Planning Commission PKT 09-06-2017September 6, 2017
16:30 p.m.
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
City Hall
Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3, APPROVAL OF MINUTES
August 2, 2017
4. AUDIENCE COMMENT
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
6. COMMISSION BUSINESS
• Study Session
Personal Wireless Service Facilities in the Right -of -Way
7. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
8. ADJOURN
Commissioners
Lawson Bronson, Chair
Tom Medhurst, Vice -Chair
Hope Elder
Wayne Carlson
Tim O'Neil
Diana Noble-Gulliford
Dawn Meader McCausland
Anthony Murrietta, Alternate
Dale Couture, Alternate
KAPlamung Commission\2017\Agenda 09-06-19.doc
City Staff
Robert "Doc" Hansen, Planning Manager
Margaret Clark, Principal Planner
E. Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant
253-835-2601
www cio�qffederalway.coni
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 2, 2017 City Hall
6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Tom Medhurst, Diana Noble-Gulliford, Tim O'Neil, Dawn Meader McCausland,
and Anthony Murrietta. Commissioners absent: Lawson Bronson, Hope Elder (ex), Wayne Carlson (ex),
and Dale Couture (ex). City Staff present: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen, Deputy City
Attorney Mark Orthmann, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety.
CALL TO ORDER
Vice -Chair Medhurst called the meeting to order at 6:35 P.M.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of June 21, 2017, were approved as presented. Planning Manager Hansen stated that on page
two of the minutes, in the last sentence of the third paragraph from the bottom, reference is made to
"them." He wished to clarify that "them" refers to including a representative from the neighborhoods in
the stakeholders meeting.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Planning Manager Hansen delivered the report. He announced there will be a Planning Short Course
offered on September 27th in Sea -Tac and provided registration information. He went over the Sound
Transit status. Staff intends to have public information on the proposed route. Commissioner Noble-
Gulliford commented that the public needs to know what is the planned route south to Tacoma in order to
provide useful comment.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Discussion — Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Manager Hansen led the discussion. He commented that staff has discussed the proposed
amendments over the last 18 months. Item #7 (using an RV as a primary residence) of the original
proposal has been removed (it will be reviewed at a later date) and Manager Hansen provided the
Commissioners with an updated chart of the proposed amendments. Since notification of a public hearing
was not made for August 16th, the Commission discussed rescheduling the meeting to August 30th. Since
KAPlanning Commission\2016\Meeting Summary 08-02-17.doc
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 August 2, 2017
not all Commissioners were in attendance, Administrative Assistant Piety will survey how many
Commisisoners will be available on August 30th. Manager Hansen went on to state that most of the
amendments are for clarification of code language and intent; with one amendment (0) to allow wine
production, breweries, and distilleries in the Suburban Estates (SE) zone.
Discussion was held on proposed amendment # 1, which deals with the placement of the city's notice of
application signs. Commissioner O'Neil is concerned that the amendment could impose a burden on the
applicant to find a place for the notice in such cases like a flag lot where the lot itself is not visible from a
road. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford asked for clarification of where does the sign go if there are a
number of roads, or if the site is located on a small road with little traffic.
Commissioners asked in regards to proposal #8, would wineries, etc. be allowed in other zones. Manager
Hansen repled that staff is researching allowing them in other zones (need to determine if they will be
compatible with nearby uses), but this will take more time and staff wanted to proceed with allowing
them in at least one zone as soon as possible. Commissioner Meader McCausland commented that she has
had experience dealing with zoning issues regarding wineries, etc. She said that the regulations can be
confusing because of the various tourist activities that can take place, such as concerts. Manager Hansen
responded that staff is reviewing other jursidiction's regulations and experiences. Staff is considering a
limitation on the size and regulations for these types of businesses that are home occupations. Staff is
suggesting that they go through Use Process II review in order to address such issues.
Vice -Chair Medurst asked in regards to proposal #2 (which deals with deals with making the code
consistent with the Surface Water Manual), is there a design standard that comes into play because he
feels there should be one. Manager Hansen replied that he is not sure (he does not think so) and will have
to research it. He stated the intent of the code is to encourage grid pavers.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Deputy City Attorney Orthmann commented in regards to the comprehensive plan amendment process.
After reviewing how the city conducts site-specific rezones, it was noted that a map change is done as
part of the process. Staff feels the amemdment process should be considered a quais judicial process and
not discussed outside of the public hearing. Any discussion on the process should be disclosed on the
official record. The public should be given an opportunity to discuss any issues raised. Planning Manager
Hansen suggested that if a Commissioner receives questions/comments about the comprehensive plan
amendment process, she should recommend the person contact city staff. Discussion was held on the
environmental review process for the comprehensive plan amendments and site-specific requests.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
KAPlanning Commission\2016Weeting Summary 08-02-17.doc
QGDE N OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC T 206.447.7000 OMWLAW.COM
901 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 3500 F 206.447.0215
M U P N Y SEATTLE, WA 9 816 4-2 00 8
WALLACE
ATTORNEYS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 1, 2017
TO: Federal Way Planning Commission
CC: Mark Orthmann
David Van De Weghe
FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Special Council
RE: Preparing for Small Cell Deployment
INTRODUCTION
In order to prepare for small cell deployment and meet the federal timelines ("shot clocks"), the
City Council will consider revisions to its franchising and right-of-way ordinances in Title 4, as
well as revisions to the zoning code (Ch. 19.05 Definitions and 19.255 relating to Personal
Wireless Service Facilities). While the changes to the zoning code will be in the form of an
interim ordinance necessitated by the federal shot clocks, the Planning Commission plays a
significant role in determining which zones require special attention, the development of design
standards, and designation of the processes which will be utilized for significant design
deviations.
FRANCHISE CHANGES
Small Cell Development will be primarily regulated by the City's franchising ordinances in Title
4. A franchise is a form of a contract and the courts have given significant deference to city
council decisions as legislative acts when asked to review denials or conditioned approvals.
Federal guidelines also prohibit discrimination between similarly situated service providers and
guarantee general access to provide telecommunications service within the community. Much of
the administrative detail and review regarding right-of-way use will occur in the franchising and
public works processes.
{WSS1611381.DOCX;1/13104.080002/ 1
Federal Way Planning Commission
August 1, 2017
Page 2
The Planning Commission will be tasked with a number of critical recommendations:
A. Design Zones. The interim ordinance is designed to provide specialized review in the
form of concealment plans for certain critical design zones and undergrounded areas. In
other areas in the City, the majority of installations will either be on BPA transmission
towers, as attachments to existing utility poles, or in the form of replacement light
standards. These designs will typically be negotiated as part of the franchise.
In certain areas of the City, however, special attention to designated concealment is
needed. A design zone is zone in which a specialized streetscape has been designated by
your comprehensive plan. These may be commercial areas or, in some cases, residential
areas where utilities remain above ground. Undergrounded areas are just that, areas of
your community in which utilities have been undergrounded and utility poles are not
available as a resource for the location of true small cell deployments.
B. Design Standards. In addition to specifically negotiated designs in the franchise
documents, generalized design guidelines will be developed to assist staff in the
administrative approval of small cell facilities. Because of the tight timeframe under the
federal shot clocks, GMA processes (which include internal land use appeals) are not
well suited to consideration of specific design elements. The interim ordinance,
therefore, looks to various levels of approval:
1. Approval by franchise.
2. Minor or significant deviations from the approved franchise designs. Minor
deviations would be a staff Process 1, while a significant deviation would be a
Process 3 approval under your code.
3. Consideration of and approval of concealment strategies for design review, design
zones, and underground zones.
4. Additional review for critical areas and shorelines environments.
CONCLUSION
I look forward to working with you and staff as we proceed to adapt the interim ordinance into
your code with your thoughtful participation.
WSS:cm
{WSS1611381.DOCX;1/13104.080002/ } 2