 §72, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) the Deleted: waivers. 0 Deleted of the Zoning Code V.P., Deleted: a height waiver Deleted: waiver(s) will Deleted: 1. The granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest; and include, but not be limited to: Deleted: a waiver. Deleted: include, but not be limited to: Deleted: B Deleted: waiver Deleted: Deleted: c Deleted: waiver Deleted: waiver i / \ Page 1: [1] Deleted waiver(s) will substantially secure Page 1: [2] Deleted substantially secure Kim Allen 2/25/16 3:18 PM Kim Allen 2/25/16 3:18 PM 1 City of Tukwila Community Affairs & Parks Committee O De'Sean Quinn, Chair O Kathy Hougardy O Thomas McLeod AGENDA Distribution: D. Quinn K. Hougardy T. McLeod 3. Duffle D. Robertson Mayor Ekberg D. Cline C. O'Flaherty R. Turpin L. Humphrey N. Gierloff E. Boykan MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2016 — 5:30 PM HAZELNUT CONFERENCE Room (formerly known as CR #3) at east entrance of City Hall Commun Deve\opment Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a. An update on the Carbon Reduction Action Agenda from Elizabeth Willmott, Climate Solutions' New a. Information only. Pg.1 Energy Cities Team. Nora Gierloff, Deputy Community Development Director b. An ordinance updating wireless communication b. Forward to 3/28 C.O.W. Pg.37 facilities regulations. and 4/4 Regular Mtg. Nora Gierloff, Deputy Community Development Director c. An overview of the Minor Home Repair Program. c. Information only. Pg.53 Evelyn Boykan, Human Services Program Manager 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. MISCELLANEOUS 2016 Community Affairs & Parks Committee Information only. Work Plan Laurel Humphrey, Council Analyst Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, February22, 2016 16. The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate those with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800 (TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.gov) for assistance. l~1 7 1 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor TO: INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Ekberg Community Affairs and Parks FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director DATE: February 1, 2016 SUBJECT: Wireless Communication Facilities Updates ISSUE Updates to TMC 18.58, the Wireless Communication Facilities regulations, are needed to come into compliance with new Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules. BACKGROUND New regulations regarding wireless communication facilities were included in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act).1 In that legislation Section 6409(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."' 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 60 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. DISCUSSION 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 60 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. • 90% 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 I 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). 37 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 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 FINANCIAL IMPACT These changes will not create a financial impact on the City as they do not affect the type or cost of our wireless facility permitting. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward this ordinance to the Planning Commission for a hearing and recommendation. It could then return to Committee on March 14, and then move to the March 28 Committee of the Whole meeting for a hearing and subsequent April 4 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Ordinance Amending TMC 18.58 Z:1Council Agenda Items lDCD\Wireless fnfoMemoCAP2-8.doc 38 DRAFT 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 Communications 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 Page 1 of 14 39 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, VVT 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 Page 2 of 14 40 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 ProcessinglOrdinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 1-29-16 NG:bjs Page 3 of 14 41 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 erne yhic geograparea gap in coverage, capacity, frequency, or technology such that ea the_ plicant in which a Iarno a substantial number of applicant's remote user subscribers are unable to establish connect or maintain a connection toreliable wireless service from the national telephone network through applicant's wireless network. A "dead spot" (defined as small -less than significant 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 1.a through 1.e of this section; however, a building permit may be required for work on buildings: a. Routine maintenance and repair of wireless communication facilities, This shall not includ 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. b. Changing of antennas on wireless communication facilities is permittedexempt 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 reducedhave the same -area -or -less those-rermoyyed. The total number of and nac mutt r in the came �ean�Q�err�a�r�. c. Changing antennas within a concealed building -mounted installation is exempt provided there is no visible change from the outside. d. 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 Page 4 of 14 42 e. 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: 1. Any decision by the DCD Director, Director of Public Works, or Hearing Examiner Planning Commission 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 A. TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning" Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Type 1 Typc 1 Type 1 Adding antennas to an existing tower or utility pole Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Type 1(�) Eligible facilities rnodification 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° Type 3) Type 3) (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 43 (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 18.58.1540. 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 communications 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 ProcessinglOrdinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 1-29-16 NG:bjs Page 6 of 14 44 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. de. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). ef. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." and fg. 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 f. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State licensed architect. W: Word Processing \Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation update strike-thru 1-29-16 NG:bjs Page 7 of 14 45 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 18.58.070060. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table 4 A. 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 or other 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 Page 8 of 14 46 8. 7. That an alternative technology that des not require the use of a new transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be B. 87. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites or alternative technologies unsuitable. All engineeringevidence 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 list all facility locations owned or operated by that entity within the City. Any obtain a b„ iness license an an annual basic 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: 118.58.120 Utility Pole Replacement for 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 47 3. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities must meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district. If an exception is granted under TMC Section 18.58.480170 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 Examiner , 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 Page 10 of 14 48 1 / \ i 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 subparagraphs (a) and (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 that 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 49 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 subject 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 6 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 50 • 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's 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 51 Section 11. 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 chanqinq 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 a 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 52 7 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director November 3, 2015 Zach Phillips 1001 SE Water Ave Ste 180, Portland, OR 97214 RE: City of Tukwila Spectrum Act Code Amendments Dear Zach Phillips, The City of Tukwila is in the process of updating our Zoning Code regulations for wireless facilities in order to meet the provisions of the Spectrum Act. As a recent wireless permit applicant I invite you to review and comment on our attached draft ordinance. Tukwila's complete existing Wireless Communications Facilities chapter TMC 18.58 can be found online at our web site under Government/Tukwila Municipal Code. It would be most helpful to receive any comments by November 20th. We plan to take this ordinance to public hearings before our Planning Commission and City Council in early 2016. If you have any questions or would like additional information please contact me. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Deputy DCD Director Enclosure: Draft Ordinance Address: 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Website: www.TukwilaWA.gov Nora Gierloff From: Nora Gierloff Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 9:19 AM To: 'REGAN.OKANE@SACW.COM'; jsmith@rykaconsulting.com'; 'JUSTIN.ABBOTT@SELECTSITEACQ.COM'; 'GHASHMI@PTSWA.COM'; 'info@odelia.com' Subject: Tukwila Wireless Regulations Update Attachments: Draft Wireless facilities Ordinance 10-30-15.docx The City of Tukwila is in the process of updating our Zoning Code regulations for wireless facilities in order to meet the provisions of the Spectrum Act. As a recent permit applicant I invite you to review and comment on our attached draft ordinance. Tukwila's complete Wireless Communications Facilities chapter TMC 18.58 can be found at http://records.tukwilawa.gov/weblink8/1/doc/56618/Electronic.aspx . It would be most: helpful to receive any comments by November 20th. We plan to take this to public hearings before our Planning Commission and City Council in early 2016. If you have any questions or would like additional information please contact me, Norco C�1,P.rla f Deputy DCD Director City of Tukwila (206) 433-7141 The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 / \_. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 2251 §69 AND 2135 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 18.58.050, 18.58.070 and 18.58.120, RELATING TO COLLOCATION, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF WIRELESS FACILITIES; ESTABLISHING NEW REGULATIONS ON STANDARDS FOR ELIGIBLE FACILTIES MODIFICATIONS; 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 Communications Facilities," establishing local requirements for the location, construction, and modification of wireless facilities; and 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 1 of 11 Attachment A 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 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 2 of 11 f 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 23rd day of April, 2015, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting related to the proposed interim development and zoning regulations set forth in the proposed ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the proposed development and zoning regulations on the 26th day of May, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed development and 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 We Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 3 of 11 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 18.58.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §69 and 2135 §1 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code (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: TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(1) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Transmission tower co -location Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Adding antennas to an existing tower r t utilitypcle, Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Eligible ?`acvilities Hloditication TYE 1 Ty p 1 Type Utility pole ..lac ement 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. (2) Provided the height of the tower 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 18.58.150. (4) In the event of uncertainty on the type of a wireless facility, the DCD Director shall have the authority to determine how a proposed 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 4 of 11 0 0 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 communications 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 allowthe 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 18.104.060 and the following: 1. Type 1 — Applicant shall submit: a. A completed application form provided by the Department of Community Development. 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 ecti«r 18.58,200 would be a substantial change to an existing eligible support structure, W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 5 of 11 0 0 e. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required). f. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise." and g. 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. d. Letter from a radio frequency engineer that demonstrates that the facility meets Federal requirements for allowed emissions. e. If the facility is locatedwithin 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. awi f. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State -licensed architect. 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 18.58.070. b. The radio frequency engineer report shall include a discussion of the information required under TMC Section 18.58.070. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table I A. 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. W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 6 of 11 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 2. TMC Section 18.58.070 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2135 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.58.070, subparagraph 10, is hereby amended to read as follows: 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 3. Section Title Change. 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 Replacement for Co -location Section 4. 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 etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 7 of 11 0 0 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 rivate broadcast. and ublic safet 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 eli ible facilities modification a !,cation is filed with the Cit under this cha ter su orts or houses equipment described in paragraphs (a) and (b) above, and that has been reviewed and a roved under the a licable zonin or sitin rocess 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 u ort or house a u 'ment described in ara ra hs a and (b) above. 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 which was reviewed and a roved under the a licable zonin or elfin rocess and lawful! constructed. 5. "Pro osed facilities modification"shall mean and refer to a proposal submitted by an applicant to modify an eligible support structure the applicant asserts is subject to review under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act, and involving: a, collocation of new transmission equipment: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 8 of 11 removal of transmission equipment; or 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 roximty 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 other than towers in the public rights -of -way, it increases the hei ht of the tower b more than 10°I0 orb the hei ht of one additional antenna arra with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed 20 'eet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10'/0or more than 10feet, 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 other than towers 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 6 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, d..._Fr any eligible support structure; or e ) it entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site; ( it would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 9 of 11 L3) 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 noncompliant 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 at 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 Cit 's notice of in mi lete a ication or re nest 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 Cit fails to a rove or den an ell ible facilities modification within the timeframe 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. Section 5. 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 6. 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 W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 10 of 11 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 7. 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 , 2015. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attomey Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing\Ordinances\Wireless facilities -collocation etc. strike-thru 3-23-15 KS:bjs Page 11 of 11 Letter LE COOLEY COLIN ROBINSON ZACH PHILLIPS GIBRAN HASHMI RONALD MECKLER 13630 SR 9 SE, SNOHOMISH, WA, 98296 Cascadla PM, 733 7TH AVE STE 209, KIRKLAND, WA, 98033 1001 SE WATER AVE STE 180, PORTLAND, OR, 97214 PACIFIC TELECOM SERVICES, 560 2ND AVE, STE 210, SEATTLE, WA, 98104 CROWN CASTLE, 8547 154 AVE NE, REDMOND, WA, 98052 LAUREN SCHROEDTER HANSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, 11711 SE 8 ST, STE 120, BELLEVUE, WA, 98005 Email REGAN O'KANE JEFF SMITH JUSTIN ABBOTT MADELINE CHANEY Ken Lyons 0 540 W MADISON AVE, 16TH FLR, CHICAGO, IL, 60661 RYKA CONSULTING, 918 S HORTON STREET, STE 1002, SEATTLE, WA, 98134 SELECT SITE ACQUISITION LLC, 870 ORAVETZ RD SE, AUBURN, WA, 98092 ODELIA PACIFIC CORP, 1215 4TH AVE STE 1900, SEATTLE, WA, 98161 Busch Law Firm PLLC Verizon T-MOBILE AT&T Sprint BNSF Sprint T-Mobile Sprint Verizon AT&T REGAN.OKANE@SACW.COM jsmith@rykaconsulting.com JUSTIN.ABBOTT@SELECTSITEACQ.COM info@odelia.com ken.lyons@wirelesscounsel.com Department of Commerce Innovation is in our nature. Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment 60 Days Prior to Adoption ndicate one (or both, if applicable): 0 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ® Development Regulation Amendment Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the following jurisdiction provides notice of intent to adopt a proposed comprehensive plan amendment and/or development regulation amendment under the Growth Management Act. Jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Mailing Address: 6300 Southcenter BI. Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Date: 3/23/2015 Contact Name: Nora Gierloff Title/Position: Deputy DCD Director Phone Number: (206)433-7141 E-mail Address: Nora.Gierloff©Tukwilawa.gov Brief Description of the Proposed/Draft Amendment: If this draft amendment is provided to supplement an existing 60-day notice already submitted, then please provide the date the original notice was submitted and the Proposed amendment to modify Tukwila's existing Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter to comply with Spectrum Act requirements for eligible facilities modifications. Commerce Material ID number located in your Commerce acknowledgement letter. Is this action part of the scheduled review and update? GMA requires review every 8 years under RCW 36.70A.130(4)-(6). Yes: No: _X_ Public Hearing Date: Planning Board/Commission: 4/23/15 Council/County Commission:5/26/15 Proposed Adoption Date: 6/1/15 REQUIRED: Attach or include a copy the proposed amendment text. Rev 03/2015 10 ltrrrt S. March 23, 2015 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SE • PO Box 42525 • Olympia, Washington 98504-2525 • (360) 725-400t www.cvmmerce.wa.gov Nora Gierloff Depty DCD Director City of Tukwilla 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100 Tukwilla, Washington 98188 Dear Ms. Gierloff: Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this procedural requirement. City of Tukwila - Proposed amendment to modify existing Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter to comply with Spectrum Act requirements for eligible facilities modifications. These materials were received on March 20, 2015 and processed with the Material ID # 21129. We have forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies. If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106. If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment, then final adoption may occur no earlier than May 19, 2015. Please remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten (10) days of adoption. If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov, or call Dave Andersen (509) 434-4491. Sincerely, Review Team Growth Management Services STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF CQMMERCE e+e SE • P4 Box 42525 • Olympia, Nashingron 98504-2525 • (360) 725-4000 www.commerce.wa.gov March 23, 2015 Nora Gierloff Depty DCD Director City of Tukwilla 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100 Tukwilla, Washington 98188 Dear Ms. Gierloff: Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this procedural requirement. City of Tukwila - Proposed amendment to modify existing Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter to comply with Spectrum Act requirements for eligible facilities modifications. These materials were received on March 20, 2015 and processed with the Material ID # 21129. We have forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies. If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106. If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment, then final adoption may occur no earlier than May 19, 2015. Please remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten (10) days of adoption. If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov, or call Dave Andersen (509) 434-4491. Sincerely, Review Team Growth Management Services Department of Commerce Innovation is in our nature. Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment 60 Days Prior to Adoption Indicate one (or both, if applicable): ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ® Development Regulation Amendment Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the following jurisdiction provides notice of intent to adopt a proposed comprehensive plan amendment and/or development regulation amendment under the Growth Management Act. Jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Mailing Address: 6300 Southcenter BI. Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Date: 3/23/2015 Contact Name: Nora Gierloff Title/Position: Deputy DCD Director Phone Number: (206)433-7141 E-mail Address: Nora.Gierloff@Tukwilawa.gov Brief Description of the Proposed/Draft Amendment: If this draft amendment is provided to supplement an existing 60-day notice already submitted, then please provide the date the original notice was submitted and the Proposed amendment to modify Tukwila's existing Wireless Communication Facilities Chapter to comply with Spectrum Act requirements for eligible facilities modifications. Commerce Material ID number located in your Commerce acknowledgement letter. Is this action part of the scheduled review and update? GMA requires review every 8 years under RCW 36. 70A.130(4)-(6). Yes: No: _X_ Public Hearing Date: Planning Board/Commission: 4/23/15 Council/County Commission:5/26/15 Proposed Adoption Date: 6/1/15 REQUIRED: Attach or include a copy the proposed amendment text. Rev 03/2015 Nora Gierloff From: Nora Gierloff Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:50 PM To: AnnMarie Soto; Bob Giberson; Cheryl Thompson; Chris Flores; Christy O'Flaherty; David Cline; Derek Speck; Evie Boykan; Jack Pace; Jim Haggerton; Joyce Trantina; Laurel Humphrey; Mary Miotke; Mike Villa; Peggy McCarthy; Rachel Bianchi; Rachel Turpin; Rick Still; Stephanie Brown; Trish Kinlow Cc: Minnie Dhaliwal Subject: Wireless Facilities Regulations Executive Staff, In 2012, Congress enacted the Middle Class Tax Relief Act. Section 6409 of that act requires cities to approve applications for collocation, removal or replacement of wireless transmission facilities located on existing towers and base stations if the proposed modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of the tower or base station. Cities have been slow to respond to this change in federal law and so the FCC enacted rules which go into effect on April 8th that effectively preempt local permitting and review of such modifications. These new rules mandate that cities approve an application within 60 days of receipt unless the City determines that the application does not fit within the limits of what constitutes a substantial change. The rules define what constitutes a substantial change. If the city does not act within 60 days, the application is deemed approved. Staff has determined that we can accommodate these requirements with some minor changes to the existing Wireless Communication Facilities chapter of our Zoning Code. Because these changes relate to how we process applications for structures that the current code already permits it seems that we would be exempt from SEPA review for this change under: WAC 197-11-800 Categorical exemptions. (19) Procedural actions. The proposal, amendment or adoption of legislation, rules, regulations, resolutions or ordinances, or of any plan or program shall be exempt if they are: (a) Relating solely to governmental procedures, and containing no substantive standards respecting use or modification of the environment. (b) Text amendments resulting in no substantive changes respecting use or modification of the environment. Please review the proposed changes saved at Z:\01AgendaBusiness\Ordinances For Review\2015 Ordinances\WirelessEditsDueMarch20.docx by March 20. Please let me know if you have any questions, Nara.Q erlaff Deputy DCD Director City of Tukwila The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 Nora Gierloff From: Jack Pace Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 9:20 AM To: Nora Gierloff Cc: Minnie Dhaliwal Subject: FW: Siting Wireless Antennas - New FCC Rules - 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief Act Hi Nora, What are your thoughts? Jack From: Rachel Turpin [mailto:Rachel@kenyondisend.com] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 12:29 PM To: David Cline; Jack Pace Cc: Bob Giberson Subject: FW: Siting Wireless Antennas - New FCC Rules - 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief Act David and Jack, You may be aware that in October, the FCC adopted new rules regarding siting of wireless communications facilities that will become effective early next year. Cities will need to amend their development regulations to incorporate the new FCC regulations as part of the application and review process. The FCC's order will also impact the City's rights -of -way and franchise agreements, though those exact impacts are not yet clear. Chris Bacha, our firm's telecommunications/right-of-way/franchise expert, is currently engaged in a joint project for a number of our clients to research those impacts and to draft ordinances to address the FCC's order. Is this an effort that Tukwila would be interested in joining? It would be like the NWF v. FEMA case where all the cities would cost -share to save resources. I've already run this by Bob, and he is interested. Below you will find an email that Chris with additional information. I have another email from him that I will forward you as well. If this is something that Tukwila is interested in, I will let Chris know and he will get started. Thanks, Rachel Rachel B. Turpin Kenyon Disend, PLLC The Municipal Law Firm 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027-3820 Tel: (425) 392-7090, ext. 2210 Fax: (425) 392-7071 Rachek kenyondisend.com www.kenyondisend.com i I From: Chris Bacha Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 5:07 PM To: dheid@auburnwa.gov; Kevin Yamamoto; TBrubaker@ci.kent.wa.us; Kintzley, Heather; Lisa.Beaton@ci.kennewick.wa.us; Steve Victor; Janean Parker (parkerlaw@wwestsky.net); Brett Vinson; James McNamara; SFaggiano@SpokaneCity.org; LRiordan@bellevuewa.gov; Heidi Wachter - Lakewood; epauli@cityoftacoma.orq; PRuffatto@cob.orq; Robin Jenkinson; Sara Springer Cc: Pat Mason; Mike Kenyon Subject: Siting Wireless Antennas - New FCC Rules - 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief Act Folks: The Federal Communications Communication recently issued new rules for siting of wireless communications facilities that will become effective early next year. The new rules apply to collocation of "transmission equipment" on existing antenna support structures and base stations as those terms are defined under the new FCC regulations. These new rules will require amendments to existing development regulations including a new 60 day shot clock for determinations issued under these new rules. Unlike the 90 day shot clock imposed by the FCC a few years ago, failure to approve or deny an application under these new rules within the 60 day time period will result in a permit application being "deemed approved". I have included a summary below of the new regulations and have attached a copy of the FCC report and order. I am contacting you because each Washington city will need to amend its development regulations to incorporate the new FCC regulations as part of the application and review process. We are developing an ordinance for another client city for that purpose and it makes sense to me to check with other communities to see if there is interest in participating in developing this ordinance for use in your communities. If you have an interest please let me know. In the alternative, the wireless industry intends to develop a model ordinance in conjunction with national local government organizations; however, I do not know when that model ordinance will be available. Regards, In 2012 Congress passed the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act. Section 6409 of this act created new requirements applicable to collocation of transmission equipment upon existing towers and base stations. In particular, Section 6409 mandated that local governments approve applications for collocation of transmission equipment meeting the eligibility requirements under this new law. On October 21, 2014, the Federal Communications Commission issued a report and order creating new rules regarding the siting of wireless communication facilities meeting the requirements of Section 6409. The new regulations will take effect 90 days after publication in the federal register. It is unlikely that 2 any appeal of this report and order will result in a stay. Cities that have not incorporated these new requirements in their development regulations will run the risk of collocation applications being deemed approved because the applications are not processed in compliance with the new federal regulations. The following is a summary of the main features of these new regulations. A. Expedited Review: The new regulations apply to applications for modification to an existing antenna support structure or an existing base station. If an application meets the requirements under the rule it becomes an "eligible facilities request" and must be reviewed for a determine regarding whether or not the proposal meets the requirements for an eligible facility. Any application meeting these requirements must be approved by the reviewing entity. The review is therefore ministerial, limited to checking boxes. B. 60 Day Shot Clock; Remedy: The new regulations implement a 60 shot -clock to review an application. The FCC has implemented a "deemed approved" remedy in the event a city, town or county fails to take action within 60 days following submittal of the application (less any time tolled). In other words, if the city does not timely respond by approving or denying such an application, the application will be deemed approved. This will trigger an obligation by the applicant to provide written notice that the application is deemed approved whereupon the City will have 21 days to file a LUPA appeal. The city can only prevail if it can prove that the proposed modification did not meet the federal requirements. C. Tolling; Application Requirements: The 60 day time period is subject to tolling but only if the city has advised the applicant in writing of the specific information in the application that is required by the City Code and what information has not been provided. The city must provide this information to the applicant within 30 days of submittal of the application. The 60 time period will then be tolled pending receipt of the requested information. Upon such receipt by the city, the clock starts again and the city will then have 10 days to review and determine if the information is complete. If it is incomplete, notice must be sent again in order to toll the clock. D. Specificity in Notice of Incomplete Application. If the city or town fails to identify missing information in its initial 30 day letter, any failure to provide that information cannot operate to toll the 60 day shot clock. Accordingly, it is imperative that all deficiencies be identified in that first letter. It is also imperative that the application submittal requirements be very specific and they must be stated in an ordinance. Accordingly, cities that do not have ordinances in place with application requirements will arguably be unable to deny an application that has insufficient information. E. Limitation of Application Requirements. The FCC has stated that the application requirements imposed by the city can only require information that is related to whether or 3 not the application meets the federal requirements. Thus, the application requirements must be narrowly tailored. Any requests for information outside this limitation will not operate to toll the shot clock and cannot be enforced. F. Needs Analysis. The new regulations also provide that the City cannot require a needs analysis. The assumption is that because Section 6409 is intended to apply only to existing wireless facility sites, a collocation would have no impact and any needs analysis would have already occurred when the initial siting for that location occurred. Accordingly, local governments cannot require that the applicant show that the modification is necessary to fill a gap in service coverage or show that the proposed modification is the least intrusive modification to meet the needs of the applicant. G. Eligible Facilities. Section 6409 applies to two types of existing facilities, towers and base stations. Towers covered under these regulations are those towers constructed for the purpose or primary purpose of housing transmission equipment. However, a base station is broadly defined as, "the equipment and non -tower supporting structure as a fixed location that enable Commission -licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network" and would include any equipment (cables, switches, generators, etc.) associated with wireless communications service. This broad definition means that a base station can also include the support structure upon which the transmission equipment is located. In other words, a building, water tower, utility pole, church steeple, and so on. H. Existing Facility. The wireless industry argued in its filings before the FCC that the term "existing" as used in Section 6409 meant any structure that was in existence at the time of the application, regardless of use. If the FCC had accepted that view, a collocation would have included the placement of new transmission equipment on any existing structure (other than an antenna tower) even if the existing structure did not house any transmission equipment at the time of the application. The FCC did not entirely accept this view and determined that "existing" base station meant a base station upon which transmission equipment was already located. Accordingly, an application to modify an existing base station requires a showing that the base station houses transmission equipment at the time of the application. I. Criteria. Section 6409 provides that an application to modify an existing tower or base station will be subject to the expedited review and approval requirements only if the proposed modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of the tower or base station. The FCC adopted regulations that define what constitutes such a substantial change based solely upon objective criteria. These criteria are generally limited to increases in height and width of the tower or base station and vary depending upon the type of structure. The FCC did preserve the right of local governments to required compliance with life, health safety codes and to a more limited degree, conditions imposed pursuant to a conditional use permit 4 (with the exception of changes height and width). The FCC regulations also preserved concealed requirements to ensure that a collocation would not defeat the purpose of concealment requirements imposed upon the existing facility. The FCC, however, prohibited cities from refusing modifications meeting the FCC requirements solely because the existing structure or use constituted a legal non -conforming structure or use. J. Measurement. One of the wins for local governments was a requirement that the modification must be measured from the height and width of the facility as it existed prior to enactment of Section 6409 in 2012. This ensure that multiple applications cannot stack one on top of the other. K. Replacement. Another win for local governments was the FCC rule regarding replacement. The new regulations allow an existing tower or structure to be hardened and increased in height, but do not allow such towers or structures to be replaced. For example, a utility pole cannot be replaced to accommodate a new antenna installation, but an existing utility pole could be extended in height if the extension complied with existing code requirements. Accordingly, replacement of a utility pole to replace or add an additional antenna would be subject to the normal application process. In you have an interest in joint efforts to develop a model ordinance to address these new regulations, please let me know. Regards, Chris D. Bacha Attorney Kenyon Disend, PLLC The Municipal Law Firm 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027-3820 Tel: (425) 392-7090, ext. 2193 CeII: (253) 219-0016 Fax: (425) 392-7071 ChrisChkenyondisend.com www.kenyondisend.com 5 -*TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.58 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Sections: 18.58.010 18.58.020 18.58.030 18.58.040 18.58.050 18.58.060 18.58.070 18.58.080 18.58.090 18.58.100 18.58.110 18.58.120 18.58.130 18.58.140 18.58.150 18.58.160 18.58.170 18.58.180 18.58.190 Purpose Authority and Application Exemptions Permits Required Types of Permits —Priority —Restrictions New Towers General Requirements Electrical Transmission Tower Co -Location -Specific Development Standards Adding Antennas to Existing WCF Tower -Specific Development Standards Concealed Building Mounted Development Requirements Non -concealed Building Mounted Development Requirements Utility Pole Co -location Towers -Specific Development Standards Request to Use Non -concealed Building Attached in Lieu of a Concealed Building Attached Landscaping/Screening Zoning Setback Exceptions Height Waivers Expiration Removal of Abandoned Wireless Communication Facilities 18.58.010 Purpose A. The purpose of this Chapter is to regulate the placement, construction and modification of wireless communication facilities, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, while not unreasonably interfering with the development of the competitive wireless telecommunications marketplace in the City. The purpose of this Chapter will be achieved through adherence to the following objectives: 1. Establish clear and nondiscriminatory local regulations concerning wireless telecommunications providers and services that are consistent with Federal and State laws and regulations pertaining to telecommunications providers; 2. Protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts that wireless communication facilities might create, including but not limited to impacts on aesthetics, environmentally sensitive areas, historically significant locations, flight corridors, and health and safety of persons and property; 3. Encourage providers of wireless communication facilities to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 4. Encourage the location of wireless communication facilities in nonresidential areas and allow wireless communication facilities in residential areas only when necessary, to meet functional requirements of the telecommunications industry; 5. Minimize the total number of wireless communication facilities in residential areas; 6. Require cooperation between competitors and, as a primary option, joint use of new and existing towers, tower sites and suitable structures to the greatest extent possible, in order to reduce cumulative negative impact upon the City; 7. Allow wireless communication companies to use City property (i.e. City Hall, Community Center, parks, etc.) for the placement of wireless facilities, where consistent with other public needs, as a means to generate revenue for the City; 8. Ensure wireless communication facilities are configured in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the wireless communication facilities, as viewed from different vantage points, through careful design, landscape screening, minimal impact siting options and camouflaging techniques, and through assessment of technology, current location options, siting, future available locations, innovative siting techniques and siting possibilities beyond the jurisdictional boundaries of the City; 9. Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively and efficiently; 10. Provide for the removal of wireless communication facilities that are abandoned or no longer inspected for safety concems and Building Code compliance, and provide a mechanism for the City to cause these abandoned wireless communication facilities to be removed, to protect the citizens from imminent harm and danger; 11. Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failure, through engineering, careful siting, and maintenance of wireless communication facilities; and 12. Provide a means for public input on major wireless communications facility placement, construction and modification. B. In furtherance of these objectives, the City shall give due consideration to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, zoning code, existing land uses, and environmentally sensitive areas in approving sites for the location of communication towers and antennas. C. These objectives were developed to protect the public health, safety and welfare, to protect property values, and to minimize visual impact, while furthering the development of enhanced telecommunication services in the City. These objectives were designed to comply with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting personal wireless services. This Chapter shall not be applied in such a manner as to unreasonably discriminate between providers of functionally equivalent personal wireless services. Page 18-212 Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office TITLE 18 — ZONING D. To the extent that any provision of this Chapter is inconsistent or conflicts with any other City ordinance, this Chapter shall control. Otherwise, this Chapter shall be construed consistently with the other provisions and regulations of the City. E. In reviewing any application to place, construct or modify wireless communication facilities, the City shall act within a reasonable period of time after an application for a permit is duly filed, taking into account the nature and scope of the application. Any decision to deny an application shall be in writing, supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. The City shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application in accordance with Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code, this Chapter, the adopted Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, and other applicable ordinances and regulations. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.020 Authority and Application. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to the placement, construction or modification of all wireless communication facilities, except as specifically exempted in TMC Section 18.58.030. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.030 Exemptions. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following: 1. Routine maintenance and repair of wireless communication facilities, 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 permitted, provided the new antennas have the same area or Tess of those removed. The total number of antennas must remain the same. Additional ground equipment may be placed within an approved equipment enclosure, provided the height of the equipment does not extend above the screening fence. 2. An antenna that is designed to receive or send direct broadcast satellite service and/or broadband signals, or other means for providing intemet service including direct -to - home satellite services, and that is 1 meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement, and when the antenna is attached to the residence or business that is utilizing the service. 3. An antenna that is designed to receive video programming services via multipoint distribution services, including multi -channel multipoint distribution services, instructional television fixed services, and local multipoint distribution services, and that is 1 meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement. 4. An antenna that is designed to receive television broadcast signals. 5. Antennas for the receiving and sending of amateur radio devices or HAM radios, provided that the antennas meet the height requirements of the applicable zoning district, and are owned and operated by a Federally -licensed amateur radio station operator or are used exclusively for receive -only antennas. In order to reasonably accommodate licensed amateur radio operators as required by Federal Code of Regulations, 47 CFR Part 97, as amended, and Order and Opinion (PRB-1) of the Federal Communication Commission of September 1985, and RCW 35A.21.260, a licensed amateur radio operator may locate a tower not to exceed the height requirements of the applicable zoning district, provided the following requirements are met for such towers located in a residentially -zoned district: a. The tower and any antennas located thereon shall not have any lights of any kind on it and shall not be illuminated either directly or indirectly by any artificial means; b. The color of the tower and any antennas located thereon must all be the same and such that it blends into the sky, to the extent allowed under requirements set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration; c. No advertising logo, trademark, figurine or other similar marking or lettering shall be placed on the tower or any wireless communication facilities mounted or otherwise attached thereto or any building used in conjunction therewith; d. The tower shall be located a distance equal to or greater than its height from any existing residential structure located on adjacent parcels of property, including any attached accessory structures; e. A tower must be at least three-quarters of its height from any property line on the parcel of property on which it is located, unless a licensed engineer certifies that the tower will not collapse or that it is designed in such a way that, in the event of collapse, it falls within itself, and in that event, it must be located at least one-third of its height from any property line; f. No signs shall be used in conjunction with the tower, except for one sign not larger than 8W high and 11" wide and as required by Federal regulations; g. Towers shall not be leased or rented to commercial users, and shall not otherwise be used for commercial purposes; and h. All towers must meet all applicable State and Federal statutes, rules and regulations, including obtaining a building permit from the City, if necessary. 6. Emergency communications equipment during a declared public emergency, when the equipment is owned and operated by an appropriate public entity. 7. Any wireless intemet facility that is owned and operated by a govemment entity. 8. Antennas and related equipment no more than 3 feet in height that are being stored, shipped or displayed for sale. 9. Radar systems for military and civilian communication and navigation. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-213 -TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE 18.58.040 Permits Required. A. No person may place, construct or modify a wireless communication facility subject to this Chapter without first having in place a permit issued in accordance with this Chapter. Except as otherwise provided herein, the requirements of this Chapter are in addition to the applicable requirements of TMC Title 18. B. Any application submitted pursuant to this Chapter shall be reviewed and evaluated by the Director for all projects located on public or private property. The Director of Public Works or his/her designee shall review all proposed wireless communication facilities that are totally within City right-of-way. If a project is both on private or public property and City right-of- way, the DCD Director shall review the application. Regardless of whether the DCD Director or the Director of Public Works is reviewing the application, all applications will be reviewed and evaluated pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. C. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all other permits from any other appropriate goveming body (i.e., Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Federal Aviation Administration, etc.). D. This Chapter provides guidelines for the placement and construction of wireless communication facilities, not exempt as set forth in TMC Section 18.58.030 from its provisions and modification of wireless communication facilities. E. No provision of this Chapter shall be interpreted to allow the installation of a wireless communication facility to reduce the minimum parking or landscaping on a site. F. Wireless communication facilities that are govemed under this Chapter shall not be eligible for variances under TMC Chapter 18.72. Any request to deviate from this Chapter shall be based on the exceptions or waivers set forth in this Chapter. G. Third Party Expert Review - Applicants use various methodologies and analyses, including geographically -based computer software, to determine the specific technical parameters of the services to be provided utilizing the proposed wireless communication facilities, such as expected coverage area, antenna configuration, capacity, and topographic constraints that affect signal paths. In certain instances, a third party expert may be needed to review the engineering and technical data submitted by an applicant for a permit. The City may at its discretion require an engineering and technical review as part of a permitting process. The costs of the technical review shall be bome by the applicant. H. The selection of the third party expert may be by mutual agreement between the applicant and the City, or at the discretion of the City, with a provision for the applicant and beneficially interested parties to comment on the proposed expert and review his/her qualifications. The third party expert review is intended to address interference and public safety issues and be a site -specific review of engineering and technical aspects of the proposed wireless communication facilities and/or a review of the applicants' methodology and equipment used, and is not intended to be a subjective review of the site which was selected by an applicant. Based on the results of the expert review, the City may require changes to the application. The expert review shall address the following: 1. The accuracy and completeness of submissions; 2. The applicability of analysis techniques and methodologies; 3. The validity of conclusions reached; 4. The viability of other sites in the City for the use intended by the applicant; and 5. Any specific engineering or technical issues designated by the City. I. Any decision by the DCD Director, Director of Public Works, or Planning Commission 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. J. No alterations or changes shall be made to plans approved by the Director, Director of Public Works, or Hearing Examiner without approval from the City. Minor changes which do not change the overall project may be approved by the Director as a minor modification. (Ord. 2251 §68, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1(part), 2006) 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: TABLE A Type of Permit Required, Based on Type of Wireless Communication Facility Zoning(1) Type of Facility Residential Commercial Industrial Transmission tower co -location Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 Adding antennas to an existing tower Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Type 1(2) Utility pole co -locations i �I< `Type 2 Type 2 Type 2 Concealed building attached Type 2(3) Type 20) Type 1 Non -concealed building attached Type 2 Type 2 Type 1 New tower or waiver request Type 304) Type 3(4) Type 3(4) Zoning for any prvvate/public property or right-of-way: Residential - LDR, MDR, or HDR. Commercial - 0, MUO, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC, C/LI or TVS. Industrial - LI, HI, MIC/L, or MIC/H. :F I (2) Provided the height of the tower does not -increase -and -the square footageofthe enclosure area does-notincrease. (3) An applicant may request to install a non -concealed building attached facility, under TMC Section 18.58.150. (4) In the event of uncertainty on the type of a wireless facility, the DCD Director shall have the authority to determine how a proposed facility is incorporated into Table A. - rj Page 18-214 Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office TITLE 18 — ZONING In the event of uncertainty on the type of a wireless facility, the DCD Director shall have the authority to determine how a proposed 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 communications 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 nonresidential 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 18.104.060 and the following: 1. Type 1— Applicant shall submit: f� A completed application form provided by the Department of Community Development; 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; - •=a,� a�-. d. Sensitive Area studies and proposed mitigation (if required); e. If an outdoor generator is proposed, a report prepared by an acoustical engineer demonstrating compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise"; and f. 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; 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 f. If landscaping is proposed, four sets of a landscaping plan prepared by a Washington State -licensed architect. 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 18.58.070; b. The radio frequency engineer report shall include a discussion of the information required under TMC Section 18.58.070. The report shall also explain why a tower must be used instead of any of the other location options outlined in Table 1; 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; and Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-215 -TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE 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. (Ord. 2251 §69, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.060 New Towers. A. New towers are not permitted within the City unless the Hearing Examiner finds that the applicant has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that: 1. Coverage objective —There exists an actual (not theoretical) significant gap in service, and the proposed wireless communication facility will eliminate such significant gap in service; and 2. Alternates— No existing tower or structure, or other feasible site or other altemative technologies not requiring a new tower in the City, can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless communication facility; and 3. Least intrusive: The proposed new wireless communication facility is designed and located to remove the significant gap in service in a manner that is, in consideration of the values, objectives and regulations set forth in this chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the least intrusive upon the surrounding area. B. The Hearing Examiner shall be the reviewing body on the application to construct a new tower, and shall determine whether or not each of the above requirements are met. Examples of evidence demonstrating the foregoing requirements include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. That the tower height is the minimum necessary in order to achieve the coverage objective; 2. That no existing towers or structures or altemative sites are located within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's engineering requirements to meet its coverage objective (regardless of the geographical boundaries of the City); 3. That existing towers or structures are not of a sufficient height or could not feasibly be extended to a sufficient height to meet the applicant's engineering requirements to meet its coverage objective; 4. That existing structures or towers do not have sufficient structural strength to support the applicant's proposed antenna and ancillary facilities; 5. That the applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna; 6. That the fees, costs or contractual provisions required by the owner or operator in order to share an existing tower or structure, or to locate at an altemative site, or to adapt an existing tower or structure or altemative site for sharing, are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower construction by 25% are presumed to be unreasonable; 7. That an altemative technology that does not require the use of a new tower, such as a cable microcell network using multiple low -powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of altemative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology unsuitable; and 8. The applicant demonstrates other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures or other sites or altemative technologies unsuitable. All engineering and technological evidence must be provided and certified by a registered and qualified professional engineer and clearly demonstrate the evidence required. C. The Hearing Examiner, after holding a public hearing, shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application, or remand the application back to staff for further investigation in a manner consistent with the Hearing Examiner order. (Ord. 2251 §70, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.070 General Requirements. The following shall apply to all wireless communication facilities regardless of the type of facility: 1. Noise — Any facility that requires a generator or other device which will create noise must demonstrate compliance with TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise". A noise report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted with any application to construct and operate a wireless communication facility that will have a generator or similar device. The City may require that the report be reviewed by a third party expert at the expense of the applicant. 2. Business license requirement — Any person, corporation or entity that operates a wireless communication facility within the City shall have a valid business license issued annually by the City. Any person, corporation or other business entity which owns a tower also is required to obtain a business license on an annual basis. 3. Signage — Only safety signs or those mandated by other govemment entities may be located on wireless communication facilities. No other types of signs are permitted on wireless communication facilities. 4. Parking — Any application must demonstrate that there is sufficient space for temporary parking for regular maintenance of the proposed facility. 5. Finish — A tower shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA or FCC, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce its visual obtrusiveness. Page 18-216 Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office TITLE 18 — ZONING 6. Design — The design of all buildings and ancillary structures shall use materials, colors, textures, screening and landscaping that will blend the tower facilities with the natural setting and built environment. 7. Color — All antennas and ancillary facilities located on buildings or structures other than towers shall be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and ancillary facilities as visually unobtrusive as possible. 8. Lighting — Towers shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the reviewing authority shall review the lighting altematives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding areas. No strobe lighting of any type is permitted on any tower. 9. Advertising — No advertising is permitted at wireless communication facility sites or on any ancillary structure or facilities equipment compound. 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. J L,. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.080 Electrical Transmission Tower Co -Location - Specific Development Standards. The following requirements shall apply: 1. Height — There is no height requirement for antennas that are located on electrical transmission towers. 2. Antenna aesthetics — There are no restrictions on the type of antennas located on the electrical transmission tower. The antennas must be painted to match the color of the electrical transmission tower. 3. Antenna intensity— There is no limit on the number of antennas that may be located on an electrical transmission tower structure. 4. Feed lines and coaxial cables — shall be attached to one of the legs of the electrical transmission tower. The feed lines and cables must be painted to match the color of the electrical transmission tower. 5. Cabinet equipment — Cabinet equipment shall be located directly under the electrical transmission tower where the antennas are located or a concealed location. The wireless communication equipment compound shall be fenced; the fence shall have a minimum height of 6 feet and a maximum height of 8 feet. The fence shall include slats, wood panels, or other materials to screen the equipment from view. Barbed wire may be used in a utility right-of-way that is not zoned residential. 6. Setbacks — Since the facility will be located on an existing electrical transmission tower, setbacks shall not apply. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.090 Adding Antennas to Existing WCF Tower - Specific Development Standards. The following requirements shall apply: ‘.Dt, 4 - « 1. Height — The height must not exceed--what-was a .the4ower. If the height shall exceed what was originally approved, approval as a Type 2 decision is required for any height which will be less than the maximum height of the zone. 2. Antenna aesthetics — Antennas shall be painted to match the color scheme of the tower. 3. Antenna intensity— There is no limit on the number of antennas that may be located on an existing tower. 4. Feed lines and coaxial cables — Feed lines and coaxial cables shall be located within the tower. Any exposed feed lines or coaxial cables (such as when extended out of the tower to connect to the antennas) must be painted to match the tower. 5. Cabinet equipment — A new cabinet shall be located within the equipment enclosure that was approved as part of the original application. If the applicant wishes to expand the equipment enclosure from what was approved by the City or County under the previous application, the applicant shall seek a wireless communication facility (Type 2) application for only the equipment enclosure increase. 6. Setbacks — Setbacks shall not apply when an applicant installs new antennas on an existing tower and uses an existing equipment enclosure. If the equipment enclosure is increased, it must meet setbacks. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.100 Concealed Building Mounted Development Requirements. The following requirements shall apply: r t i 1. Height — The proposed facility must met the height requirement of the applicable zoning category. The antennas can qualify under TMC Section 18.50.080, "Rooftop Appurtenances", if the antennas are located in a church spire, chimney or fake chimney, elevator tower, mechanical equipment room, or other similar rooftop appurtenances usually required to be placed on a roof and not intended for human occupancy. Stand-alone antennas shall not qualify as rooftop appurtenances. 2. Antennas aesthetics — The antennas must be concealed from view by blending with the architectural style of the building. This could include steeple -like structures and parapet walls. The screening must be made out of the same material and be the same color as the building. Antennas shall be painted to match the color scheme of the building(s). 3. Feed lines and coaxial cables — Feed lines and cables should be located below the parapet of the rooftop. Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-217 -TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE 4. Cabinet equipment — If cabinet equipment cannot be located within the building where the wireless communication facilities will be located, then the City's first preference is to locate the equipment on the rooftop of the building. If the equipment can be screened by placing the equipment below the parapet walls, no additional screening is required. If screening is required, then the proposed screening must be consistent with the existing building in terms of color, style, architectural style and material. If the cabinet equipment is to be located on the ground, the equipment must be fenced with a 6-foot-tall fence, and materials shall be used to screen the equipment from view. Barbed wire may be used in the TVS, LI, HI, MIC/L, and MIC/H zones. 5. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities facility must meet the setback of the applicable zoning category where the facility is to be located. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.110 Non -concealed Building Mounted Development Requirements. The following requirements shall apply: 1. Height— The proposed facility musmeet the height requirements of the applicable zoning category. If the building where the facility is located is at or above the maximum height requirements, the antennas are permitted to extend a maximum of 3 feet above the existing roof line. Non -concealed building mounted facilities shall not qualify as "Rooftop Appurtenances" under TMC 18.50.080. 2. Antenna aesthetics — The first preference for any proposed facility is to utilize flush -mounted antennas. Nonflush- mounted antennas may be used when their visual impact will be negated by the scale of the antennas to the building. "Shrouds" are not required unless they provide a better visual appearance than exposed antennas. Antennas shall be painted to match the color scheme of the building(s). 3. Feed lines and coaxial cables — Feed lines and cables should be located below the parapet of the rooftop. If the feed lines and cables must be visible, they must be painted to match the color scheme of the building(s). 4. Cabinet equipment — If cabinet equipment cannot be located within the building where the wireless communication facilities will be located, then it must be located on the rooftop of the building. If the equipment can be screened by placing the equipment below the parapet walls, no additional screening is required. If screening is required, then the proposed screening must be consistent with the existing building in terms of color, style, architectural style and material. If the cabinet equipment is to be located on the ground, the equipment must be fenced with a 6-foot-tall fence and materials shall be used to screen the equipment from view. Barbed wire may be used in the TVS, LI, HI, MIC/L, and MIC/H zones. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.120 Utility Pole Co -location./ ? < r' ^ .`" The following requirements shall apply: 1. Height — The height of a utility pole co -location is limited to 10 feet above the replaced utility pole, and may be not greater than 50 feet in height in residential zones. Within all other zones, the height of the utility pole is limited to 50 feet or the minimum height standards of the underlying zoning, whichever is greater. 2. Replacement pole — The replaced utility pole must be used by the owner of the utility pole to support its utility lines (phone lines or electric). A replaced utility pole cannot be used to provide secondary functions to utility poles in the area. 3. Pole aesthetics — The replaced utility pole must have the color and general appearance of the adjacent utility poles. 4. Coaxial cables — Coax cables limited to '/Z" in diameter may be attached directly to a utility pole. Coax cables greater than W must be placed within the utility pole. The size of the cables is the total size of all coax cables being utilized on the utility pole. 5. Pedestrian impact— The proposal shall not result in a significant change in the pedestrian environment or preclude the City from making pedestrian improvements. If a utility pole is being replaced, consideration must be made to improve the pedestrian environment if necessary. 6. Cabinet equipment — Unless approved by the Director of Public Works, all cabinet equipment and the equipment enclosure must be placed outside of City right-of-way. If located on a parcel that contains a building, the equipment enclosure must be located next to the building. The cabinet equipment must be screened from view. The screening must be consistent with the existing building in terms of color, style, architectural style and material. If the cabinet equipment is to be located on the ground, the equipment must be fenced with a 6- foot-tall fence and materials shall be used to screen the equipment from view. Barbed wire may be used in the TVS, LI, HI, MIC/L, and MIC/H zones. 7. Setbacks — Any portion of the wireless communication facilities located within City right-of-way is not required to meet setbacks. The City will evaluate setbacks on private property under the setback requirements set forth in TMC Section 18.58.170. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.130 Towers -Specific Development Standards. The following requirements shall apply: 1. Height — Any proposed tower with antennas shall meet the height standards of the zoning district where the tower will be located. Page 18-218 Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office TITLE 18 — ZONING 2. Antenna and tower aesthetics — The applicant shall utilize a wireless communication concealed facility. The choice of concealing the wireless communication facility must be consistent with the overall use of the site. For example, having a tower appear like a flagpole would not be consistent if there are no buildings on the site. If a flag or other wind device is attached to the pole, it must be appropriate in scale to the size and diameter of the tower. 3. Setbacks — The proposed wireless communication facilities must meet the setbacks of the underlying -zoning district. If an exception is granted under TMC Section 18.58.180 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. 4. Color — The color of the tower shall be based on the surrounding land uses. 5. Feed lines and coaxial cables — All feed lines and cables must be located within the tower. Feed lines and cables connecting the tower to the equipment enclosure, which are not located within the wireless communication facility equipment compound, must be located underground. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.140 Request to Use Non -concealed Building Attached in Lieu of a Concealed Building Attached. The use of concealed building facilities shall have first priority in all residential and commercial zones. However, an applicant may request to construct a non -concealed building attached wireless communication facility in lieu of a concealed wireless communication facility. The following criteria shall be used: 1. Due to the size of the building and the proposed location of the antennas, the visual impact of the exposed antennas will be minimal in relation to the building. 2. Cables are concealed from view and any visible cables are reduced in visibility by sheathing or painting to match the building where they are located. 3. Cabinet equipment is adequately screened from view. 4. Due to the style or design of the building, the use of a concealed facility would reduce the visual appearance of the building. 5. The building where the antennas are located is at least 200 feet from the Duwamish/Green River. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 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 Planning 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. B. Landscaping shall be installed on the outside of fences. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent practicable and may be used as a substitute for or as a supplement to landscaping or screening requirements. The following requirements apply: 1. Screening landscaping shall be placed around the perimeter of the equipment cabinet enclosure, except that a maximum 10-foot portion of the fence may remain without landscaping in order to provide access to the enclosure. 2. The landscaping area shall be a minimum of 5 feet in width around the perimeter of the enclosure. 3. The applicant shall utilize evergreens that shall be a minimum of 6 feet tall at the time of planting. 4. Applicant shall utilize irrigation or an approved maintenance schedule that will insure that the plantings are established after two years from the date of planting. C. The applicant shall replace any unhealthy or dead plant materials in conformance with the approved landscaping development proposal, and shall maintain all landscape materials for the life of the facility. In the event that landscaping is not maintained at the required level, the Director, after giving 30 days advance written notice, may maintain or establish the landscaping at the expense of the owner or operator and bill the owner or operator for such costs until such costs are paid in full. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.160 Zoning Setback Exceptions. A. Generally, wireless communication facilities placed on private property must meet setbacks of the underlying zoning. However, in some circumstances, allowing modifications to setbacks may better achieve the goal of this Chapter of concealing such facilities from view. B. The Director or Hearing Examiner, depending on the type of application, may permit modifications to be made to setbacks when: 1. An applicant for a wireless communication facility can demonstrate that placing the facility on certain portions of a property will provide better screening and aesthetic considerations than provided under the existing setback requirements; or 2. The modification will aid in retaining open space and trees on the site; or 3. The proposed location allows for the wireless communication facility to be located a greater distance from residentially -zoned (LDR, MDR, and HDR) properties. Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-219 TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE C. This zoning setback modification cannot be used to waive/modify any required setback required under the State Building Code or Fire Code. (Ord. 2251 §71, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1(part), 2006) 18.58.170 Height Waivers. Where the Hearing Examiner finds that extraordinary hardships, practical difficulties, or unnecessary and unreasonable expense would result from strict compliance with the height limitations of the Zoning Code, or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal, it may approve a height waiver to these regulations; provided that the applicant demonstrates that the waiver(s) will substantially secure the values, objectives, standards, and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and demonstrate the following: 1. The granting of the height waiver will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare, or injurious to other property, and will promote the public interest; and 2. A particular and identifiable hardship exists or a specific circumstance warrants the granting of a waiver. Factors to be considered in determining the existence of a hardship shall include, but not be limited to: a. Topography and other site features; b. Availability of altemative site locations; c. Geographic location of property; and d. Size/magnitude of project being evaluated and availability of co -location. B. In approving the waiver request, the Hearing Examiner may impose such conditions as it deems appropriate to substantially secure the objectives of the values, objectives, standards and requirements of this Chapter, TMC Title 18, and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. C. A petition for any such waiver shall be submitted, in writing, by the applicant with the application for Hearing Examiner review. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the waiver and all of the facts relied upon by the applicant (Ord. 2251 §72, 2009; Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.180 Expiration. Any application to install or operate a wireless communications facility shall expire exactly one year from the date of issuance of the application unless significant progress has been made to construct the facility. The City may extend the expiration period by up to one additional year due to circumstances outside of the control of the applicant. However, the City shall not issue an extension if any revisions have occurred to the City's Zoning Code which would affect the wireless communication facility approved application. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) 18.58.190 Removal of Abandoned Wireless Communication Facilities. Any antenna or tower that, after the initial operation of the facility, is not used for the purpose for which it was intended at the time of filing of the application for a continuous period of 12 months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such antenna or tower shall remove same within 90 days of receipt of notice from the City notifying the owner of such abandonment. Failure to remove such abandoned tower shall result in declaring the antenna and/or tower a public nuisance. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then this section shall not become effective until all users cease using the tower. (Ord. 2135 §1 (part), 2006) by s iso 4-0 o� �1,�u-fit nil o( re.R�cvee.� Page 18-220 Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office s� ferBlvd S !L5 Ramp f'`p' fir t,(/ u Legend Parcels Zoning LDR 4 ' 1 Tukwila Parcels with Wireless Facilities Permits Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits L12-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA158 ROXBURY L12-007 423049130 TYPE 1 L12-012 WIRELESS FACILITY 13400 INTERURBAN AVE S 0003000115 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA145 ALLENTOWN L12-012 3000115 TYPE 1 L12-030 WIRELESS FACILITY 0223400020 STACY MACGREGOR VERIZON SEA EAST ANDOVER L12-030 223400020 TYPE 1 L12-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51 PL S 0003800003 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT NV TUKWILA SE03XC408 L12-032 3800003 TYPE 1 L12-039 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 STACY MACGREGOR REALCOM ASSOCIATES L12-039 923049120 TYPE 2 L12-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 REBECCA FOX REALCOM ASSOCIATES L12-040 3523049071 TYPE 2 L12-041 WIRELESS FACILITY 16038 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800005 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT SPECTRUM L12-041 5800005 TYPE 2 L13-0046 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 Max Baker VERIZON @ SEAQ ORILLIA AWS MODIFICATION L13-0046 3523049037 TYPE 1 L13-023 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING WAY S 0323049026 COURTNEYJOHNSON SPRINT SE25XC333 MCQUEEN L13-023 323049026 TYPE 2 L14-0005 WIRELESS FACILITY 12901 BEACON -COAL MINE RD S 0001400003 Minnie Dhaliwal BNSF RAILWAY COMMUNICATIONS TOWER L14-0005 1400003 TYPE 3 L14-0014 WIRELESS FACILITY 14240 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 Max Baker SEA INTERRUB L14-0014 3365901881 TYPE 2 L14-0017 WIRELESS FACILITY 2223049102 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 WEE SE63XC332 L14-0017 2223049102 TYPE 1 L14-0018 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51ST PL S 0003800003 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 TUKWILA SE03XC408 L14-0018 3800003 TYPE 1 L14-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44TH AVE S 7349200345 Max Baker VERIZON WIRELESS SEA RIVERTON L14-0019 7349200345 TYPE 1 L14-0020 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 Max Baker SEA EAST ANDOVER L14-0020 223400010 TYPE 1 L14-0038 WIRELESS FACILITY 10825 E MARGINAL WAY S 0323049198 Max Baker SPRINT SE03XC409-SR-599 L14-0038 323049198 TYPE 1 L14-0068 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 LAURA BENJAMIN AT & T WA158 ROXBURY L14-0068 423049130 TYPE 1 L14-0069 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 LAURA BENJAMIN VERIZON L14-0069 223400010 TYPE 1 L14-0073 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR WAY 5 0323049026 COLIN POFF MCQUEEN SPRINT WIRELESS TELECOMM L14-0073 323049026 TYPE 1 L14-0074 WIRELESS FACILITY 10868 EAST MARGINAL WAY S 0323049057 COLIN POFF AT&T MOBILITY L14-0074 323049057 TYPE 1 L14-0078 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 COLIN POFF SS05 SOUTHCENTER L14-0078 5800029 TYPE 1 L15-0016 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 VALERIE LONNEMAN DIGITAL FORTRESS SATELLITE ANTENNA PROJ L15-0016 923049309 TYPE 3 L15-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 COLIN POFF SEA EAST ANDOVER L15-0019 223400010 TYPE 1 L15-0029 WIRELESS FACILITY 14220 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 VALERIE LONNEMAN T-MOBILE SE03563D L15-0029 3365901881 TYPE 2 L15-0039 WIRELESS FACILITY 5476800305 DILLON ROTH T-MOBILE SE03556D BEACON & BANGOR SCL L15-0039 5476800305 TYPE 2 L15-0040 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 LAURA BENJAMIN SPRINT CLEARWIRE EVOLUTION L15-0040 6437300020 TYPE 1 L15-0041 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 LAURA BENJAMIN SE03545A T-MOBILE TIB & 116TH L15-0041 923049120 TYPE 1 L15-0050 WIRELESS FACILITY 4030 S 140TH ST 7360600465 LAURA BENJAMIN T-MOBILE @ BIRCH CREST & 142ND/SCL/LEE L15-0050 7360600465 TYPE 2 L15-0059 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 LAURA BENJAMIN SE04000B SOUTHCENTER PLACE L15-0059 2623049021 TYPE 2 L15-0060 WIRELESS FACILITY 130 ANDOVER PARK E 0223100040 VALERIE LONNEMAN SE04001A PARK EAST L700/SECTOR SPLIT L15-0060 223100040 TYPE 2 L99-0062 USE PERMITS 18700 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 MICHAEL JENKINS 60 FOOT MONOPOLE WITH 2 ANTENNAE L99-0062 3523049037 TYPE 3 L97-0055 USE PERMITS 15820 TUKWILA INTL BL 2223049001 MICHAEL JENKINS CONSTRUCTION OF 100 FT MONOPOLE L97-0055 2223049001 TYPE 3 L96-0070 USE PERMITS 6100 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 3597000221 MICHAEL JENKINS AT & T WIRELESS L96-0070 3597000221 TYPE 2 Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits Main Key Field PROJECTTYPE Address SITE _APN PLANNER PROJECT _NAME Project No Project GIS_SITE_APN MAIN BLE_SUBT L01-011 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 MINNIE DHALIWAL QWEST WIRELESS- ROOFTOP ANTENNAE L01-011 1157200013 TYPE 2 L01-045 USE PERMITS 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S 0003200009 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOF TOP WIRELESS FACIL L01-045 3200009 TYPE 2 L02-002 USE PERMITS 5301 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200140 MINNIE DHALIWAL AT&T rooftop wireless communication faci L02-002 1157200140 TYPE 2 L02-007 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 CAROL LUMB INSTALLATION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICA L02-007 1157200013 TYPE 2 L02-011 USE PERMITS 5711 S 152 ST 1157200370 CINGULAR WIRELESS IS PROPOSING ANUNSTAFF L02-011 1157200370 TYPE 2 L02-027 USE PERMITS 14800 INTERURBAN AVE S 3597000005 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOFTOP FACILITY L02-027 3597000005 TYPE 2 L03-002 USE PERMITS 4020 S 140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL CUP FOR NEXTEL ROOFTOP WIRELESS FACILITY L03-002 7360600475 TYPE 2 L03-005 USE PERMITS 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-Mobile/Voicestream roof top wireless f L03-005 3523049071 TYPE 2 L03-024 USE PERMITS 14404 51 AVE S 7999600160 MILES, BRANDON Install a wireless communications facili L03-024 7999600160 TYPE 2 L03-040 USE PERMITS 4020 S 140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-mobile wireless communication facility L03-040 7360600475 TYPE 1 L05-019 USE PERMITS 15215 52 AVE S 1157200017 MILES, BRANDON Roof top wireless cellular facility for L05-019 1157200017 TYPE 2 L05-078 USE PERMITS 13134 44 AVE S 7349200345 BRANDON MILES CO -LOCATING ANTENNAS FOR WIRELESS INTERN L05-078 7349200345 TYPE 1 L06-065 USE PERMITS 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 BRANDON MILES CUP TO LOCATE WIRELESS INTERNET FACILITY L06-065 2623049127 TYPE 2 L08-047 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 CHRIS BEALS VERIZON WIRELESS PROPOSES TO MODIFY ITS L08-047 2623049021 TYPE 2 L09-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 BRANDON MILES DIGITAL FOREST - INTERGATE WEST BLDG C L09-007 923049309 TYPE 2 L09-016 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE S 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON Modification of existing antenna. Reloc L09-016 7349200340 TYPE 1 L09-025 WIRELESS FACILITY 15920 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800024 BRANDON MILES REPLACING ANTENNAS L09-025 5800024 TYPE 2 L09-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 COURTNEY THOMSON wireless communication device on doulble L09-032 6437300020 TYPE 2 L09-044 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE S 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON L09-044 7349200340 TYPE 1 L09-045 WIRELESS FACILITY 1232 ANDOVER PARK W 3523049074 COURTNEY THOMSON TYPE 2 PERMIT FOR CONCEALED ROOFTOP ANTE L09-045 3523049074 TYPE 2 L09-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEY THOMSON VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA BRISCO/ORILLIA RD L09-058 3523049037 TYPE 1 L10-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEY THOMSON VERIZONE WIRELESS S-SEA BRISCO L10-040 3523049037 TYPE 1 L10-057 WIRELESS FACILITY 13134 44 AVE S 7349200345 COURTNEY THOMSON CLEARWIRE ATC SOUTHGATE L10-057 7349200345 TYPE 1 L10-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 2800 SOUTHCENTER MALL 9202470010 CAROL LUMB VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA SOUTHCENTER DAS L10-058 9202470010 TYPE 2 L10-066 WIRELESS FACILITY 3458 S 146 ST 0040000315 Brandon Miles CLEARWIRE SEA0264 RIVERTON L10-066 40000315 TYPE 2 L11-003 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 JAIMIE REAVIS REALCOM ASSOCIATES L11-003 2623049127 TYPE 2 L11-011 WIRELESS FACILITY 11030 EAST MARGINAL WAY S 0323049057 STACY MACGREGOR SUNNY AUSINK L11-011 323049057 TYPE 1 L11-014 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T MOBILITY SS05 SOUTHCENTER L11-014 5800029 TYPE 1 L11-021 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T L11-021 6437300020 TYPE 2 L11-022 WIRELESS FACILITY 5711 S 152 ST 1157200370 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T MOBILITY L11-022 1157200370 TYPE 2 L11-027 WIRELESS FACILITY 12228 51 PL S 0179001955 JAIMIE REAVIS AT&T WIRELESS AT ALLENTOWN 2 L11-027 179001955 TYPE 1 L11-028 WIRELESS FACILITY 6874201170 JAIMIE REAVIS VERIZON WIRELESS L11-028 6874201170 TYPE 1 Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits Main Key Field PROJECTTYPE Address SITE _APN PLANNER PROJECT _NAME Project No GIS_SITE_APN MAIN_TA BLE_SUBT L01-011 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 MINNIE DHALIWAL QWEST WIRELESS- ROOFTOP ANTENNAE L01-011 1157200013 TYPE 2 L01-045 USE PERMITS 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S 0003200009 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOF TOP WIRELESS FACIL L01-045 3200009 TYPE 2 L02-002 USE PERMITS 5301 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200140 MINNIE DHALIWAL AT&T rooftop wireless communication faci L02-002 1157200140 TYPE 2 L02-007 USE PERMITS 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 1157200013 CAROL LUMB INSTALLATION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICA L02-007 1157200013 TYPE 2 L02-011 USE PERMITS 5711 S 152 ST 1157200370 CINGULAR WIRELESS IS PROPOSING ANUNSTAFF L02-011 1157200370 TYPE 2 L02-027 USE PERMITS 14800 INTERURBAN AVE S 3597000005 MINNIE DHALIWAL VERIZON WIRELESS ROOFTOP FACILITY L02-027 3597000005 TYPE 2 L03-002 USE PERMITS 4020 S 140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL CUP FOR NEXTEL ROOFTOP WIRELESS FACILITY L03-002 7360600475 TYPE 2 L03-005 USE PERMITS 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-Mobile/Voicestream roof top wireless f L03-005 3523049071 TYPE 2 L03-024 USE PERMITS 14404 51 AVE S 7999600160 MILES, BRANDON Install a wireless communications facili L03-024 7999600160 TYPE 2 L03-040 USE PERMITS 4020 S 140 ST 7360600475 MINNIE DHALIWAL T-mobile wireless communication facility L03-040 7360600475 TYPE 1 L05-019 USE PERMITS 15215 52 AVE S 1157200017 MILES, BRANDON Roof top wireless cellular facility for L05-019 1157200017 TYPE 2 L05-078 USE PERMITS 13134 44 AVE S 7349200345 BRANDON MILES CO -LOCATING ANTENNAS FOR WIRELESS INTERN L05-078 7349200345 TYPE 1 L06-065 USE PERMITS 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 BRANDON MILES CUP TO LOCATE WIRELESS INTERNET FACILITY L06-065 2623049127 TYPE 2 L08-047 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 CHRIS BEALS VERIZON WIRELESS PROPOSES TO MODIFY ITS L08-047 2623049021 TYPE 2 L09-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 BRANDON MILES DIGITAL FOREST - INTERGATE WEST BLDG C L09-007 923049309 TYPE 2 L09-016 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE S 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON Modification of existing antenna. Reloc L09-016 7349200340 TYPE 1 L09-025 WIRELESS FACILITY 15920 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800024 BRANDON MILES REPLACING ANTENNAS L09-025 5800024 TYPE 2 L09-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 COURTNEY THOMSON wireless communication device on doulble L09-032 6437300020 TYPE 2 L09-044 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44 AVE S 7349200340 COURTNEY THOMSON L09-044 7349200340 TYPE 1 L09-045 WIRELESS FACILITY 1232 ANDOVER PARK W 3523049074 COURTNEY THOMSON TYPE 2 PERMIT FOR CONCEALED ROOFTOP ANTE L09-045 3523049074 TYPE 2 L09-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEY THOMSON VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA BRISCO/ORILLIA RD L09-058 3523049037 TYPE 1 L10-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 COURTNEY THOMSON VERIZONE WIRELESS S-SEA BRISCO L10-040 3523049037 TYPE 1 L10-057 WIRELESS FACILITY 13134 44 AVE S 7349200345 COURTNEY THOMSON CLEARWIRE ATC SOUTHGATE L10-057 7349200345 TYPE 1 L10-058 WIRELESS FACILITY 2800 SOUTHCENTER MALL 9202470010 CAROL LUMB VERIZON WIRELESS -SEA SOUTHCENTER DAS L10-058 9202470010 TYPE 2 L10-066 WIRELESS FACILITY 3458 5 146 ST 0040000315 Brandon Miles CLEARWIRE SEA0264 RIVERTON L10-066 40000315 TYPE 2 L11-003 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049127 JAIMIE REAVIS REALCOM ASSOCIATES L11-003 2623049127 TYPE 2 L11-011 WIRELESS FACILITY 11030 EAST MARGINAL WAY S 0323049057 STACY MACGREGOR SUNNY AUSINK L11-011 323049057 TYPE 1 L11-014 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T MOBILITY SS05 SOUTHCENTER L11-014 5800029 TYPE 1 L11-021 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T L11-021 6437300020 TYPE 2 L11-022 WIRELESS FACILITY 5711 S 152 ST 1157200370 JAIMIE REAVIS SUNNY AUSINK FOR AT&T MOBILITY L11-022 1157200370 TYPE 2 L11-027 WIRELESS FACILITY 12228 51 PL S 0179001955 JAIMIE REAVIS AT&T WIRELESS AT ALLENTOWN 2 L11-027 179001955 TYPE 1 L11-028 WIRELESS FACILITY 6874201170 JAIMIE REAVIS VERIZON WIRELESS L11-028 6874201170 TYPE 1 Tukwila Wireless Facility Permits L12-007 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA158 ROXBURY L12-007 423049130 TYPE 1 L12-012 WIRELESS FACILITY 13400 INTERURBAN AVE S 0003000115 STACY MACGREGOR AT&T WA145 ALLENTOWN L12-012 3000115 TYPE 1 L12-030 WIRELESS FACILITY 0223400020 STACY MACGREGOR VERIZON SEA EAST ANDOVER L12-030 223400020 TYPE 1 L12-032 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51 PL S 0003800003 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT NV TUKWILA SE03XC408 L12-032 3800003 TYPE 1 L12-039 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 STACY MACGREGOR REALCOM ASSOCIATES L12-039 923049120 TYPE 2 L12-040 WIRELESS FACILITY 1228 ANDOVER PARK E 3523049071 REBECCA FOX REALCOM ASSOCIATES L12-040 3523049071 TYPE 2 L12-041 WIRELESS FACILITY 16038 WEST VALLEY HWY 005800005 STACY MACGREGOR SPRINT SPECTRUM L12-041 5800005 TYPE 2 L13-0046 WIRELESS FACILITY 18800 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 Max Baker VERIZON @ SEAQ ORILLIA AWS MODIFICATION L13-0046 3523049037 TYPE 1 L13-023 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING WAY S 0323049026 COURTNEYJOHNSON SPRINT SE25XC333 MCQUEEN L13-023 323049026 TYPE 2 L14-0005 WIRELESS FACILITY 12901 BEACON -COAL MINE RD S 0001400003 Minnie Dhaliwal BNSF RAILWAY COMMUNICATIONS TOWER L14-0005 1400003 TYPE 3 L14-0014 WIRELESS FACILITY 14240 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 Max Baker SEA INTERRUB L14-0014 3365901881 TYPE 2 L14-0017 WIRELESS FACILITY 2223049102 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 WEE SE63XC332 L14-0017 2223049102 TYPE 1 L14-0018 WIRELESS FACILITY 12200 51ST PL S 0003800003 Max Baker SPRINT 2.5 TUKWILA SE03XC408 L14-0018 3800003 TYPE 1 L14-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 13130 44TH AVE S 7349200345 Max Baker VERIZON WIRELESS SEA RIVERTON L14-0019 7349200345 TYPE 1 L14-0020 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 Max Baker SEA EAST ANDOVER L14-0020 223400010 TYPE 1 L14-0038 WIRELESS FACILITY 10825 E MARGINAL WAY S 0323049198 Max Baker SPRINT SE03XC409-SR-599 L14-0038 323049198 TYPE 1 L14-0068 WIRELESS FACILITY 0423049130 LAURA BENJAMIN AT & T WA158 ROXBURY L14-0068 423049130 TYPE 1 L14-0069 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 LAURA BENJAMIN VERIZON L14-0069 223400010 TYPE 1 L14-0073 WIRELESS FACILITY 10400 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR WAY S 0323049026 COLIN POFF MCQUEEN SPRINT WIRELESS TELECOMM L14-0073 323049026 TYPE 1 L14-0074 WIRELESS FACILITY 10868 EAST MARGINAL WAY S 0323049057 COLIN POFF AT&T MOBILITY L14-0074 323049057 TYPE 1 L14-0078 WIRELESS FACILITY 15700 NELSON PL 0005800029 COLIN POFF SS05 SOUTHCENTER L14-0078 5800029 TYPE 1 L15-0016 WIRELESS FACILITY 12101 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049309 VALERIE LONNEMAN DIGITAL FORTRESS SATELLITE ANTENNA PROJ L15-0016 923049309 TYPE 3 L15-0019 WIRELESS FACILITY 596 INDUSTRY DR 0223400010 COLIN POFF SEA EAST ANDOVER L15-0019 223400010 TYPE 1 L15-0029 WIRELESS FACILITY 14220 INTERURBAN AVE S 3365901881 VALERIE LONNEMAN T-MOBILE SE03563D L15-0029 3365901881 TYPE 2 L15-0039 WIRELESS FACILITY 5476800305 DILLON ROTH T-MOBILE SE03556D BEACON & BANGOR SCL L15-0039 5476800305 TYPE 2 L15-0040 WIRELESS FACILITY 16500 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 6437300020 LAURA BENJAMIN SPRINT CLEARWIRE EVOLUTION L15-0040 6437300020 TYPE 1 L15-0041 WIRELESS FACILITY 12201 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD 0923049120 LAURA BENJAMIN SE03545A T-MOBILE TIB & 116TH L15-0041 923049120 TYPE 1 L15-0050 WIRELESS FACILITY 4030 S 140TH ST 7360600465 LAURA BENJAMIN T-MOBILE @ BIRCH CREST & 142ND/SCL/LEE L15-0050 7360600465 TYPE 2 L15-0059 WIRELESS FACILITY 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY 2623049021 LAURA BENJAMIN SE04000B SOUTHCENTER PLACE L15-0059 2623049021 TYPE 2 L15-0060 WIRELESS FACILITY 130 ANDOVER PARK E 0223100040 VALERIE LONNEMAN SE04001A PARK EAST L700/SECTOR SPLIT L15-0060 223100040 TYPE 2 L99-0062 USE PERMITS 18700 ORILLIA RD S 3523049037 MICHAEL JENKINS 60 FOOT MONOPOLE WITH 2 ANTENNAE L99-0062 3523049037 TYPE 3 L97-0055 USE PERMITS 15820 TUKWILA INTL BL 2223049001 MICHAEL JENKINS CONSTRUCTION OF 100 FT MONOPOLE L97-0055 2223049001 TYPE 3 L96-0070 USE PERMITS 6100 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 3597000221 MICHAEL JENKINS AT & T WIRELESS L96-0070 3597000221 TYPE 2