Loading...
21-101703-Statement of Code Compliance-ATTCH 2-SC2064 Redondo Beach_AT&TSTATEMENT OF CODE COMPLIANCE Wireless Communication Facility (WCF or PWSF) Process II Application AT&T (SC2064 Redondo Beach) Submitted to the City of Federal Way, WA Development Services Department AT&T’s application (the “Application”) for a new personal wireless services facility (the “Facility”) in the Residential (RS15.0) zone is subject to and complies with the following applicable provisions of Federal Way’s Municipal Code (“FWMC”), which are addressed in this Statement of Code Compliance in the following order: I. WIRELESS COMMUNICAITON FACILITIES  Chapter 19.256 FWMC Wireless Communication Facilities II. USE ZONE CHART, HEIGHT AND PERMIT PROCESS  Chapter 19.200.190 FWMC Personal wireless service facility. II. PERMIT REVIEW  Chapter 19.60 FWMC Process II – Site Plan Review PLEASE NOTE: AT&T’s responses to applicable provisions are indicated below in bold italicized blue text. Any reference to an “Attachment” is in reference to an attachment included in AT&T’s application for the proposed Facility. I. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES 19.256.010 Purpose and scope. The purpose of this chapter, in addition to implementing the general purposes of the comprehensive plan and development regulations, is to regulate the activities of permitting, 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 a competitive wireless telecommunications marketplace within the city. This chapter provides permitting and review regulations as well as aesthetic, design and concealment standards for the construction of wireless communication facilities both within and without the public right-of-way. It also provides siting options at appropriate locations within the city to support existing communications technologies, to adapt to new technologies as needed, and to minimize associated safety hazards and visual impacts. The siting of wireless communication facilities on existing buildings and structures, collocation of telecommunication facilities on a single support structure and visual mitigation strategies are encouraged to preserve neighborhood aesthetics and reduce visual clutter in the city 19.256.020 Exemptions. (1) Exemptions. The following antennas and facilities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and shall be permitted in all zones consistent with the applicable development standards outlined in the use zone charts, Division VI, Zoning Regulations, of this title: (a) WCFs used for temporary emergency communications in the event of a disaster, or emergency preparedness, and for any other public health or safety purpose, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, any communications systems utilized by first responders such as police or fire. (b) Industrial processing equipment and scientific or medical equipment using frequencies regulated by the FCC; provided such equipment complies with all applicable provisions of FWRC 19.110.050, Compliance generally; 19.110.060, Exceptions; and 19.110.070, Rooftop appurtenances – Required screening. (c) Citizen band radios or antennas operated by federal licensing amateur (“ham”) radio operators; provided such antennas comply with all applicable provisions of FWRC 19.110.050, Compliance generally; 19.110.060, Exceptions; and 19.110.070, Rooftop appurtenances – Required screening. (d) Satellite dish antennas less than two meters in diameter, including direct-to-home satellite services, when used as secondary use of the property; provided such antennas comply with all applicable provisions of FWRC 19.110.050, Compliance generally; 19.110.060, Exceptions; and 19.110.070, Rooftop appurtenances – Required screening. (e) Automated meter reading (“AMR”) facilities for collecting utility meter data for use in the sale of utility services, except for WIP and other antennas greater than two feet in length; so long as the AMR facilities are within the scope of activities permitted under a valid franchise agreement between the utility service provider and the city. (f) Eligible facilities requests. See Chapter 19.257 FWRC. (g) Routine maintenance or repair of a major WCF and related equipment excluding structural work or changes in height, dimension, or visual impacts of the tower or support structure; provided, however, that compliance with the standards of this title is maintained and a right-of- way use permit is obtained if the major WCF is located in the right-of- way. (h) Temporary major WCFs for large scale community events, limited to the duration of the event, plus two days prior to the event and two days after. Applicant Response: Applicant is proposing to collocate on a PSE utility pole and is applying for a Conditional Use Permit as outlined below. 19.256.030 Definitions. [Intentionally omitted] 19.256.040 Federal regulatory requirements. (1) These provisions shall be interpreted and applied in order to comply with the provisions of federal law. By way of illustration and not limitation, any WCF that has been certified as compliant with all FCC and other government regulations regarding the human exposure to radio frequency emissions will not be denied on the basis of RF radiation concerns. (2) WCFs shall be subject to the requirements of this Code to the extent that such requirements: (a) Do not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and (b) Do not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting wireless service within the city. Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.050 Small wireless facility application process. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.060 Small wireless facility application requirements. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.070 Small wireless facility review criteria and process. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.080 Small wireless facility permit requirements. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.090 Small wireless facility modification. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.100 Small wireless facility aesthetic, concealment, and design standards. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.110 Designated design zones for small wireless facilities. [Omitted – Applicant is not proposing a small wireless deployment and this section does not apply.] 19.256.120 Major wireless communication facility application and review process. (1) Application. Upon receipt of a complete application for a major wireless communication facility, the application shall be processed as a process II application; provided, that temporary major WCFs are subject to process I review. See Chapters 19.60 and 19.55 FWRC. (2) Public notice. Notice shall be provided as required for process I and II applications. (3) Review. The director shall review the application for conformance with the application requirements and review criteria to determine whether the application is consistent with this chapter. (4) Decision. A permit may be granted, granted with conditions pursuant to this chapter and the code, or denied. Any condition reasonably required to enable the proposed use to meet the standards of this chapter and code may be imposed. If the application cannot meet the standards of this chapter through the imposition of reasonable conditions, the application shall be denied. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) Applicant Response: AT&T is applying for a Major wireless communication facility and understands the review process outlined herein. 19.256.130 Major wireless communication facility application requirements. (1) Process II permit applications for major WCFs, excluding temporary major WCFs, shall include the following minimum information in addition to that required for the underlying permit review process: (a) A diagram or map showing the primary viewshed of the proposed facility. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 5a-Viewshed Map. (b) Three photo simulations of the proposed facility from affected properties and/or public rights-of-way at varying distances. These photo simulations should include examples of camouflage and stealth installation options, if applicable. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 5-Photo Simulations. (c) Architectural elevations of proposed facility and site. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 4-Zoning Drawings. (d) If applicable, a propagation map of the proposed major WCF at the requested height and an explanation of the need for that facility at that height and in that location. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 3-RF Justification. (e) An inventory of other major WCF sites operated by the applicant and all other service providers within a half-mile radius of the proposed major WCF location. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 3-RF Justification. (f) A site/landscaping plan showing the specific placement of the major WCF on the site; showing the location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features; and indicating type and locations of proposed plant materials used to screen WCF components. Applicant Response: Please see Attachment 4-Zoning Drawings. (g) If the major WCF equipment cabinet is proposed to be located above ground, an explanation of why it is impracticable to locate the cabinet underground. Applicant Response: Due to the cost of an underground vault and concerns for the safety of the employees, locating the equipment underground is impracticable. . (h) Documentation of efforts to collocate on existing facilities. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to collocate on an existing structure (i) In proposing a major WCF in a particular location, the applicant shall analyze the feasibility of locating the proposed major WCF in each of the higher priority locations and document, to the city’s satisfaction, why locating the major WCF in each higher priority location and/or zone is not being proposed. Applicant Response: Please see response to 19.256.140 below. (j) If proposing a new tower, the applicant shall submit a signed statement indicating they agree to allow for the potential collocation of additional major WCF equipment by other service providers on the applicant’s structure or within the same wireless site location. If an applicant contends that future collocation is not possible on its site, it must submit a technical study documenting why. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to collocate on an existing PSE power pole and this subsection does not apply. (k) The city may require the applicant, at the applicant’s expense, to provide any additional information, mapping, studies, materials, inspections, or reviews that are reasonably necessary to implement this chapter and to require that such information, studies, mapping, materials, inspections, and reviews be reviewed by a qualified professional under contract to the city, also at the applicant’s expense. Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.140 Prioritized locations for major wireless communication facilities. The following sites shall be the required order of location for proposed major WCFs, including antenna and equipment enclosures. In order of preference, the prioritized locations for major WCFs are as follows: (1) Structures located in the BPA transmission easement. A major WCF may be located on any existing support structure currently located in the easement upon which are located U.S. Department of Energy/Bonneville Power Administration (“BPA”) power lines regardless of underlying zoning. Applicant Response: The BPA trail is approximately 2.2 miles outside of the search ring for this site and would not meet the desired coverage objective. (See Attachment 3 - RF Justification for definition of search ring). (2) Existing wireless sites and towers. A major WCF may be located on an existing site or tower where a legal WCF is currently located regardless of underlying zoning. If an existing wireless site or tower is located within a half- mile radius of a proposed major WCF location, the applicant shall document why collocation on the existing wireless site or tower is not being proposed, regardless of whether the existing site or tower is located within the jurisdiction of the city. Applicant Response: The nearest tower is 144’ft monopole approximately 2.25 mile SE of the search ring near the I-5 corridor and would not meet the desired coverage objective. (See Attachment 3 - RF Justification for definition of search ring) (3) Institutional uses and structures. If the city, a utility, institutional uses, or other public agency consents to such location, a major WCF may be located on existing structures, such as water towers, utility structures, fire stations, bridges, churches, schools, and other public buildings within all zoning districts, provided the public facilities are not located within public rights-of- way. Applicant Response: The only institutional structure is a church approximately 1/2 mile SW of the search ring. The tallest point of this structure is approximately 36ft which would be a maximum height of 51’. Both the distance from the search ring and the height restriction would not meet the desired coverage objective. (See Attachment 3 - RF Justification for definition of search ring) (4) Appropriate zoning districts. A major WCF may be located in or on other public or private property, buildings, or structures within nonresidential zoning districts as allowed by the zoning chart. Applicant Response: The search ring was selected to meet specific coverage objectives (see Attachment 3 - RF Justification for details). Within a one-mile radius of the search ring the zoning is residential. (5) If the applicant demonstrates to the city’s satisfaction that it is not technically feasible to site in a prioritized location, or as expressly allowed by the zoning chart, the city reserves the right to approve alternative site locations if a denial would be in violation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, as determined by the city through a process III review using the following test: Would denial of the application effectively prohibit the provision of service in violation of 47 USC 253 and/or 332? Applicant Response: As demonstrated in the Attachment 3 - RF Justification, it is not technically feasible to locate a site in any of the defined location listed above , thus prohibiting applicant from improving and expanding its coverage. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests approval of this application for collocation on a PSE utility pole in the ROW under Process II as allowed for under 19.256.090 above. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) 19.256.150 Major wireless communication facility development standards. The following development standards shall be followed in the design, siting, and construction of a major WCF: (1) Building- or structure-mounted major WCFs on existing buildings or structures outside of the public right-of-way. Major WCFs mounted on existing buildings and structures shall conform to the following development standards: (a) The equipment cabinet for the major WCF shall meet all requirements of subsection (4) of this section. (b) The maximum size of the major WCF panels and number of antennas shall be the minimum necessary to achieve the service objective. (c) The combined antennas and supporting structure may extend up to, but not exceed, 15 feet above the existing or proposed roof or other structure regardless of whether the existing structure is in conformance with the existing maximum height of the underlying zone as outlined in the use zone charts, Division VI, Zoning Regulations, of this title. Antennas may be mounted to rooftop appurtenances, as identified in FWRC 19.110.070, provided they do not extend beyond 15 feet above the maximum height of the structure as defined per FWRC 19.05.080, H definitions. (d) The antennas are mounted on the building or structure such that they are located and designed to minimize visual and aesthetic impacts to surrounding land uses and structures. (e) It is the applicant’s responsibility to prove that the proposed size of the major WCF panels and number of antennas is the minimum size and number necessary. (f) Within residential zones, equipment enclosures, and buildings to house equipment cabinets located above ground shall meet all applicable setback requirements for residential development of the underlying zone. For developed sites in nonresidential zones, the setback requirements for the equipment enclosure shall be those of the principal use of the subject property. For undeveloped sites in nonresidential zones, the setback requirements for the equipment enclosure shall be 20 feet for front, side, and rear yards. (g) The major WCF shall comply with all other applicable standards of this Code. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to collocate on an existing utility pole in the ROW and this section does not apply. (2) New freestanding major WCFs. All requirements of the associated land use zoning charts must be met. Additionally, these structures shall conform to the following site development standards: (a) Placement of a freestanding major WCF shall be denied if placement of the antennas on an existing structure can meet the applicant’s technical and network location requirements. (b) Monopoles shall be the only freestanding structures allowed in the city; except that a lattice tower may be used to accommodate the collocation of four or more service providers as part of a joint permit application. (c) A freestanding major WCF may not be located closer than 500 feet to an existing freestanding major WCF whether it is owned or utilized by the applicant or another service provider, unless the applicant demonstrates that a closer distance is justified by technical need or better screening result. (d) A freestanding major WCF, including the support structure and associated equipment, shall comply with all required setbacks of the zoning district in which it is located. For developed sites, the setback requirements shall be those of the principal use of the subject property. For undeveloped sites, the setback requirements for new freestanding major WCFs shall be 20 feet for front, side, and rear yards. (e) Freestanding major WCFs shall be designed and placed on the site in a manner that takes maximum advantage of existing trees, mature vegetation, and structures so as to: (i) Use existing site features to screen as much of the total WCF as feasible from prevalent views; and/or (ii) Use existing site features as a background so that the total major WCF blends into the background with increased distances. (f) In reviewing the proposed placement of a facility on the site and any associated landscaping, the city may condition the application to supplement existing trees and mature vegetation to more effectively screen the facility. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to collocate on an existing utility pole in the ROW and this section does not apply. (3) Standards for equipment cabinets. Equipment cabinets shall either: (a) Be placed in a new or existing completely enclosed building. It is the applicant’s responsibility to prove that the proposed size of the building is the minimum size necessary to house the equipment; or (b) Be placed above ground in a new or existing equipment enclosure. It is the applicant’s responsibility to prove that the proposed size of the equipment enclosure is the minimum size necessary to house the equipment. If the equipment enclosure is located within a new enclosed building, the building shall conform to all applicable development standards and design guidelines for the underlying zone. The enclosed building shall be architecturally designed and shall be compatible with existing buildings on the site. The enclosed building shall be screened to the greatest extent feasible from any street and/or adjacent properties by landscaping and/or topography. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to install a prefabricated 7’x7’ walk-in equipment shelter (WIC) above ground. This is the smallest WIC available to house all of the electronic equipment and batteries necessary to power the site. As shown on the zoning drawings the WIC will be surrounded by a chain-link fence with privacy slats and a five foot wide landscape buffer and will utilize the existing trees to the east as additional screening from public view (4) Standards for equipment enclosures. (a) Equipment enclosures shall not be allowed within the right-of-way. (b) In residential zones, equipment enclosures located above ground on properties shall meet all applicable setback requirements for residential development of the underlying zone. For developed sites in nonresidential zones, the setback requirements for the equipment enclosure shall be those of the principal use of the subject property. For undeveloped sites in nonresidential zones, the setback requirements for the equipment enclosure shall be 20 feet for front, side, and rear yards; however, for undeveloped sites in nonresidential zones, if the applicant can demonstrate that the equipment enclosure can blend in harmoniously with the existing site and complement the landscape buffer requirements of the underlying zone, as determined appropriate by the director, the equipment enclosure can be located inside of the 20-foot setback but outside of the required landscaping buffer of the underlying zone. (c) Equipment enclosures shall be designed, located, and screened to minimize adverse visual impacts from the public right-of-way and adjacent properties. (d) Equipment enclosures shall be designed, located, and screened to minimize adverse visual and functional impacts on the pedestrian environment. (e) Equipment enclosures and screening shall not adversely impact vehicular sight distance. Applicant Response: The proposed equipment shelter will be located on private property. All setbacks to the ROW exceed 20’ as shown below and on page C1.1 of the zoning drawings. The equipment shelter will be within a sight obscuring fenced compound with a five-foot landscape buffer and will not adversely impact vehicular sight distance. Front Setback: 36’10” W Side Setback: 23’11” E Side Setback: 118’2” Rear Setback: 13’5” (5) Security fencing. (a) No fence shall exceed six feet in height as stipulated in FWRC 19.125.160(5). (b) Security fencing shall be effectively screened from view through the use of appropriate landscaping materials. (c) Chain-link fences shall be painted or coated with a nonreflective color. Applicant Response: The ground equipment will be secured by a six-foot chain- link fence in nonreflective gray. It will be screened by a five-foot wide Type 3 landscape buffer surrounding a 6’ sight obscuring fence. (6) Cumulative effects. The city shall consider the cumulative visual effects of major WCFs mounted on existing structures and/or located on a given permitted site in determining whether additional permits may be granted so as to not adversely affect the visual character of the city. Applicant Response: Understood. (7) Signage. No wireless equipment shall be used for the purpose of mounting signs or message displays of any kind, except for small signs used for identification, hazard warning, and name of service provider; provided, that safety signage as required by applicable laws, regulations, and standards is permitted. Applicant Response: Understood. (8) Use zone charts, height and permit process. (a) The final approval authority for applications made under this section shall be defined by the appropriate permit process as outlined in the use zone charts, Division VI, Zoning Regulations, of this title. (b) Allowed heights shall be established relative to the appropriate process as outlined in the use zone charts, Division VI, Zoning Regulations, of this title. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.160 Expiration of major wireless communication facility permit. A major WCF permit issued under this chapter must be substantially implemented within three years from the date of final approval or the permit shall expire. The holder of the permit may request one extension to be limited to 12 months if the applicant cannot construct the major WCF within the original three-year period. Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.170 Nonconformance exceptions. [Intentionally Omitted.] 19.256.180 Temporary major wireless communication facilities. [Intentionally Omitted.] 19.256.190 Collocation. A permittee shall cooperate with other service providers in collocating additional antennas on support structures and/or on existing buildings and sites, provided said proposed collocatees have received a permit for such use at said site from the city. A permittee shall allow other service providers to collocate and share the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a technical impairment of the permitted use (as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden). In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating a new service provider, the city may require a third party technical study at the expense of the permittee. Failure to comply with this provision may result in a revocation of the permit. Applicant Response: AT&T is proposing to collocate on an existing structure and this section does not apply. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) 19.256.200 Removal of facility. (1) Abandonment and removal. The owner or operator of a WCF shall provide the city with a copy of the notice of intent to cease operations required by the FCC at the time it is submitted to the FCC. Additionally, the owner or operator of a WCF shall notify the city in writing of the abandonment of a particular facility within 30 days of the date the WCF is abandoned. The abandoned WCF shall be removed by the facility owner within 90 days of the date the WCF is abandoned, the permit is revoked, or if the facility falls into disrepair and is not maintained, as determined by the city. Disrepair includes structural features, paint, landscaping, or general lack of maintenance that could result in adverse safety or visual impacts. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then the city’s right to remove the tower shall not become effective until all users abandon the tower. (2) Partial abandonment and removal. If the abandoned antennas on any major WCF are removed or relocated to a point where the top 20 percent or more of the height of the supporting structure is no longer in use, the major WCF shall be considered partially abandoned. The owner or operator of any partially abandoned major WCF shall notify the city in writing of the partial abandonment of a particular facility within 30 days of the date the major WCF is partially abandoned. The owner of the major WCF shall have 120 days from the date of partial abandonment to collocate another service on the major WCF. If another service provider is not added to the major WCF within the allowed 120-day collocation period, the owner shall, in 210 days of partial abandonment, dismantle and remove that portion of the supporting structure that exceeds the point at which the highest operational antenna is mounted. (3) Removal and lien. If the owner or operator fails to remove the abandoned or partially abandoned facility upon 210 days of its abandonment or partial abandonment, the responsibility for removal falls upon the property owner on which the abandoned or partially abandoned facility is located. The city may enforce this subsection using the procedures as set forth in Chapter 1.15 FWRC. Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.200 Removal of facility. (1) Abandonment and removal. The owner or operator of a WCF shall provide the city with a copy of the notice of intent to cease operations required by the FCC at the time it is submitted to the FCC. Additionally, the owner or operator of a WCF shall notify the city in writing of the abandonment of a particular facility within 30 days of the date the WCF is abandoned. The abandoned WCF shall be removed by the facility owner within 90 days of the date the WCF is abandoned, the permit is revoked, or if the facility falls into disrepair and is not maintained, as determined by the city. Disrepair includes structural features, paint, landscaping, or general lack of maintenance that could result in adverse safety or visual impacts. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then the city’s right to remove the tower shall not become effective until all users abandon the tower. (2) Partial abandonment and removal. If the abandoned antennas on any major WCF are removed or relocated to a point where the top 20 percent or more of the height of the supporting structure is no longer in use, the major WCF shall be considered partially abandoned. The owner or operator of any partially abandoned major WCF shall notify the city in writing of the partial abandonment of a particular facility within 30 days of the date the major WCF is partially abandoned. The owner of the major WCF shall have 120 days from the date of partial abandonment to collocate another service on the major WCF. If another service provider is not added to the major WCF within the allowed 120-day collocation period, the owner shall, in 210 days of partial abandonment, dismantle and remove that portion of the supporting structure that exceeds the point at which the highest operational antenna is mounted. (3) Removal and lien. If the owner or operator fails to remove the abandoned or partially abandoned facility upon 210 days of its abandonment or partial abandonment, the responsibility for removal falls upon the property owner on which the abandoned or partially abandoned facility is located. The city may enforce this subsection using the procedures as set forth in Chapter 1.15 FWRC. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) Applicant Response: Understood. 19.256.210 Revocation of permit. A permit issued under this chapter may be revoked, suspended or denied for any one or more of the following reasons: (1) Failure to comply with any federal, state, or local laws or regulations; (2) Failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions imposed by the city on the issuance of a permit; (3) When the permit was procured by fraud, false representation, or omission of material facts; (4) Failure to cooperate with other major WCF providers in collocation efforts as required by this chapter; (5) Failure to comply with federal standards for RF emissions; and (6) Pursuant to FWRC 19.05.300(3), the city shall use the same criteria to determine if the permit shall be revoked as it used to grant the permit. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) Applicant Response: Understood. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) 19.256.210 Revocation of permit. A permit issued under this chapter may be revoked, suspended or denied for any one or more of the following reasons: (1) Failure to comply with any federal, state, or local laws or regulations; (2) Failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions imposed by the city on the issuance of a permit; (3) When the permit was procured by fraud, false representation, or omission of material facts; (4) Failure to cooperate with other major WCF providers in collocation efforts as required by this chapter; (5) Failure to comply with federal standards for RF emissions; and (6) Pursuant to FWRC 19.05.300(3), the city shall use the same criteria to determine if the permit shall be revoked as it used to grant the permit. Applicant Response: Understood. (Ord. No. 21-906, § 5, 1-19-21.) II. USE ZONE CHART, HEIGHT AND PERMIT PROCESS 19.200.190 Personal wireless service facility. The following uses shall be permitted in the single-family residential (RS) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section: III. PERMIT REVIEW 19.60.010 Process II generally. Various places in the Code indicate that certain developments, activities or uses are permitted only if approved using process II. This chapter describes process II. All commercial, office and industrial development applications subject to the provisions of this chapter, including applications for remodeling and expansion of an existing use, shall also meet the requirements of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community Design Guidelines. Process II applications are exempt from the procedural requirements set forth in RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130. Any process II application not categorically exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, shall be reviewed pursuant to process III of this title. If the development, activity, or use that requires approval through process II is part of a proposal that also requires approval through process IV, the entire proposal will be decided upon using process IV, if the director determines that this will result in more efficient decision making. Under process II, the director will make the initial land use decision and the decision on the community design guidelines. Any appeals of either decision will be decided by the hearing examiner after a public hearing. (Ord. No. 09-594, § 40, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, § 15, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(1)), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-361.) Cross reference: Permits, Chapter 19.20 FWRC. 19.60.030 Conduct of the review. The mayor may appoint one or more employees or other persons working on behalf of the city to perform the functions established under this chapter. (Ord. No. 10-669, § 68, 9-21-10; Ord. No. 09-594, § 42, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(3)), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-363.) 19.60.040 Purposes of review. The site plan review has the following purposes: (1) To review a proposal for compliance with the provisions of this title and all other applicable law. (2) To help ensure that a proposal is coordinated, as is reasonable and appropriate, with other known or anticipated development on private properties in the area and with known or anticipated right-of-way and other public improvement projects within the area. (3) To encourage proposals that embody good design principles that will result in high quality development on the subject property. (Ord. No. 09-594, § 43, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97. Code 2001 § 22-364.) 19.60.050 Site plan and community design guidelines approval criteria. (1) Applicability. The director may approve an application for site plan review and community design guideline review if it is consistent with the following sets of decisional criteria: (2) Site plan criteria. (a) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan; (b) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title; (c) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare; (d) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal; (e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration for access; and (f) Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off site, are adequately mitigated. (3) Community design guideline decisional criteria. (a) It is consistent with site design standards set forth in FWRC 19.115.050 for all zoning districts; (b) It is consistent with applicable supplemental guidelines set forth in FWRC 19.115.090; and (c) For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing development, it is consistent with those provisions of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community Design Guidelines, identified by the director as being applicable. (Ord. No. 09-631, § 4, 11-3-09; Ord. No. 09-594, § 44, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, § 17, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(4)), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-365.) 19.60.060 Administrative guidelines. The mayor is authorized to adopt administrative guidelines to implement the provisions of this chapter. These administrative guidelines will be used in the site plan review and have the full force and effect as if they were set forth in this title, and shall be on file in the department. (Ord. No. 11-684, § 12, 1-18-11; Ord. No. 09-594, § 45, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(5), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-366.) 19.60.070 Authority – Director’s decision – Notice. (1) Site plan review conducted under this chapter will form the basis of any modifications to any permits or approvals issued by the city for the proposal. In this regard, the person or persons conducting the site plan review is hereby authorized to require modifications to the proposal consistent with the criteria contained in FWRC 19.60.040 and any administrative guidelines adopted under FWRC 19.60.060. (2) The director shall integrate his or her decision and findings for site plan and community design guideline review into a single decision. A copy of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant, any person who submitted written comments, or any person who specifically requested a copy of the director’s decision. No other notice is required. (Ord. No. 09-594, § 46, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, § 18, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(6), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-367.) 19.60.080 Appeals. (1) Who may appeal. A decision of the director under this process may be appealed by the applicant, any person who submitted written comments or information, any person who has specifically requested a copy of the decision, or the city. (2) How and when to appeal. A written notice of appeal must be delivered to the department of community development services within 14 calendar days after issuance of the decision of the director. The notice of appeal must be accompanied by cash or a check, payable to the city of Federal Way, in the amount of the fee as established by the city. The notice of appeal must contain: (a) A statement identifying the decision being appealed, along with a copy of the decision; (b) A statement of the alleged errors in the director’s decision, including identification of specific factual findings and conclusions of the director disputed by the person filing the appeal; and (c) The appellant’s name, address, telephone number and fax number, and any other information to facilitate communications with the appellant. (3) Appeal process. Appeals are governed by process IV. (Ord. No. 09-594, § 47, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, § 19, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(175.10(7), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 22-368.) Comprehensive Plan: Goals: EDG2 Help attract, expand, and retain businesses, jobs, and investments that provide employment and enhance income opportunities for Federal Way residents. EDP4 Actively recruit new employers to the City. EDP5 Promote the continued diversification and sustainability of the local economy and expand employment opportunities for residents. PUG1 Work with private utility companies to allow them to provide full and timely service that meets the needs of the City’s residents and businesses, both present and future. PUG2 Work with private utility companies to allow them to provide service in a way that balances cost-effectiveness with environmental protection, aesthetic impact, public safety, and public health. PUP16 The City should require that site-specific utility facilities such as antennas and substations be reasonably and appropriately sited and screened to mitigate adverse aesthetic impacts.