Full Text
Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 1 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Discussion Issues Issue Discussion Notes Status A. Permit Review Timelines (Shot Clocks) A1. How does the FCC’s ruling impact the City’s procedures and workflow? And, how does it impact applicants for wireless communication facility deployment? (Miller) Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Miller asked how the FCC’s ruling and associated changes to the Redmond Zoning Code impact procedures and workflows carried out by City staff as well as the applicants for wireless communication facility deployment. Staff Response/Recommendation RZC 21.76.040.F Time Frames for Review – Wireless Communications Facilities provides application review timing in compliance with federal law and FCC guidelines. This portion of the RZC was previously established by Ord. 2919, eff. April 14, 2018. No changes to Section F have resulted from the FCC’s January 14, 2019 ruling, as follows: FCC Ruling: Review of an application to collocate a Small Wireless Facility using an existing structure: 60 days. (ii) Review of an application to collocate a facility other than a Small Wireless Facility using an existing structure: 90 days. (iii) Review of an application to deploy a Small Wireless Facility using a new structure: 90 days. (iv) Review of an application to deploy a facility other than a Small Wireless Facility using a new structure: 150 days. RZC 21.76.040.F Time Frames for Review (current code, no changes recommended to section below) Opened 2/20 Closed 2/27 ATTACHMENT A: ISSUES MATRIX ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 2 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status Wireless Communications Facilities. In order to comply with Federal law and FCC guidelines, applications for the following wireless communications facilities and systems shall be finally approved, denied or conditionally approved within the following timeframes. 1.For all WCF applications, other than applications for Eligible Facilities Requests as described below, the City shall approve, deny or conditionally approve the application within the timeframes fixed by Federal or State law, unless review of such application is tolled by mutual agreement. 2.Eligible Facilities Request a. Type of Review. Upon receipt of an application for an Eligible Facilities Request, the City shall review such application to determine completeness. b. Approval; Denial. An Eligible Facilities Request shall be approved upon determination by the City that the proposed facilities modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure. An Eligible Facilities Request shall be denied upon determination by the City that the proposed facilities modification will substantially change the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure. c. Timing of Review. The City shall issue its decision within sixty (60) days of receipt of an application, unless the review period is tolled by mutual agreement by the City and the applicant or according to subsection F.2.d. d. Tolling of the Timeframe for Review. The 60-day review period begins to run when the application is filed, and may be tolled only by mutual agreement by the City and the applicant, or in cases where the City Administrator determines that the application is incomplete. The timeframe for review is not tolled by a moratorium on the review of applications. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 3 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status i. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the City must provide written notice to the applicant within 30 days of receipt of the application, specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application. ii. The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a supplemental submission in response to the City’s notice of incompleteness. iii. Following a supplemental submission, the City will notify the applicant within 10 days that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified in this section. Second or subsequent notices of incompleteness may not specify missing documents or information that were not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness. e. Failure to Act. In the event the City fails to approve or deny an Eligible Facilities Request within the timeframe for review (accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed granted. The deemed grant does not become effective until the applicant notifies the City Administrator in writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the application has been deemed granted. f. Remedies. Any action challenging a denial of an application or notice of a deemed approved remedy, shall be brought in King County Superior Court or Federal Court for the Western District of Washington within thirty (30) days following the date of denial or following the date of notification of the deemed approved remedy. 3.The Administrator is hereby authorized to take appropriate administrative action, such as the hiring of a special hearing examiner, as well as expedited processing of applications, review and appeals, if any, in order to meet Federal or State time limits. Permit review timeframes are regulated at the state and local levels and the shot clocks provide review periods falling within the previously established timeframes. Staff anticipates ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 4 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status that the current ruling does not create new or additional impacts on the City’s procedures and workflows. An increase in demand for access to service and data capacity is anticipated and staff may experience an associated increase in applications for deployment of wireless communication facilities. The requirement for applications of wireless communication facilities to meet the development regulations and design standards provided in RZC 21.56 remains the same as previously established by Ord. 2919: RZC 21.76.070.AD Land Use Actions and Decision Criteria (current code, no changes recommended to section below) 6.Decision Criteria. All proposed wireless communication facilities shall not be approved unless the development regulations and design standards provided in RZC 21.56, Wireless Communication Facilities, are met. In compliance with the FCC’s ruling, the associated changes to the RZC are not anticipated to create new or additional impacts on applicants. The recommended amendments to the RZC are limited to those necessary to ensure the City’s compliance with the FCC’s January 14, 2019 ruling. Public Comment No public comments ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 5 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status A2. When a new Right-of-ways pole is necessary, does the Shot Clock allow sufficient time for permit review? (Rajpathak) Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Rajpathak asked whether the Shot Clock schedule allows sufficient time for permit review in situations where a new Right-of-Ways pole installation becomes necessary? Staff Response/Recommendation A City of Redmond Right-of-Ways pole replacement for installation of a Small Cell site would be permitted through a Right-of-Ways use permit under a Master License Agreement. The City evaluated the Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the RMC to ensure compliance. As 5G moves forward, staff will be working with the telecommunication providers to improve permit processing while ensuring it meets all community concerns, technical and regulatory requirements. Public Comment No public comments Opened 2/27 B. Safe Harbor Fees B1. What is the definition of Safe Harbor Fees? (Miller) Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Miller requested additional information regarding Safe Harbor Fees, listed as a key point of the FCC’s ruling in staff’s Feb. 20, 2019 presentation. Staff Response/Recommendation The recommended amendments to the RZC do not include fees. For reference, fees are addressed in a fee resolution, currently in discussion among Finance and Public Works staff. The FCC’s ruling (para. 23) discusses “fair and reasonable compensation. Fees are based on an approximation of costs that are “reasonable” and no higher than fees charged to “similarly-situated competitors in similar situations.” (para. 50). Opened 2/20 Closed 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 6 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status At the Commission’s February 27, 2019 meeting, Elana Zana of Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC provided additional information including the definition of Safe Harbor Fees – a fair and reasonable compensation as determined by actual cost. Paragraph 10 of the FCC’s ruling includes: The fees are a reasonable approximation of the state or local government’s costs, only objectively reasonable costs are factored into those fees, and the fees are no higher than the fees charged to similarly-situated competitors in similar situations. Public Comment No public comments C. Guidelines for Aesthetic Standards C1. Is the Technical Committee the correct decision-making body regarding Special Exceptions (RZC 21.56.060)? (Nichols) Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Nichols asked whether the Technical Committee was the correct decision- making body, as recommended for amendment to RZC 21.56.060.C.3 Special Exceptions – Procedures. Staff Response/Recommendation RZC 21.56.060.C.3 has been recommended to be amended to include: The decision-making body for review of a Special Exception shall be the Technical Committee. Opened 2/20 Closed 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 7 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status RZC 21.56.060.C.1 defines the final approving authority to be the same as that for the permit approving the antenna(s) location. RZC Table 21.76.070 Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process provides the land use permit type based on wireless communication facility type, the zone in which the facility is proposed, and the type of structure involved. A copy of this table is provided on Pages D-30 to D-32 of the Technical Committee’s Report, Feb. 14, 2019. The permit type for Small Cell Facilities located in special design areas, such as along a portion of Cleveland Street (RZC 21.78 Definitions – Special Design Areas), is Type II and may also involve permits or lease agreements in accordance with RMC Chapter 12.14. Type II permits are an administrative review with decision by the Technical Committee. Redmond Municipal Code (RMC) 4.50.020 provides the authority and duties of the Technical Committee. The Technical Committee shall review land use permit applications as noted in RZC Chapter 21.76, Review Procedures, and report its findings, conclusions and recommendations to the appropriate review authority, when applicable, prior to that authority making its decision or recommendation. The Technical Committee shall be responsible for making decisions or recommendations on land use permit applications, and for City implementation of the State Environmental Policy Act. Public Comment No public comments ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 8 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status C2. What is the Design Review Boards role regarding review of wireless communication facility character and design? (Miller, Rodriguez, Rajpathak) Planning Commission Discussion 2/20: Commissioner Miller asked whether the Design Review Board would or could be involved in the review of wireless communication facility review in the context of facility character and design. 2/27: Commissioners Rodriguez and Rajpathak requested additional information regarding the review process, permit type, and decision maker for: • Application for new development of a commercial or industrial building(s) that include rooftop wireless communication facilities; and • Application for new macro cell facility. Staff Response/Recommendation 2/20: Staff does not anticipate the Design Review Board reviewing applications for wireless communication facilities. RZC 21.76.020.E.3 Overview of the Development Process – Design Review describes that the Board has design review authority over applications requiring a building permit and having a total valuation of $50,000 or more. The small cell or small wireless facilities for 4G and 5G that are anticipated to be within the right-of-way, will require a Right-of-Way Use permit and in the Special Design Areas, a land use permit, though not a building permit (IBC 105.2.3). Permit review procedures for wireless communication facilities are provided in RZC 21.76.070.AD Wireless Communication Facilities, particularly Table 21.76.070 Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process. This review process, per RZC 21.76.070.AD.6 – Decision Criteria, requires that all proposed wireless communication facilities meet the development regulations and design standards provided in RZC 21.56. 2/27: To comply with the FCC’s Shot Clocks (RZC 21.76.040.F), the design standards for wireless communication facilities are included in RZC 21.56 Wireless Communication Facilities (during an April 2017 update) for a streamlined review process. The Design Review Board provides their review based on Article III, Design Standards (RZC 21.58 to 21.62), of Opened 2/20, 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 9 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status the Redmond Zoning Code. Since RZC 21.56 Wireless Communication Facilities is not within Article III, new macro cell facilities do not receive review by the Design Review Board. RZC Table 21.76.070 Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process provides the permit type for specific facility installations by zone and structure. Excerpts from this table are provided below in response to Commissioner Rodriguez and Commissioner Rajpathak’s questions: • Application for new development of a commercial or industrial building(s) that include rooftop wireless communication facilities; Macro Cell Facility and, Small Cell Facility and Small Cell Network mounted to a Structure Mounted Facility and associated Equipment Enclosures All nonresidential zones Nonresidenti al, Mixed Use & Multifamily Structures Type I1 R-20 and R-30 Multifamily Use, Nonresidenti al & Mixed Use Structures Type II All residential zones except R-20 and R-30 Nonresidenti al Structures Type II • Application for new macro cell facility. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 10 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status New Antenna Support Structures for Macro and Small Cell Facilities and New Antenna Support Structures for Macro and Small Cell Facilities that exceed height limits established in RZC 21.56. All zones Tower Type II Macro Cell Facility and, Small Cell Facility and Small Cell Network attached to Utility Poles, Light Poles and Miscellaneous Poles Macro Cell Facility and, Small Cell Facility and Small Cell Network attached to Utility Poles, Light Poles and Miscellaneous Poles All residential zones Existing and Replacement Utility Poles, Light Poles and Miscellaneous Poles and New Light Poles subject to a lighting analysis (All other new poles are to be regulated as a New Antenna Support Structure) Type II None required for Small Cell Facility located within public rights-of-way, see RMC Chapter 12.14, Telecommunication s for additional Franchise requirements Type II if located within Special Design Areas All non-residential zones Existing and Replacement Utility Poles, Light Poles and Miscellaneous Poles and New Light Poles subject to a lighting analysis (All other new poles are to be regulated as a New Antenna Support Structure) Type I None required for Small Cell Facility located within public rights-of-way, see RMC Chapter 12.14, Telecommunication s, Article III, for additional Franchise, requirements Type II if located within Special Design Areas Public Comment No public comments ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 11 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status C3. How will the FCC’s ruling and changes to the Redmond Zoning Code impact the City’s aesthetics? How can current design standards be maintained? How can the City work with providers during code administration for facility deployment? (Kritzer, Miller) Planning Commission Discussion Commissioners Kritzer and Miller requested additional information and examples that demonstrate the changes to the City’s aesthetics that could be anticipated as a result of the FCC’s ruling and associated changes to code. Staff Response/Recommendation RZC 21.56.050 Design Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities provides required design standards for which all wireless communication facilities shall comply. Standards (RZC 21.56.050.4.d) specific to the Special Design Areas (RZC 21.78 Definitions) were previously adopted and no changes are recommended. The current recommendation includes updates regarding size requirements and further clarification in accordance with FCC rules. For reference, the City provides standard details for signs, posts, and poles, several of which provide opportunity for internal fiber or wiring. Within the Special Design Areas, including Leary Way and a portion of Cleveland Street, service providers shall fully conceal small wireless facilities inside poles or incorporate them into street furniture. Any equipment mounted to the poles within the Special Design Areas shall be camouflaged to appear as an integrated part of the pole. Staff will continue to work with the service providers as the demand for wireless communication facilities continues to increase and as technologies change. Four of the City’s standard details are attachment to this issue matrix and are provided to the Commission for reference: • 420 – Luminaire Pole (Concrete Square) (most common) • 425 – Series Light Standard • 470 – Roadway Luminaire and Pole (Old Town) • 487 – Overlake Village Street Light At the Commission’s February 27 study session, staff will provide additional information regarding facility design including examples from service providers. Opened 2/20 Closed 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 12 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status Staff will continue to work with providers such as in coordinating in-field discussions, as provided during the previous amendment process. Public Comment No public comments D. Terminology D1. Provide clarification for the definition of Small Wireless Facilities or Small Cell(s). (Rodriguez, Rajpathak, and Wireless Policy Group LLC/Verizon). Planning Commission Discussion 2/20: Commissioner Rodriguez asked staff to clarify the definition of Small Wireless Facilities or Small Cell(s), particularly that portion regarding “all other wireless equipment associated with the structure”, as recommended for amendment to RZC 21.78, Definitions. 2/27: Commissioner Rajpathak requested additional information describing the difference between the federal measurement of 28 cubic feet per its updated definition of Small Wireless Facilities (Subpart U, para. 1.6002.(l)) and the state’s measurement of 17 cubic feet as listed in RCW 80.36.375. Staff Response/Recommendation 2/20: The recommended amendment to the definition of Small Wireless Facilities or Small Cell(s) is derived from the definition provided by the FCC as provided below with sections 2 and 3 discussing the sizing for antennas and all other wireless equipment: Small wireless facilities, consistent with § 1.1312(e)(2), are facilities that meet each of the following conditions: The facilities— Are mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height including their antennas as defined in § 1.1320(d); or Opened 2/20, 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 13 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status (ii) Are mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or (iii) Do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent, whichever is greater; Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of ‘‘antenna’’ in § 1.1320(d)), is no more than three cubic feet in volume; All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume; The facilities do not require antenna structure registration under part 17 of this chapter; The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR 800.16(x); and The facilities do not result in human exposure to radiofrequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in § 1.1307(b). The recommended amendment would establish consistency with the federal law regarding 28 cubic feet of equipment by volume, in comparison to the state code (involving 17 cubic feet) per RCW 80.36.375. The following examples from Denver, Colorado demonstrate sizing and show how the antenna and equipment can be incorporated into and onto existing utility poles, provided as new freestanding poles, and installed on buildings: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 14 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status 2/27: A primary difference between the FCC’s measurement regarding wireless communication facilities equipment at 28 cubic feet and the Washington state measurement at 17 cubic feet is that the state measurement is only for the “primary equipment enclosure”. “The following associated equipment may be located outside the primary equipment enclosure and if so located, are not included in the calculation of equipment volume: Electric meter, concealment, telecomm demarcation box, ground-based enclosures, battery back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switch, and cut-off switch.” (RCW 80.36.375). The FCC’s measurement does not exclude the equipment as listed in the RCW. The FCC definition of wireless communication facilities is as follows (cited in full above): “All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 15 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume.” Public Comment Wireless Policy Group, LLC, for its client Verizon, requested a clarification to an amendment to reflect the following (as highlighted below): Pole mounted equipment enclosures, unified camouflage designs and associated transmission equipment (excluding antennas but including all exterior or interior conduit), and all other wireless equipment associated with the antennas and any pre-existing associated equipment on the pole shall be the minimum size possible and shall not exceed 17 28 cubic feet for enclosures. Its February 20, 2019 letter requests a clarification why interior conduit would be included toward the maximum 28 cubic feet for pole mounted equipment enclosures, unified camouflage designs, and associated transmission equipment (included interior conduit), when the interior conduit would not be visible. D2. What is the intent regarding the FCC’s ruling regarding “reasonable” and “materially inhibit”? (Miller). Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Miller asked staff to clarify the meanings of “reasonable” and “materially inhibit” and how the terms would be regulated. Staff Response/Recommendation Staff is consulting with the legal counsel to provide this information at the Commission’s February 27, 2019 study session. At the Commission’s February 27, 2019 meeting, Elana Zana of Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC described the FCC’s interest regarding “reasonable” to be focused on cost in the context of Opened 2/20 Closed 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 16 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status reasonable cost and actual cost. She summarized the FCC’s description as being actual, reasonable, and objective cost. Regarding “materially inhibit”, Ms. Zana described this as a new standard for the 9th Circuit Court. The test is whether regulations prevent an applicant from doing that for which an application has been submitted. The FCC’s ruling (para. 6) includes: • An effective prohibition occurs when a state or local regulation materially inhibits a provider’s ability to engage in any of a variety of activities related to providing a covered service. • This test is met when filling a coverage gap, densifying a wireless network, introducing new services or otherwise improving service capabilities. • A state or local regulation could materially inhibit service by rendering a service provider unable to provide an existing service in a new geographic area, by restricting the entry of a new provider in providing service in a particular area, or by materially inhibiting the introduction of new services or the improvement of existing services. Public Comment No public comments ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 17 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status D3. What other utilities or equipment competes for collocating on city poles? (Miller). Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Miller requested information regarding competition for collocating utilities or equipment on City of Redmond poles. Staff Response/Recommendation The following describes facilities or equipment collocated with City of Redmond light poles: Type Total Example Traffic cameras (CCTV) Approx. 6 Rectangular Rapid Flash beacons Approx. 8 Opened 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 18 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status Signs More than 50 Wireless communications antenna 1 The following is also an example of a CCTV camera and wireless antenna collocated with two City of Redmond light poles: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 19 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status Public Comment No public comments D4. 5G antennas cannot be screened or painted, refine code to include “to the fullest extent technologically feasible.” (Wireless Policy Group LLC/Verizon). Planning Commission Discussion Staff Response/Recommendation Staff recommends reserving this request for consideration at a later date. The City has not reviewed many applications for small cell facilities and has not had the opportunity to realize changes to streetscape and neighborhood character that could occur as a result of 4G and 5G deployment. Equally, the technologies to support small cell wireless continue to evolve, with different systems being promoted among the variety of service providers. Staff wishes to monitor the progress of deployment and the implementation of RZC 21.56 Wireless Communications Facilities, as well as to continue discussion with wireless communication service providers. Staff also recognizes the opportunity for the City to grant special exceptions (RZC 21.56.060 Special Exceptions) when adherence to all development and design standards would result in a physical or technical barrier to signal reception or transmission, or would otherwise be an effective prohibition of wireless service. Public Comment Wireless Policy Group LLC (WPG), for its client Verizon, requested a refinement to RZC 21.56.050(3)(b) and 21.56.050(4)(d) to include “to the fullest extent technologically feasible” as follows: 21.56.050(3)(b) Antenna Arrays for Macro and Small Cell facilities mounted on rooftops of mixed-use, commercial, multifamily and other similar structures shall be fully screened to the fullest extent technologically feasible. Screening shall be of a Opened 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 20 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status material and design compatible with the building, and can include penthouse screening, parapet walls, or other similar screening. Omni-directional antennas shall be of a color compatible with the roof, structure or background. Antenna Arrays attached to residential structures are not permitted in any residential zoning district other than R-20 and R-30. 21.56.050(4)(d) Full concealment of antennas, equipment enclosures and all associated transmission equipment is required for all poles when located along Leary Way, Cleveland Street, Gilman Street, Bear Creek Parkway and 152nd Avenue NE between NE 20th and NE 31st Streets to the fullest extent technologically feasible. Equipment enclosures shall be fully concealed within the base of the pole, inside the pole or incorporated into street furniture, park furniture and/or other similar features and structures whenever technically feasible. Mounting to the exterior surface of the pole is not allowed unless camouflaged to appear as an integrated part of the pole. WPG’s February 20, 2019 letter describes that the requirement for full concealment would not be possible for Verizon’s deployment of 5G. Specifically, the letter states that 5G antennas cannot be screened or painted and that the concealment requirement for areas such as Cleveland Street, Gilman Street, Redmond Way, and in parts of Overlake would inhibit 5G deployment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 21 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status E. Additional Topics E1. Which party (applicant or the City) pays for a new pole in the Right- of-Ways? (Rodriguez). Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Rodriguez asked which party, the applicant or the City, pays for the installation of a new poles within the Right-of-Ways when a replacement is determined to be necessary. Staff Response/Recommendation The applicant is required to pay for a new pole as regulated by the Master Permit & Master Licensing Agreement. The rules and regulations are being updated under the Redmond Municipal Code update aspect to the FCC order. Public Comment No public comments Opened 2/27 E2. Does the City provide incentives for installation of the 5G network or equipment? (Rodriguez). Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Rodriguez asked whether the City provides any incentives regarding the Fifth Generation (5G) network or equipment. Staff Response/Recommendation The City does not provide incentives for the installation of the 5G network or its equipment. Though, City staff continues to work with wireless communications service providers such as in touring Special Design Areas and reviewing aesthetics and characteristics that the City desires of current and future wireless communications facilities. In addition, the Redmond Comprehensive Plan, Utilities Element includes policies regarding telecommunications such as: Opened 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 22 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status • UT-81 Work with telecommunications providers to ensure facility plans reflect and support Redmond’s Land Use Plan and that resources are available to support the Land Use Plan. • UT-82 Negotiate mutually beneficial franchise contract conditions that support the delivery of cost-effective services desired by Redmond residents and businesses. • UT-83 Promote a wide range of telecommunications options. This can include: o Making City facilities available for placement of antennas, o Treating attached cellular base antennas as other building or rooftop appurtenances, and o Support website communication between the City and its residents and customers. • UT-88 Maintain Redmond’s competitiveness in support of businesses, residents and visitors by promoting access to advanced and affordable communications technology citywide. Public Comment No public comments E3. Do other carriers have similar issues to those stated in Verizon’s February 20, 2019 letter? (Rajpathak). Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Rajpathak asked if other wireless communication service providers have similar concerns as those expressed by Verizon via Wireless Policy Group LLC’s February 20, 2019 letter. Staff Response/Recommendation In addition to Verizon, AT&T had submitted comments during the development of the draft proposed amendments. Staff continued to coordinate with AT&T and all regional service providers to seek comments during the draft phase. This included a joint meeting with Opened 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 23 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status Planning and Public Works staff, regional wireless communications service providers, and the City’s legal counsel. It is common for wireless communications service providers to prioritize certain cities for engagement and coordination. While the concerns stated by Verizon may be significant in the context of their deployment in Redmond, the same issues might not have the same level of significance for other providers. This may be a factor of the variety of equipment designs currently in use and continuing to evolve throughout the industry. Public Comment No public comments E4. Additional refinements recommended for clarity, consistency, and accuracy. Planning Commission Discussion Staff Response/Recommendation In review of Planning Commission’s recommended changes and public comments received regarding the recommended amendments to the RZC, staff recommends the following refinements to RZC 21.56.050 for clarification and accuracy: 1. Section 5g: The original recommendation inserted the term “small wireless facilities” whereas the rest of the code uses “small cell facilities”. This change maintains consistency with the FCC’s definition of Small Wireless Facilities or small cell(s) (RZC 21.78). Staff recommends the following as highlighted below. 5.g Attachment of additional small wireless cell facilities to a utility pole which has an existing small wireless cell facility attached Collocations shall be permitted on utility poles if located in a manner that minimizes clutter and visual impact. Opened 2/27 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 – includes discussions on Feb. 20 and 27, 2019 Page 24 of 24 Planning Commission Issues Matrix for March 13, 2019 Amendment to Redmond Zoning Code Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities (LAND-2019-00094, SEPA-2019-00100) Issue Discussion Notes Status 2. Section 7e: This section addresses macro cell facilities attached to existing and replacement utility poles. Therefore, staff recommends the following. 7e Attachment of additional small wireless facilities to a utility pole which has an existing small wireless facility attached Collocations shall be permitted on utility poles if located in a manner that minimizes clutter and visual impact. Canister antennas attached to the top of the pole shall be stacked as technically feasible. RZC 21.56.060 includes a typographical error and is corrected as highlighted below: A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide for the granting of special exceptions when adherence to all development and design standards of this chapter would result in a physical or technical barrier which would block signal reception or transmission or in would otherwise circumstances which prevent be an effective prohibition of wireless services.communication. Public Comment No public comments