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.