HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/03/2013 07 Wireless Communication Facilities Moratorium Extension; Findings of FactBUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.
For Meeting of: 9/3/2013
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider ordinance extending moratorium
concerning wireless communication facilities and adopting
findings of fact in support thereof.
SUBMITTED BY: Mark Kunkler, Senior Assistant City Attorney
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
City staff is currently working on a comprehensive code for wireless communication facilities
and cell towers. A moratorium was adopted in April 2013 to allow for such work, and to allow
for public comment and participation from residents, the wireless industry and the Planning
Commission. On August 7, 2013, at the request of the wireless industry, the Planning
Commission adopted a motion recommending an extension of the current moratorium for one
month, through November 1, 2013. During the succeeding meeting on August 14, 2013, the
Planning Commission revised its recommendation to ask that the moratorium be extended
through December 31, 2013 in order to provide ample time for continuing review and
discussion. It was observed that the moratorium could be lifted before December 31, 2013
upon enactment of a new comprehensive code, but the extension through December 31 would
provide more opportunity for discussion and review, as well as accommodate the 30 -day
"effective date" requirement imposed on ordinances pursuant to the Yakima City Charter, Article
VI, Section 2.
The proposed extension through December 31, 2013 was supported by representatives of the
community and the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Association, but was opposed by
representatives of the industry. The industry countered that a one -month extension would
extend the moratorium through November 1, 2013 which should be sufficient to accomplish
enactment. Staff is recommending a two month extension, through December 1, 2013.
Pursuant to state law, a moratorium may be extended upon the City Council's adoption of an
ordinance and findings following a public hearing. RCW 35.63.200 and RCW 36.70A.390. The
attached ordinance is presented for Council consideration, but the period of extension is left for
Council determination.
Also included in the agenda materials is a memorandum discussing next steps in the review
process and a copy of the draft code delivered to the Planning Commission for its August 14,
2013 meeting. Additional changes are currently in process based on suggestions and
comments received from the Planning Commission, community and industry.
Resolution:
Other (Specify):
Contract:
Start Date:
Item Budgeted: NA
Funding Source/Fiscal
Impact:
Strategic Priority:
Insurance Required? No
Mail to:
Phone:
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL:
Ordinance: X
Contract Term:
End Date:
Amount:
Improve the Built Environment
City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct public hearing, adopt ordinance extending moratorium for a period determined
appropriate by the City Council. Staff recommends an extension of the moratorium for two (2)
months, from October 1, 2013 through December 1, 2013.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Upload Date
Type
Memo Wireless Communication Facilities
F-1
8/23/2013
Cover Memo
MORATORIUM EXTENSION Sept 3 2013
MORATORIUM-Telecommunication Towers-4-
F-1
8/23/2013
Backup Material
2013
ORDINANCE.Cell Towers. MORATORIUM
F-1
8/23/2013
Ordinance
EXTENSION.Sept.3.2013
R-2013-066 Telecommunications Towers Six-
F-1
8/23/2013
Backup Material
Month Moratorium - Findings of Fact
Tele-Communications-Cell Towers-
F-1
8/23/2013
Backup Material
DRAFT. REVISED.Au
CITY OF YAKIMA
LEGAL
DEPARTMENT
200 South Third Street Yakmui Washuigton %Rn (509)575b(T30 F" (509)`575 -6160
MEMORANDUM
August 23, 2013
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
FROM: Mark Kunkler, Senior Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Wireless Communication Facilities — Comprehensive Code — Next Steps
Current city code has very little pertaining to wireless communications facilities. In fact, the
entire current regulation consists of one section:
15.04.180 Communication towers.
The following provisions shall govern the placement of communication towers
within the urban growth area:
1. Communication towers less than thirty -five feet in height require a Type
(1) review to ensure compliance with minimum setbacks and building code
requirements;
2. Communication towers thirty -five feet or greater in height require a Type
(2) review to ensure compliance with setback provisions and that other permit
procedures are reviewed and met; and
3. Communication towers more than fifty -five feet in height shall follow the
review procedures for Class (3) uses and shall meet all the provisions and the
building code. (Ord. 2008 -46 § 1 (part), 2008: Ord. 2947 § 1 (part), 1986.
Formerly 15.04.130).
There are no restrictions or conditions that would apply different standards for cell towers and
other wireless communication facilities in different zoning districts. Current code does not
address heightened sight- screening requirements for towers proposed for a residential zone as
opposed to an industrial or commercial zone. There are no provisions requiring collocation of
facilities. There are no provisions describing a separate application process for wireless
communication facilities and no provisions requiring an applicant to justify one proposed facility
location over another more suitable location. There are no provisions describing camouflage or
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
August 23, 2013
Page 2
"stealth" technologies, and no clear provisions to guide the wireless communication industry as
to community standards.
In short, this means that a comprehensive code must be fashioned in its entirety. Staff has had
the benefit of codes and ordinances adopted by other jurisdictions, as well as comments from
the industry and the community. Soon after adoption of the moratorium in April, staff began
compiling and reviewing codes from other jurisdictions. We also received copies of sample
codes from the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Association (BCNA). About three drafts of a
proposed ordinance had been prepared by the middle of July, and staff was able to review
status and a draft code with representatives of BCNA at that time.
During the same period, staff met with representatives of ATT, and had been exchanging
suggestions and proposed revisions of the draft code.
These efforts have continued into August. A new revised draft was prepared and circulated to
interested persons in the community and to industry representatives in late July and early
August. On August 7, 2013, the Planning Commission held its first public hearing on the
proposed code and received comments from interested parties. Even as the Planning
Commission met, it was observed that the city and interested parties were considering further
revisions to the code, including new sections discussing "small cell" technologies using utility
poles within the community. The Planning Commission asked for more information regarding
utility pole installations and had good questions regarding the permitting processes for
proposed tower locations in different zoning districts.
At the August 7, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, representatives from ATT noted that
significant progress had been made toward a new code, but that much remained to be
discussed and clarified. For instance, the industry stated that it understood the need for
different standards and procedures in the residential and historic districts, but urged the
Commission and community to consider additional language and options for "incentivizing" the
industry to seek locations in city - preferred areas, or by setting clear camouflage standards
coupled with administrative approvals — rather than a conditional use permit process involving
extensive public hearings. For example, the industry noted that it understood the desire for
requiring "stealth" technologies in or near historic districts. If the city and community imposes
this requirement, the industry would ask for a clear standard to be met — together with an
administrative approval process. Representatives from BCNA and other areas of the
community expressed concern that some of the recent revisions to the appeared to soften the
requirements to be imposed on potential wireless facility sites, particularly with regard to levels
of camouflage. Both the industry and the community representatives advised that more time
would be needed to discuss and review.
In response, the Planning Commission also felt more time is necessary. The current
moratorium expires October 1, 2013. Under the City Charter provisions, an ordinance becomes
effective 30 days after passage and publication. Charter, Article VI Section 2. Thus, in order to
assure that the new ordinance is in place and effective before October 1, it must be adopted
and published on or before August 31, 2013. By extending the moratorium one month (to
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
August 23, 2013
Page 3
expire November 1, 2013), this gives the Planning Commission and City Council the month of
September to review and adopt a new code. Thus, the Planning Commission adopted a motion
recommending extension of the moratorium for one month, to expire November 1, 2013.
A new draft code was prepared August 9 and submitted for Planning Commission review on
August 14, 2013. New provisions were added for "small cell" wireless facilities and other
revisions made. (See attached Draft Code). Representatives of Verizon and ATT noted that
"small cell" should be modified to apply to "utility pole" installations, and made other suggested
changes. The concept of "incentivized stealth" for historic districts and other residential zones
also remains to be addressed. Representatives of BCNA and the community recommended
that the previous Planning Commission motion to extend the moratorium for one month should
be modified to recommend an extension through the end of the year. Representatives of the
industry believed that the one -month extension is sufficient.
After discussion, the Planning Commission moved that its previous recommendation for a one -
month extension be modified to provide for an extension of the moratorium through December
31, 2013, with an expectation that the new ordinance could be adopted well before then.
In the meantime, staff had prepared a set -date motion to be considered by the City Council on
August 20, 2013. The motion would set a public hearing on September 3, 2013 to consider an
extension of the moratorium. This motion was prepared and entered into the Council agenda
prior to the Planning Commission meeting held August 14, 2013. The set -date motion was
approved by the City Council, and a public hearing to consider an extension of the moratorium
is scheduled for September 3, 2013.
The issue before the City Council and the public on September 3, 2013 is whether the
moratorium should be extended, and if extended, whether the extension should be for one
month or some greater amount of time. The Planning Commission has recommended an
extension through December 31, 2013 to accommodate additional review and discussion,
issuance of its recommendation, consideration and action by the City Council, and enactment at
least 30 days prior to the expiration of the moratorium.
The City Council may decide whether an extension is necessary and may decide the period of
extension. It is possible to select a one - month, two -month or year -end extension — or any other
period of time deemed appropriate.
From staff's perspective, an extension at least through December 1, 2013 would be
recommended. This means that an ordinance should be adopted on or before November 1,
2013, and gives us the months of September and October to finalize the process. A one -month
extension (through November 1, 2013) gives staff, the community, the industry, the Planning
Commission and City Council only the month of September to adopt a final code. Moreover,
the last regular City Council meeting in September is September 17, 2013, meaning that if the
final code is not prepared and adopted on September 17, a special meeting would be
necessary later that month. The next scheduled Planning Commission meeting (study session)
is September 4, 2013, and members of BCNA, industry representatives and city staff are
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
August 23, 2013
Page 4
scheduled to meet and discuss on August 29, 2013. Anticipating a good discussion at this
meeting, additional revised drafts of the proposed code will be prepared following the August 29
meeting for review and discussion by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2013.
ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -14
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Yakima, Washington, adopting a six -month
moratorium on the filing and acceptance of development
applications for, the installation of, and issuance of permits and
approvals for, telecommunication towers, cell towers,
communication towers, and facilities related to such uses, within
the City of Yakima; directing development of comprehensive
zoning and business regulations pertaining to such towers and
related facilities; providing that the moratorium shall be in effect for
six months, through October 1, 2013; declaring an emergency in
the passage of this ordinance providing for immediate effective
date; and setting May 21, 2013 as the date for the public hearing
on the moratorium.
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 authorize the City Council to
adopt an ordinance imposing a moratorium and provide a process for public hearing
which must be held within sixty days of the date of adoption of the moratorium; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the City of Yakima needs
time to consider additional zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and
licensing regulations which would deal specifically with the location, design, construction,
maintenance and operation of telecommunication towers, cell towers, communication
towers, and facilities related to such uses (hereinafter collectively referred to as
"telecommunication towers ") within the City of Yakima, and the City Council has
therefore decided to impose a moratorium for the term of six months, commencing on
the effective date of this ordinance and extending through October 1, 2013, in order to
study the issue as determined by the City Council and to adopt appropriate regulations
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that imposition of a moratorium
is necessary to (a) provide the City with an opportunity to study the issues regarding
siting, zoning and regulation of telecommunication towers within the boundaries of the
City of Yakima; (b) to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents of the city, and
to preserve and promote development of comprehensive regulations for siting, zoning,
screening and maintenance of telecommunication towers within the city; and (c) to avoid
applicants possibly establishing vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any
revisions the City may make to its regulations and codes as a result of the City's study of
this matter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, determines and concludes that an emergency
exists, to wit: (a) the City of Yakima has learned of recent inquiries and proposals being
discussed with regard to locating telecommunication towers within the city, including
proposals for locating such uses within or in close proximity to residential
neighborhoods; (b) neither City staff nor the Planning Commission have had sufficient
opportunity to review the effects of telecommunication tower uses with regard to
concerns for economic development, preservation and /or promotion of site compatibility,
preservation and protection of the rights of residents to the quiet use and enjoyment of
their residential property and neighborhoods, and safety within the city, and development
of a comprehensive plan, program or regulation coordinating the preservation and
promotion of residential, commercial and industrial districts with the needs and uses of
the telecommunication industry; and (c) the immediate imposition of this moratorium will
preserve the status quo to enable the City to further study the effects of such uses and
to devise appropriate zoning and regulatory controls to address the effects of such uses;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes and directs the City Manager to 1) review
existing City codes and zoning regulations affecting telecommunication tower siting, 2)
further study the effects resulting from locating telecommunication towers within the
boundaries of the city, 3) prepare comprehensive proposed amendments to the City
codes and zoning regulations to address the effects of such uses, 4) to confer with
community members, City advisory commissions and telecommunication providers in
accord with the requirements of RCW 35.99.050, as shall be necessary and appropriate,
and 5) to present recommended legislation addressing such issues to the City Council
for consideration, public comment and action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that a public hearing on this
moratorium should be held on May 21, 2013, whereupon the City Council may adopt
findings of fact in support of the adoption of this moratorium, or modify the terms thereof;
and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the term of six months set forth above for the
moratorium adopted herein, this moratorium may at any time hereafter be (a) modified
by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; (b) extended for additional term(s)
of six months upon action following public hearing and adoption of findings in support
thereof; (c) terminated by the City Council upon adoption of appropriate zoning and
regulatory codes; or (d) terminated by the City Council for any reason deemed
necessary or appropriate; now, therefore:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
Section 1. Moratorium Established. From and after the effective date of this
ordinance, the City shall not allow the filing of or accept any application for a building
permit, tenant improvement, business license, business registration, nonprofit license,
permit, subdivision, short subdivision, site plan review, or any other development for any
telecommunication tower, cell tower, communication tower, and related facilities, land,
structure or use, within the boundaries of the City of Yakima. As used in this ordinance,
the following terms have the meanings set forth below:
A. "Telecommunication tower" includes a "communication tower" as defined in
YMC 15.04.180 and Chapter 15.04 YMC, and "personal wireless service
facilities" defined and regulated by Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.
Law 104 -104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996), and Section 302(c) thereof, codified at 47
U.S.0 Section 302(c). The term includes towers and facilities commonly
known as "cell towers" and other towers or structures consisting of
freestanding or monopole construction.
B. "City" means the City of Yakima and all zoning districts within such city.
2
In addition to the above definitions and as necessary to interpret or apply this Ordinance,
the City hereby adopts those definitions and provisions of the Yakima Municipal Code
pertaining to land use, zoning, design and regulation.
Section 2. Exemptions — Vested Rights — Repair and Mandated Safety
Improvements — Collocation. The moratorium shall not apply to applications for new
telecommunication towers and related facilities, or permits for relocation of existing
telecommunication towers and facilities, that have vested prior to the effective date of
this ordinance, permit applications to conduct repair of existing telecommunication
towers and facilities, permit applications to implement safety improvements for existing
telecommunication towers and facilities as mandated by state or federal standards, or
permit applications for collocation on any existing telecommunication tower or facility that
do not extend the height or area of such existing facility. Applications which are legally
vested as of the effective date of this ordinance shall continue to be processed as
provided in the Yakima Municipal Code and according to the land use regulations in
effect on the date of vesting.
Section 3. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200,
a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 21, 2013, for the purpose of taking
testimony and, if this ordinance is passed, adopting written findings and conclusions
justifying the moratorium established by this ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Period of Moratorium. The moratorium adopted by this
ordinance shall become effective immediately upon passage and approval of the City
Council, and shall remain in effect for six months, through October 1, 2013, subject to
adoption of findings and conclusions as provided in Section 3 above. This moratorium
shall also terminate upon the adoption of permanent regulations governing the location,
land use and regulation of telecommunication towers and facilities. Notwithstanding the
above, this moratorium may be extended as provided in RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW
35.63.200.
Section 5. Directive to City Manager. The City Council hereby authorizes and
directs the City Manager to review existing City codes and zoning regulations; to study
the effects resulting from the siting of telecommunication facilities; to prepare
comprehensive proposed amendments to the City codes and zoning regulations tc
address the effects of such uses; to confer with community members, City advisory
commissions as appropriate and with members of the telecommunication industry that
wish to take part in the review and code development process in accord with the
requirements of RCW 35.99.050; and to present recommended legislation addressing
such issues to the City Council for consideration and action.
Section 6. Declaration of Emergency. Pursuant to Article VI Section 2 of the
Charter of the City of Yakima, the City Council finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is an emergency ordinance to provide for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, property, health or safety. The unanimous vote of the City Council shall be
necessary for the passage of this emergency ordinance.
Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 8. Ordinance to be Transmitted to Department. Pursuant to RCW
36.70A.106, this Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Washington State Department of
Commerce as required by law or otherwise posted, published or recorded as permitted
by law.
Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect
immediately upon its passage and approval as provided by law and the City Charter.
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, signed and approved
this 2nd day of April, 2013.
ATTEST:
Zvi
City Clerk
Effective Date: April 2, 2013
Publication Date:
Ordinance Approved by Unanimous Vote
of Council Members: Yes
/s/
Micah Cawley, Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Yakima renewing and extending moratorium
regarding telecommunication and wireless communication
facilities adopted April 2, 2013 pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013-
14, for a period of month_, through midnight of
2013, adopting findings of fact in
support of such renewal and extension and affirming moratorium
through '2013.
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously adopted Ordinance No. 2013 -14 on
April 2, 2013 establishing a six -month moratorium on the filing and acceptance of
development applications for, the installation of, and issuance of permits and approvals
for, telecommunication towers, cell towers, communication towers, and facilities related
to such uses, within the City of Yakima; directing development of comprehensive zoning
and business regulations pertaining to such towers and related facilities; providing that
the moratorium shall be in effect for six months, through October 1, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received a recommendation from the Planning
Commission, supported by the wireless communication industry, residents of the City of
Yakima, and City staff, to extend the moratorium for a period of at least one month, and
a further recommendation from the Planning Commission for extension of such
moratorium through December 31, 2013; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.63.200 and RCW 36.70A.390 provide that a moratorium,
may be renewed for one or more six -month periods if a subsequent public hearing is
held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has scheduled and conducted a public hearing,
pursuant to notice duly published, on September 3, 2013, to consider the requests for
renewal of such moratorium by extension for at least one month, through November 1,
2013, or through December 31, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having received the recommendations of the City
of Yakima Planning Commission, and having considered all comments and testimony
presented at the public hearing, now makes the following findings of fact:
(a) Since the adoption of the moratorium on April 2, 2013, city staff has:
reviewed laws, municipal codes of other cities and municipal corporations; has
prepared drafts of proposed comprehensive code provisions relating to the
regulation of wireless communication facilities; and has worked with
representatives of the community and the wireless communication industry to
consider possible revisions.
(b) Public hearings have been scheduled and held before the Planning
Commission on August 7 and August 14, 2013, with a further study session
currently scheduled for September 4, 2013.
1
(c) City staff has participated in neighborhood meetings with members of the
Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood Association (BCNA) and representatives of the
wireless communication industry on August 29, 2013.
(d) While significant work has been accomplished to review and compile draft
provisions, a significant portion of work remains to be done, including further
study sessions with the Planning Commission, public hearings before the
Planning Commission and public hearing before the City Council to consider the
Planning Commission's recommendation for adoption of a telecommunications
ordinance.
(e) As stated above, a study session is currently set of September 4, 2013 by
the Planning Commission to consider updated revisions to the draft code, with
further public hearing(s) to be set in September.
(f) Additional time is warranted per provisions of the Yakima City Charter
Article VI, Section 2, that provide that an ordinance shall become effective thirty
(30) days after adoption and publication, thereby compressing the time available
for consideration and adoption of a new comprehensive code prior to the
scheduled expiration of the current moratorium.
(g) City staff has presented a work plan supporting and justifying an
extension of the moratorium for at least one month, with a foreseeable likelihood
that additional time may be necessary to accommodate sufficient review by
interested parties, further review by the Planning Commission, and review and
adoption by the City Council.
(h) An extension of the moratorium for one month has been recommended
by representatives of the wireless industry.
(i) On August 7, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted a motion
recommending that the City Council extend the moratorium for an additional
month, through November 1, 2013.
0) On August 14, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted a motion revising
its previous recommendation, which new motion recommended that the City
Council extend the moratorium for a period expiring December 31, 2013.
(k) Representatives of the wireless communications industry object to any
extension beyond November 1, 2013, and contend that the additional time
between October 1 and November 1 should be sufficient to accomplish review
and adoption.
(1) Members of the community and the BCNA contend that, given the
comprehensive nature of the proposed code, more time should be provided to
assure adequate opportunity for the community, industry, staff, Planning
Commission and City Council to review, comment and revise the proposed code.
2
(m) The City Council finds and determines that an extension of the
moratorium for month_ is warranted and
supported, and that such extension is in the best interests of residents of the City
of Yakima and will promote the general safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having adopted the above findings of fact, hereby
makes the following conclusions:
(a) The City Council has jurisdiction to consider and decide all issues herein,
including an extension of the moratorium, all pursuant to RCW 35.63.200 and
RCW 36.70A.390.
(b) There being no objection to any Council member hearing and deciding
such issues, any objection thereto is hereby deemed waived.
(c) The work performed to date has been necessary and appropriate to
prepare a proposed comprehensive code pertaining to regulation of wireless
communication facilities, but additional time is necessary and appropriate to
accommodate further review and ultimate adoption.
(c) The moratorium adopted pursuant to Ordinance No 2013 -14 should be
renewed by extension through midnight of ' 2013.
Such extension is warranted and supported by the scope of work to be done,
including accommodation of time necessary for review of the proposed code,
submission of comments and proposed revisions, public hearings and final
adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the above findings and
conclusions support the requested extension of the moratorium adopted pursuant to
Ordinance No. 2013 -14, and that such extension will promote the general safety and
welfare; now, therefore
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
Section 1
14, originally
midnight of _
The moratorium adopted and imposed pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -
set to expire October 1, 2013, is hereby renewed to extend through
12013.
Section 2. The City Manager is hereby directed to continue to perform the duties
imposed pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -14.
Section 3. Except as amended, renewed and extended herein, the provisions of
Ordinance No. 2013 -14 shall remain in full force and effect according to its terms.
Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its passage,
approval, and publication as provided by law and by the City Charter.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, signed and approved this 3d day of September,
2013.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Publication Date:
Effective Date:
Micah Cawley, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. R- 2013 -066
A RESOLUTION adopting Findings of Fact supporting a six -month moratorium, enacted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to emergency Ordinance No. 2013 -14, prohibiting
the filing and acceptance of development applications for, the installation of,
and issuance of permits and approvals for, telecommunication towers, cell
towers, communication towers, and facilities related to such uses, within the
City of Yakima; and authorizing the City Manager to study and develop
appropriate comprehensive land use, licensing or registration regulations
addressing such issues for consideration by the City Council.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36 70A.390 and RCW 35 63.200, the City Council of the
City of Yakima by unanimous vote of those present on April 2, 2013 adopted Ordinance
No. 2013 -14 imposing a moratorium for six months prohibiting the filing and acceptance of
development applications for, the installation of, and issuance of permits and approvals for,
telecommunication towers, cell towers, communication towers, and facilities related to such
uses, within the City of Yakima; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 require the City Council to hold a
public hearing within sixty days after imposition of a moratorium to receive evidence and
testimony regarding imposition of the moratorium, to consider whether such moratorium should
be modified or continue in effect as originally adopted, and to adopt findings of fact supporting
such decision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held the required public hearing on May 21, 2013
pursuant to notice duly published, and having considered all evidence and testimony presented,
hereby makes the following:
Findings of Fact
The City Council of the City of Yakima has authority pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390
and RCW 35.63.200 to adopt a moratorium to preserve the status quo pending
development of comprehensive land use controls and regulations, health and safety
regulations, and business licensing or registration regulations and procedures,
concerning telecommunication towers, cell towers, communications towers, and
facilities related to such uses
2. Existing land use regulations in the Yakima Municipal Code consist of the provisions
of YMC 15.04.180 which provide:
15.04.180 Communication towers.
The following provisions shall govern the placement of communication towers
within the urban growth area:
1. Communication towers less than thirty -five feet in height require a Type
(1) review to ensure compliance with minimum setbacks and building code
requirements;
2. Communication towers thirty -five feet or greater in height require a Type
(2) review to ensure compliance with setback provisions and that other permit
procedures are reviewed and met; and
3. Communication towers more than fifty -five feet in height shall follow the
review procedures for Class (3) uses and shall meet all the provisions and the
building code (Ord. 2008 -46 § 1 (part), 2008: Ord. 2947 § 1 (part), 1986
Formerly 15.04 130).
Additional provisions are found within the international building codes pertaining to
structural engineering and issuance of building permits for such uses. Existing
codes and procedures in the Yakima Municipal Code do not adequately address
appropriate priority of zoning, site screening, camouflaging of towers and related
telecommunication facilities, collocation requirements, application requirements,
provisions addressing secondary effects of such facilities upon the quiet use and
enjoyment of property, and other factors as described in Finding 3 below
3. Within the parameters of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104 -104,
110 Stat. 56 (1996), state law and applicable regulations, the City of Yakima may
consider regulations pertaining to telecommunication towers and facilities in a
number of areas, for example (a) requiring applicants to provide for expert
assistance; (b) verification of the need for a requested tower or facility; (c) prioritizing
preferred locations for telecommunication towers; (d) verification of minimum height
of towers needed to provide adequate coverage; (e) standards governing
appearance and aesthetics; (f) requiring collocation to minimize number of towers in
the community; (g) developing application forms and establishing appropriate
application fees, (h) regulation of lighting, setbacks, signage and site security; (i)
undergrounding of associated utilities; (j) insurance and indemnification; (k)
provisions relating to removal of abandoned structures.
4. Secondary effects arising from inadequate land use controls for telecommunication
towers and facilities include: (a) lack of standards prioritizing zoning districts or types
of property, so that a telecommunication tower or facility could be located in the
vicinity of more sensitive land uses such as residential zones and neighborhoods,
rather than upon existing public property or facilities; (b) no means to require
collocation of telecommunication facilities on existing towers so as to reduce the
number of telecommunication towers and facilities within the community; (c) no
adequate standards requiring telecommunication towers and facilities to be screened
or camouflaged to preserve and promote quiet use and enjoyment of existing
property owners, (d) no means to deny any application for a new telecommunication
tower or facility where no verification of need of such facility exists; (e) no means to
limit construction of telecommunication towers and facilities within or in the near
vicinity of sensitive community uses such as established historic districts.
5. The City Council finds and determines that the City of Yakima needs time to consider
additional zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and business licensing
regulations which would deal specifically with telecommunication towers and related
facilities within the City of Yakima, and the City Council therefore finds and
determines that the moratorium for the term of six months adopted and implemented
in Ordinance No 2013 -14, commencing on April 2, 2013 and extending through
2
October 1, 2013, is necessary and appropriate in order to study the issues and to
consider adopting appropriate regulations.
6. The City Council finds and determines that certain exemptions from the moratorium
are warranted as set forth in Ordinance No. 2013 -14, including applications for
telecommunication towers and facilities that vested prior to the effective date of the
moratorium As required by Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012 (H.R. 3630) ( "Act "), also excluded from the moratorium are
eligible facilities' requests for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base
station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or
base station. For purposes of this subsection, the term "eligible facilities request"
means any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that
involves—
(A) collocation of new transmission equipment;
(B) removal of transmission equipment; or
(C) replacement of transmission equipment.
Application and administration of the moratorium adopted and implemented pursuant
to Ordinance No. 2013 -14 shall be consistent with such provisions and with the
interpretation of Section 6409(a) of the Act as issued by the Federal
Communications Commission on January 25, 2013 (DA 12- 2407).
7. The City Council finds and determines that imposition of the moratorium adopted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -14 is necessary to (a) provide the City with an
opportunity to study the issues regarding siting, zoning and regulation of
telecommunication towers, cell towers, communications towers, and related facilities
within the City of Yakima and to prepare appropriate revisions to the City's codes
and regulations; (b) to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Yakima
by avoiding and ameliorating negative impacts of the proliferation of new
telecommunication towers and related facilities; and (c) to avoid applicants possibly
establishing vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any revisions the City
may make to its regulations and codes as a result of the City's study of this matter.
8 The City Council finds, determines and concludes that an emergency exists justifying
emergency adoption of Ordinance No 2013 -14, to wit: (a) existing city codes and
procedures are inadequate to provide for the receipt and processing of applications
for telecommunication towers and related facilities, designation of appropriate zoning
districts or priority of zoning districts for such uses, and protection of the general
health, safety and welfare of residents of the City of Yakima; (b) neither City staff nor
the Planning Commission have had sufficient opportunity to review the effects of
permitting telecommunication towers and facilities or to formulate, prepare and
recommend appropriate zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and
business licensing regulations which would deal specifically such uses within the City
of Yakima; and (c) the immediate imposition of this moratorium pursuant to
Ordinance No. 2013 -14 will preserve the status quo to enable the City to further
study the effects of such uses and to devise appropriate zoning and regulatory
controls to address the effects of such uses
9 The City Council finds and determines that the moratorium adopted and
implemented pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -14 should remain in effect according
to its terms, and that such is in the best interests of residents of the City of Yakima
and will promote the general health, safety and welfare, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The Findings of Fact set forth above are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact
supporting the adoption, implementation and continuation of the moratorium adopted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to Ordinance No 2013 -14 according to its terms, with
application and administration of such moratorium consistent with Finding of Fact No.
6 above, pertaining to Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012 (H.R. 3630).
2. The City Manager of the City of Yakima is hereby authorized and directed to perform
those duties and functions set forth in Ordinance No. 2013 -14, including but not
limited to, development of proposed comprehensive land use, licensing, and health
and safety regulations pertaining to telecommunication lowers and related facilities
and any issues ancillary thereto.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 21St day of May, 2013.
Micah Caw y, Mayor
,4 W 449
}
1
4
Chapter 15.29
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
Sections:
15.29.010
Purpose.
15.29.020
Definitions.
15.29.030
Exemptions.
15.29.035
Modification of Existing Wireless Tower or Base Station.
15.29.040
Site selection criteria.
15.29.045
Protected areas.
15.29.050
Priority of locations.
15.29.060
Siting priority on public property.
15.29.070
Required submittals and testing.
15.29.080
Co- location.
15.29.090
Design criteria.
15.29.100
Permits required.
15.29.110
Inspection requirements.
15.29.120
Non - use /abandonment.
15.29.130
Third party review.
15.29.140
Conditional use permits — Procedures — Conditions for granting.
15.29.150
Conditional use permits — Effect of hearing examiner decision.
15.29.160
Application form.
15.29.170
Filing fees.
15.29.180
Notice of hearing — Conditional use permits.
15.29.190
Reapplication.
15.29.200
Transfer of ownership.
15.29.210
Vacation of permits.
15.29.220
Violation — Penalty.
15.29.230
Relief, Waiver, Exemption.
15.29.240
Severabilitv.
15.29.010 Purpose.
A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish general guidelines for the siting of towers and antennas.
The goals of this chapter are to:
1. Enhance the ability of personal wireless service providers to provide such services
throughout the city quickly, effectively, and efficiently;
1
2. Encourage personal wireless service providers to locate towers and antenna in
nonresidential areas;
3. Encourage personal wireless service providers to co- locate on new and existing tower sites;
4. Encourage personal wireless service providers to locate towers and antennas, to the extent
possible, in areas where the adverse impact on city residents is minimal;
5. Encourage personal wireless service providers to configure towers and antennas in a way
that minimizes any significant adverse visual impact; and
6. Provide for the wireless communications needs of governmental entities.
Accordingly, the city council finds that the promulgation of this chapter is warranted and necessary:
1. To manage the location of towers and antennas in the city;
2. To protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of towers;
3. To minimize adverse visual impacts of towers through careful design, siting, landscape
screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques;
4. To accommodate an increased need for towers to serve the wireless communications needs
of city residents;
5. To promote and encourage co- location on existing and new towers as an option rather than
construction of additional single -use towers, and to reduce the number of such structures
needed in the future;
6. To consider the public health and safety of towers to the extent permitted by the
Telecommunications Act of 1996; and
7. To avoid potential damage to adjacent properties through sound engineering practices and
the proper siting of antenna support structures.
B. New Uses. All new antennas shall comply with this chapter after the effective date of the ordinance
codified in this chapter.
C. Existing Uses. All towers and antennas existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this
chapter that are not in compliance with this ordinance shall be allowed to continue as they presently exist,
but will be considered nonconforming uses. Routine maintenance shall be permitted on existing towers
and antennas. However, new construction other than routine maintenance on existing towers, antennas,
buildings or other facilities shall comply with the requirements of this chapter.
2
1. These standards were developed to protect the public safety and welfare, to protect property
values and minimize visual impact while furthering the development of enhanced
telecommunication services in the city and providing for wireless communications necessary for
governmental purposes. These standards were designed to comply with the
Telecommunications Act of 1996. The provisions of this chapter are not intended to and shall not
be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting personal wireless services. This
chapter shall not be applied in such a manner as to unreasonably discriminate between
providers of functionally equivalent personal wireless services.
2. To the extent that any provision of this chapter is inconsistent or conflicts with any other city
ordinance this chapter shall control. Otherwise, this chapter shall be construed consistently with
the other provisions and regulations of the city.
3. The city shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application in accordance with
the time frames set forth in Title 16 YMC, Administration of Development Permit Regulations,
and in accordance with other applicable ordinances.
15.29.020 Definitions.
For the purpose of this chapter, the following terms shall have the meaning ascribed to them below:
"Abandonment" means to cease operation for a period of sixty or more consecutive days.
"Administrator" means the director of the city's department of community development and his or her
designees.
"Antenna" means any exterior apparatus designed for telephonic, radio, data, internet, or television
communications through the sending and /or receiving of electromagnetic waves, and includes equipment
attached to a tower, structure or building for the purpose of providing ^°wireless services, including
unlicensed wireless telecommunications services, wireless telecommunications services utilizing
frequencies authorized by the Federal Communications Commission for "cellular," "enhanced specialized
mobile radio" and "personal communications services," telecommunications services, and its attendant
base station.
"Antenna height" means the vertical distance measured from the base of the antenna support structure at
natural grade to the highest point of the structure even if said highest point is an antenna. Measurement
of tower height shall include antenna, base pad, and other appurtenances and shall be measured from
the natural grade of the parcel at the lowest elevation point of the support structure's perimeter. "Antenna
support structure" means any pole, telescoping mast, tower, tripod, or other structure which supports a
device used in the transmitting or receiving of radio frequency signals.
"Applicant" means any provider or any person, partnership, company, or government agency that files an
application for any permit necessary to install, maintain, or remove a personal wireless service facility
within the city.
"Balloon test" means a test fnr a roasenahlo noried of tome not loco than three nnncon +n io we Fkdays
halleen is s6ispended at the height that FOPliGates the height of the pFepesed tower and ppt(;pp!3 orrou
A
test for a reasonable period of time to fly, or raise upon a temporary mast, a brightly colored balloon, that
is representative in size of the initial antenna array including all standoffs, at the maximum height of the
proposed tower. No trees shall be removed to conduct the balloon test.
"Base station" is defined as a facility or structure consisting of radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial
cable, a regular and backup power supply, and other associated electronics, including a structure that
currently supports or houses an antenna, transceiver, or other associated equipment that constitutes
part of a base station, and encompasses such equipment in -any technological configuration, including
distributed antenna systems and small cells.
mo, fl
means a popsenal wireless sep.4r-,@ faGility that is disguised, hidden, eF Ont@gFAU;d w0th AR
that mi.S not a monopole eF tew@F, eF a popsenal wireless isep.4r.te faGility that is plaGGGI
"Camouflage" means to minimize adverse aesthetic and visual impacts on the land, property, buildings,
and other facilities adjacent to, surrounding, and in generally the same area as the requested location of
such wireless telecommunications facilities, which shall mean using the least visually and physically
intrusive facility that is not technologically or commercially impracticable under the facts and
circumstances, The term includes, without limitation: (a) the use of structures, design, colors,
landscaping and location to disguise, hide, blend, or integrate with an existing structure that is not a
monopole or tower; (b) placement of a wireless facility or component thereof within an existing or new
structure; (c) "stealth structures" in which the antenna or other wireless facility component is disguised or
concealed within a structure designed to appear as another structure (such as a church steeple of
flagpole) or another natural form (such as a tree, rock or other natural feature); and (d) placement of a
wireless facility or component thereof upon a site where the topography and existing trees, landscaping,
evergreen trees, design, and colors of the facility so that such facility is significantly screened from view or
designed to resemble or blend with surrounding natural features.
4
"Cell site" or "site" means a tract or parcel of land that contains j9a4;&e4a-I--wi re less service facilities
including any antenna, support structure, accessory buildings, and parking, and may include other uses
associated with and ancillary to personal wireless services.
"City" means the city of Yakima.
"City property" means all real property owned by the city whether in fee ownership or other interest.
"Co- location" means the use of a personal wireless service facility or cell site by more than one popsena4
wireless service provider.
"Commercial impracticability" or "commercially impracticable" means the inability to perform an act on
terms that are reasonable in commerce; the cause or occurrence of which could not have been
reasonably anticipated or foreseen and that jeopardizes the financial efficacy of the project. The inability
to achieve a satisfactory financial return on investment or profit, standing alone, shall not deem a situation
to be "commercial impracticable" and shall not render an act or the terms of an agreement "commercially
impracticable."
"Conditional use permit" or "CUP" means a process and approval as described in this chapter and in YMC
Title 15, Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance
"COW" means "cell on wheels." A cell on wheels or other temporary persanal-wireless communications
facility.
"Design" means the appearance of persanal-wireless service facilities, including such features as their
materials, colors, and shape.
"EIA" means the Electronics Industry Association.
"Equipment enclosure" means a structure, shelter, cabinet, or vault used to house and protect the
electronic equipment necessary for processing wireless communication signals. Associated equipment
may include air conditioning, backup power supplies and emergency generators.
"Excess capacity" means the volume or capacity in any existing or future duct, conduit, manhole,
handhold or other utility facility within the right -of -way that is or will be available for use for additional
telecommunications facilities.
"Facilities" means all of the plant, equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, antennas, and other facilities
necessary to furnish and deliver telecommunications services and cable television services, including but
not limited to poles with crossarms, poles without crossarms, wires, lines, conduits, cables,
communications and signal lines and equipment, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, and all attachments,
appurtenances, and appliances necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of telecommunications
services and cable television services.
"FCC" or "Federal Communications Commission" means the federal administrative agency, or lawful
successor, authorized to regulate and oversee telecommunications carriers, services and providers on a
national level.
"Governing authority" means the city council of the city of Yakima.
"Governmental entity" means the state of Washington, Yakima County, the city, municipally owned
utilities, and special purpose districts including the school, fire and library districts.
"Hearings examiner" means the duly appointed hearings examiner of the city.
"Modification" or "modify" means, the addition, removal or change of any of the physical and visually
discernable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, equipment shelters,
landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discernable
components, vehicular access, parking and /or an upgrade or changeout of equipment for better or more
modern equipment. Adding a new wireless carrier or service provider to a telecommunications tower or
telecommunications site as a co- location is a modification. A modification shall not include the
replacement of any components of a wireless facility where the replacement is identical to the component
being replaced or for any matters that involve the normal repair and maintenance of a wireless
telecommunications facility without adding, removing or changing anything.
"Mount" means the structure or surface upon which personal wireless service facilities are mounted.
There are three types of mounts:
A. Building Mounted. A personal wireless service facility mount fixed to the roof or side of a
building.
B. Ground Mounted. A personal wireless service facility mount fixed to the ground, such as a
tower.
C. Structure Mounted. A personal wireless service facility fixed to a structure other than a
building, such as light standards, utility poles, and bridges.
"Occupy" means to construct, install, maintain, own, or operate telecommunications facilities located
within city rights -of -way. The mere passage of electronic signals over, under, or through rights -of -way via
11
telecommunications facilities owned by another telecommunications provider does not constitute
occupying the rights -of -way.
"Overhead facilities" means utility facilities and telecommunications facilities located above the surface of
the ground, including the underground supports and foundations for such facilities.
"Person" means corporations, companies, associations, joint stock companies, firms, partnerships, limited
liability companies, other entities and individuals.
"Personal wireless service," "emu, wireless service facilities," aPA-"wireless facilities" and "facilities"
used in this title shall be defined in the same manner as in Title 47, USC, Section 332(c)(7)(C), as they
may be amended now or in the future, and includes facilities for the transmission and reception of radio or
microwave signals used for communication, cellular phone, personal communications services, enhanced
specialized mobile radio, and any other wireless services licensed by the FCC and unlicensed wireless
services.
"Protected areas" are: (a) established federal, state or local historic districts or historic district overlay
zones; (b) proposed federal, state or local historic districts or historic district overlay zones filed for record
with the federal, state or local agency with jurisdiction (hereafter "pending" historic district or overlay
zones); (c) sites, buildings, structures or objects listed in the National Register of Historic Places; (d) state
and local wildlife refuges, and permanently protected archeological sites; and (e) designated areas
subject to preservation or protection through recorded conservation easement.
"Provider" means every corporation, company, association, joint stock company, firm, partnership, limited
liability company, other entity and individual that provides personal wireless service over popsenal
wireless service facilities.
"Repairs and maintenance" means the replacement of anv components of a wireless facilitv where the
replacement is identical to the component being replaced or for any matters that involve the normal repair
and maintenance of a wireless facility without the addition, removal or change of any of the physical or
visuallv discernable components or aspects of a wireless facilitv that will add to the visible appearance of
the facility as originally permitted
"Rights -of -way" means land acquired or dedicated for public roads and streets, as further defined in
15.02.020, but does not include (a) land dedicated for roads, streets, and highways not opened and not
improved for motor vehicle use by the public; (b) structures, including poles and conduits, located within
the right -of -way; or (c) federally granted railroad rights -of -way acquired under 43 USC, Section 912, and
related provisions of federal law, that are not open for motor vehicle use.
"Right -of -way use permit" means the authorization by which the city grants permission to a service
provider to enter and use the right -of -way at a specific location for the purpose of installing, maintaining,
repairing, or removing identified facilities.
7
"Screening" means a continuous fence and /or evergreen landscaped planting that conceals the property it
encloses.
"Service provider" means every corporation, company, association, joint stock association, firm,
partnership, person, city, or town owning, operating or managing any facilities used to provide and
providing telecommunications or cable television services for hire, sale, or resale to the general public.
Service provider includes the legal successor to any such corporation, company, association, joint stock
association, firm, partnership, person, city or town.
"Small cell" means low- powered radio access nodes that operate in licensed and unlicensed spectrum
that have a ranae of 10 meters to 1 or 2 kilometers. compared to a mobile macrocell which miaht have a
range of a few tens of kilometres. Small cell technology accommodates mobile data offloading as a
means to achieve more efficient use of radio spectrum. Small cells generally reduce the cell size radius,
and place the cell sites closer to each other, resulting in a more densely packed network of smaller cells.
Outdoor small cells include femtocells. picocells. and microcells.
"State" means the state of Washington.
"Surplus space" means that portion of the usable space on a utility pole which has the necessary
clearance from other pole users, as required by the orders and regulations of the Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission, to allow its use by a telecommunications carrier for a pole attachment.
"Secondary use" means a use subordinate to the principle use of the property, such as commercial,
residential, utilities, etc.
"Security barrier" means a wall, fence, or berm that has the purpose of sealing a personal wireless service
facility from unauthorized entry or trespass.
"Telecommunications carrier" includes every person that directly or indirectly owns, controls, operates or
manages plant, equipment or property within the city, used or to be used for the purpose of providing
telecommunications services to locations outside the city.
"Telecommunications service" means transmission of information, except cable television service, by
wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means, for hire, sale, or resale to the general
public. For the purposes of definition "information" means knowledge or intelligence represented by any
form of writing, signs, signals, pictures, sounds, or any other symbols. Telecommunications service
excludes the over -the air transmission of broadcast television or broadcast radio signals, facilities
necessary for governmental purposes. The city shall act on an application within a reasonable period of
time, taking into account the nature and scope of the application. Any decision to deny an application
Ej
shall be in writing, supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. The city shall approve,
approve with condition, or deny the application in accordance with the time frames set forth inspecific
sections of this chapter, YMC Title 16, Administration of Development Permit Regulations, and in
accordance with other applicable ordinances.
"Telecommunications service provider" includes every person that directly or indirectly owns, controls,
operates or manages plant, equipment or property within the city, used or to be used for the purpose of
offering telecommunications services, except cable television service, to residents, businesses or other
locations within the city.
"Tower" means any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one
or more antennas, including self - supporting lattice towers, guy towers, or monopole towers. The term
encompasses personal wireless service facilities including radio and television transmission towers,
microwave towers, common - carrier towers, cellular telephone towers or personal communications
services towers, alternative tower structures, and the like. "Tower" also includes any structure built for the
sole or primary purpose of supporting FCC - licensed antennas and their associated facilities.
"Underground facilities" means utility and telecommunications facilities located under the surface of the
ground, excluding the underground foundations or supports for overhead facilities.
"Usable space" means the total distance between the top of a utility pole and the lowest possible
attachment point that provides the minimum allowable vertical clearance as specified in the orders and
regulations of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.
"Utility facilities" means the plant, equipment and property including, but not limited to, the poles, pipes,
mains, conduits, ducts, cables, wires, plant and equipment located under, on or above the surface of the
ground within rights -of -way and used or to be used for the purpose of providing utility or
telecommunications services.
"Unlicensed wireless services" means commercial mobile services that operate on public frequencies and
do not need an FCC license.
15.29.030 Exemptions.
The following are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and shall be permitted in all zones:
A. Industrial processing equipment and scientific or medical equipment using frequencies regulated by
the FCC.
B. Antennas and related equipment no more than three ten feet in height that are being stored, shipped,
or displayed for sale.
C. Radar systems for military and civilian communication and navigation.
E]
D. Wireless radio utilized for temporary emergency communications in the event of a disaster.
E. Licensed amateur (ham) radio stations.
F. Satellite dish antennas less than two meters in diameter, including direct to home satellite services,
when used as a secondary use of the property.
G. Routine maintenance, replacement or repair of a personal wireless service facility and related
equipment that does not constitute a modification, provided that compliance with the standards of this
chapter is maintained.. (exs4ed-iP.-g-Sstructural work or changes in height, type or dimensions of antennas,
towers, or buildings) prav+ded, that are subject to the provisions of 15.29.035 t4a
ctonriorric of this nhapter are mointoinert
H. Subject to compliance with all other applicable standards of this chapter, a building permit application
need not be filed for emergency repair or maintenance of a personal wireless service facility until thirty
days after the completion of such emergency activity.
I. A COW or other temporary personal wireless telecommunications facility shall be permitted for a
maximum of ninety days in any three hundred sixty -five day period or during an emergency declared by
the city.
J. Telecommunications facilities of the City located upon City property and public utility poles and
fixtiirPS
15.29.035 Modification of Existing Wireless Tower or Base Station.
Pursuant to 47 U.S.0 Section 1455(a), any request from an eligible facility for modification of an existing
wireless tower or base station, which modification consists of a request for co- location, removal, or
replacement of transmission equipment, that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of
such tower or base station shall be administratively processed and approved. This section states
provisions and procedures applicable to (a) requests for modifications that do not substantially change
the physical dimensions of an existing wireless tower or base station, and (b) requests for modifications
that substantially change the physical dimensions of an existing wireless tower or base station
A. Definitions of "substantial change. ". The following terms chow hove the fellev.f n moon in nc fnr
10
A "substantial change in the physical dimensions" occurs if:
(a) the mounting of the proposed antenna on the tower would increase the existing height
of the tower by more than 10 %, or by the height of one additional antenna array with
separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is
greater, except that the mounting of the proposed antenna may exceed the size limits set
forth in this paragraph if necessary to avoid interference with existing antennas; or
(b) the mounting of the proposed antenna would involve the installation of more than the
standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, not to exceed
four, or more than one new equipment shelter; or
(c) the mounting of the proposed antenna would involve adding an appurtenance to the
body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet,
or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever
is greater, except that the mounting of the proposed antenna may exceed the size limits
set forth in this paragraph if necessary to shelter the antenna from inclement weather or
to connect the antenna to the tower via cable; or
(d) the mounting of the proposed antenna would involve excavation outside the current
tower site, defined as the current boundaries of the leased or owned property
surrounding the tower and any access or utility easements currently related to the site.
B. Application. Any eligible facility requesting modification of an existing wireless tower or base station,
which modification consists of a request for co- location, removal, or replacement of transmission
equipment, shall submit an application, on a form provided by the City, for a modification permit. The
application shall include the following:
(1) The name, address, signature and contact information of the applicant, and identification of
relationship to any FCC licensee of the affected facility;
(2) Site plan or schematic drawing showing the current location and dimensions of the wireless
tower and base station, drawn to scale;
(3) Site plan and schematic drawing, drawn to scale, showing the location and dimensions of the
requested modification to the wireless tower and /or base station;
(4) A computation and description of the proposed modification establishing whether or not such
modification constitutes a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the existing facility;
and
11
(5) Any other information deemed necessary or appropriate by the City to assist in the timely
processing of the application.
C. Review of Application — Determination of Substantial Change. Within 45 days of receipt of a complete
application for modification, the administrator shall review and issue a written determination as to whether
the requested modification constitutes (a) a substantial change to the physical dimensions of an existing
wireless tower or base station, or (b) no substantial change to the physical dimensions of an existing
wireless tower or base station. The administrator may request additional information from the applicant or
any other entity to assist in this determination. To facilitate expeditious review, the applicant and
administrator, if feasible, will conduct a preapplication meeting.
(1) Modification Permit — Finding of No Substantial Change. If the administrator determines
that such application establishes that such requested modification does not substantially change
the physical dimensions of an existing wireless tower or base station, he shall issue a
modification permit. Issuance of such modification permit shall authorize issuance of any
necessary and appropriate building permits to accomplish such modification, subject to payment
by applicant of applicable permit fees and compliance with applicable permit requirements.
Issuance of all required permits shall occur within 90 days after receipt and approval of a
complete application for a modification permit. The administrator may impose conditions
necessary to achieve compliance with the provisions of this section.
(2) Application — Finding of Substantial Change. If the administrator determines that such
application constitutes a substantial change to the physical dimensions of an existing wireless
tower or base station, he shall issue a written decision and deliver such decision to the applicant.
Any modification that substantially changes the physical dimensions of an existing wireless tower
or base station shall be subject to the applicable permit and application requirements of this
chapter.
D. Appeals. The decision of the administrator shall constitute an administrative decision subject to
appeal pursuant to Chapter 16.08 YMC.
15.29.040 Site selection criteria.
A. Any applicant proposing to construct an antenna support structure, or mount an antenna on an
existing structure, shall evaluate different sites within a one - quarter mile radius to determine which site
will provide the best screening and camouflaging while providing adequate service to satisfy its function in
the applicant's tssaal gFid- system. If the applicant proposes a site that does not provide the best
opportunities for screening and camouflaging then the applicant must demonstrate by engineering
evidence why the facility cannot be located at the site where it can be best screened and camouflaged
and why the antenna must be located at the proposed site. Further, the applicant must demonstrate by
12
engineering evidence that the height requested is the minimum height necessary to fulfill the site's
function within the grid system
B. Applications for necessary permits will only be processed when the applicant demonstrates either
that it is an FCC - licensed telecommunications provider or that it has agreements with an FCC - licensed
telecommunications provider for use or lease of the support structure.
C. Small cell installations and other LIM power mobile radio service facilities shall be located and
designed to minimize any significant adverse impact on residential property values. Facilities shall be
placed in locations where the existing topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures provide the
greatest amount of camouflagessree.
D. In all zones, location and design of facilities shall consider the impact of the facility on the
surrounding neighborhood and the visual impact within the zone district. In all zones, towers shall be
signifinan +I" °Greene,+ camouflaged using the least visually and physically intrusive facility that is not
technologically or commercially impracticable under the facts and circumstances, h„ n4G4 g +hem in trees
to the @)tent +ha+ it dees nn+ rest 1I+ in signifinan+ signal degrada +inn
15.29.045 Protected areas.
Protected areas are: (a) established federal, state or local historic districts or historic district overlay
zones; (b) proposed federal, state or local historic districts or historic district overlay zones filed for record
with the federal, state or local agency with jurisdiction (hereafter "pending" historic district or overlay
zones); (c) sites, buildings, structures or objects listed in the National Register of Historic Places; (d) state
and local wildlife refuges, and permanently protected archeological sites; and (e) designated areas
subject to preservation or protection through recorded conservation easement. Except as provided in
15.29.050, antennas and antenna support facilities are not permitted in or within 300 feet of any protected
area.
15.29.050 Priority of locations.
The order of priorities for locating new personal wireless service facilities shall be as follows:
A. Co- location. Co- locate antennas, towers and related structures on existing antennas, towers and
facilities in accordance with 15.29.035 and 15.29.080.
B. Small cell installations. Small cell installations shall be allowed in all zoning districts of the City
except protected areas on the following structures, subject to the conditions stated:
1. Street utility poles within public rights -of -way.
13
(a). Only one facility shall be permitted on any street pole.
(b). Facilities located within public rights -of -way shall be located a
minimum of 500 feet apart, or as otherwise approved by the administrator.
(c). Where a utility located upon the support structure (such as a street or
utility pole) requires vertical separation between its facilities and the
antenna(s), the structure /pole and antenna may be raised by a mount to
accommodate the minimum separation requirement, not to exceed 30
feet. Any additions shall be constructed of similar materials, and shall
have surface treatments which match the color and texture of the original
facility.
(d) Approval of installation upon street utility poles is subject to any existing utility franchise
requirements, applicable standards and rules of the WUTC, and limitations concerning use of
such poles. The City may further require a right -of -way use permit for such installations.
2. Electric transmission towers or utility poles outside public rights -of -way. Where a utility
located upon the support structure (such as a street or utility pole) requires vertical separation
between its facilities and the antenna(s), the structure /pole and antenna may be raised by a
mount to accommodate the minimum separation requirement, not to exceed 30 feet. Any
additions shall be constructed of similar materials, and shall have surface treatments which match
the color and texture of the original facility. Approval of installation upon street utility poles is
subject to any existing utility franchise requirements, applicable standards and rules of the
WUTC, and limitations concerning use of such poles.
C9. Public property. Place antennas and towers on public property as further described in 15.29.060
where such antennas, towers and related facilities are disguised by camouflage °^dI^~ °+° °'+" measures
approved by the administrator.
DG. Existing rights -of -way and structures — Industrial and commercial zoning districts. Place antennas,
towers and related facilities on appropriate rights -of -way and existing structures, such as buildings,
towers, and water towers, in the industrial and commercial zoning districts, where such antennas, towers
and related facilities are disguised by camouflage °^dI^~ °+° °'+" measures approved by the administrator.
ES. Industrial zoning districts. Place antennas, towers and related facilities on properties in the
industrial zoning districts where such antennas, towers and related facilities are sight ;SGFG°^
camouflaged as approved by the administrator. Antennas, towers and related facilities on properties in
the industrial zoning districts, which proposed antennas, towers and /or related facilities are located within
300 feet from residential zoned districts, shall be approved by the administrator, subject to disguise by
camouflage or stealth rdeemed appropriate by the administrator. Antennas, towers and related facilities
on properties in the industrial zoning districts, which proposed antennas, towers and related facilities are
14
located within 300 feet from a protected area require a conditional use permit with camouflage or stealth
deemed appropriate.
F €. Local Business District (B -2) and Large Convenience Center (LCC) zoning districts. Place
antennas and towers in districts zoned Local Business District (B -2) and Large Commercial Center (LCC),
subject to the following conditions:
1. Antennas, antenna support structures and towers located within the Local Business District
(B -2) or Large Commercial Center (LCC) districts shall be placed, if possible, no closer than 300
feet from residential zoned districts and no closer than 300 feet of a protected area. An
application to locate a new antenna, antenna support structure or tower within the B -2 or LCC
districts, and more than 300 feet from residential zoned districts and more than 300 feet from a
protected area may approved by the administrator, subject to the administrator's approval of
camouflage ^r disguise by stealth
2. An applicant that wishes to locate a new antenna, antenna support structure or tower within
the B -2 or LCC districts, and within 300 feet from residential zoned districts or within 300 feet of a
protected area, shall demonstrate that a diligent effort has been made to locate the proposed
communications facilities on a site, private institutional structure, or other appropriate existing
structures more than 300 feet from residential zoned districts or more than 300 feet from a
protected area within a quarter -mile radius of the proposed site, and that due to valid
considerations including physical constraints, and technological feasibility, no more appropriate
location is available. Such antennas, towers and related facilities may approved by the
administrator, subject to the administrator's approval of camouflage OF disguise by stealth. Such
proposed structures are also subject to the balloon test and /or photo _simwla# n visual impact
assessment requirements of 15.29.070 in order to assist the administrator in determining
appropriate camouflage onri ^r ctoolth FequiFementc
G. Residential zoned districts. Except for small cell installations permitted in the residential zoned
districts as set forth in subsection B above, applications to place Pose - antennas and towers in residential
zoning districts or within 300 feet of residential zoned districts, other than within the B -2 and LCC zoning
districts as provided in subsection F€ above, shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. An applicant that wishes to locate a new antenna support structure in a residential zone, or
within 300 feet of residential zoned districts, shall demonstrate that a diligent effort has been
made to locate the proposed communications facilities on a government facility, a private
institutional structure, or other appropriate existing structures within a nonresidential zone within
a quarter -mile radius of the proposed site, and that due to valid considerations including physical
constraints, and technological feasibility, no more appropriate location is available.
2. Applicants are required to demonstrate: (i) that they have contacted the owners of structures
in excess of thirty feet within a one - quarter mile radius of the site proposed and which from a
15
location standpoint could pFeyide nor► of o nofininrk fnr troncmiccien of so ---1, meet the
coverage /capacity objectives of the facility in the applicant's network; (ii) have asked for
permission to install the antenna on those structures; and (iii) were denied permission of use for
reasons other than the ability or refusal of the applicant to pay a market rate for use of the
alternative structures.
3. The information submitted by the applicant shall include (i) a map of the area to be served
by the tower or antenna, (ii) its relationship to other cell sites in the applicant's network, and (iii)
an evaluation of existing buildings taller than 30 feet, within one - quarter mile of the proposed
tower or antenna which from a location standpoint could provide part of a network to provide
transmission of signals.
4. The proposed antenna, tower and antenna support structure is camouflaged ^r disguised by
M.
H6. Protected areas. Place antennas and towers in or within 300 feet of a protected area, other than
within the B -2 and LCC zoning districts as provided in subsection E above, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Antennas and towers facilities proposed to be located in or within 300 feet of an established
or pending federal, state or local historic district or historic district overlay, are facilities that may
affect districts, sites, buildings, structures or objects, significant in American history, architecture,
archeology, engineering or culture, that are listed, or are eligible for listing, in the National
Register of Historic Places. (See 16 U.S.C. 470w(5); 36 CFR part 60 and 800.). Applicant shall
comply with applicable provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including but
not limited to the Environment Assessment provisions of 47 C.F.R. 1.1307, et seq. and comply
with any mitigations imposed therein.
2. An applicant that wishes to locate a new antenna support structure in or within 300 feet of
an a protected area, shall demonstrate that a diligent effort has been made to locate the
proposed communications facilities on a government facility, a private institutional structure, or
other appropriate existing structures or site outside and more than 300 feet from a protected
area, and that due to valid considerations including physical constraints, and technological
feasibility, no more appropriate location is available.
3. Applicants are required to demonstrate: (i) that they have contacted the owners of structures
in excess of thirty feet within a one - quarter mile radius of the site proposed and which from a
location standpoint GO U'd pFeyide nor► of a nofininrk fnr #roncmiccinn of sigpa4 meet the
coverage /capacity objectives of the facility in the applicant's network; (ii) have asked for
permission to install the antenna on those structures; and (iii) were denied permission of use for
reasons other than the ability or refusal of the applicant to pay a market rate for use of the
alternative structures.
S.,
4. The information submitted by the applicant shall include (i) a map of the area to be served
by the tower or antenna, (ii) its relationship to other cell sites in the applicant's network, and (iii)
an evaluation of existing buildings taller than 30 feet, within one - quarter mile of the proposed
tower or antenna which from a location standpoint could provide part of a network to provide
transmission of signals.
5. Antennas and towers facilities proposed to be located in an established or pending federal,
state or local historic district, historic district overlay, or other protected area, are subject to
review by the district's or organization's governing body or assigned committee regarding
recommendations for camouflage,, °+,_and landscaped sight- screening elements.
6 -. The proposed antenna, tower and antenna support structure is disguised by stealth
Mr, infi pro nr ,& camouflaged.
15.29.060 Siting priority on public property.
A. Where public property is sought to be utilized by an applicant, priority for the use of government -
owned land for wireless antennas and towers will be given to the following entities in descending order:
1. City of Yakima, except that any facilities proposed for location within the Airport Safety
Overlay (ASO) are further subject to the limitations and requirements of Chapter 15.30 YMC;
2. Public safety agencies, including law enforcement, fire and ambulance services, which are
not part of the city of Yakima and private entities with a public safety agreement with the city of
Yakima;
3. Other governmental entities, for uses that are not related to public safety; and
4. Entities providing licensed commercial wireless telecommunication services including
cellular, personal communication services (PCS), specialized mobilized radio (SMR), enhanced
specialized mobilized radio (ESMR), data, internet, paging, and similar services that are
marketed to the general public.
B. Minimum Requirements The placement of „°wireless service facilities on city -owned property
is subject to the discretion and approval of lease terms that are acceptable to the city and must comply
with the following requirements:
1. The facilities will not interfere with the purpose for which the city -owned property is intended;
2. The facilities will have no significant adverse impact on surrounding private property, or any
significant adverse impact is mitigated by screening, camouflage or other condition required by
city;
3. The applicant shall obtain adequate liability insurance naming the city as loss payee and
commit to a lease agreement that includes equitable compensation for the use of public land and
17
other necessary provisions and safeguards. The city shall establish fees after considering
comparable rates in other cities, potential expenses, risks to the city, and other appropriate
factors;
4. The applicant will submit a letter of credit, performance bond, or other security acceptable to
the city to cover the costs of removing the facilities;
5. The lease shall provide that the applicant must agree that in the case of a declared
emergency or documented threat to public health, safety or welfare and following reasonable
notice the city may require the applicant to remove the facilities at the applicant's expense.
Telecommunication facilities serving essential government services and other government
agencies shall have priority over other users.
6. The applicant must reimburse the city for any related costs that the city incurs because of
the presence of the applicant's facilities;
7. The applicant must obtain all necessary land use approvals; and
8. The applicant must cooperate with the city's objective to encourage co- locations and thus
limit the number of cell sites requested.
C. Special Requirements for Parks. The use of city -owned parks for personal wireless service facilities
brings with it special concerns due to the unique nature of these sites. The placement of personal
wireless service facilities in a park will be allowed only when the following additional requirements are
met:
1. The city parks commission has reviewed and made a recommendation regarding proposed
personal wireless service facilities to be located in the park and this recommendation has been
forwarded to the city council for consideration and approval;
2. In no case shall personal wireless service facilities be allowed in designated critical areas
(except aquifer recharge areas) unless they are co- located on existing facilities;
3. Before personal wireless service facilities may be located in public parks, visual impacts and
disruption of normal public use shall be mitigated;
4. Personal wireless service facilities may be located in public parks that are adjacent to an
existing commercial or industrial zone;
5. Personal wireless service facilities may be located in park maintenance facilities.
15.29.070 Required submittals and testing.
18
Required submittals include:
A. If the applicant is not the landowner, applicant shall provide an authorization from the landowner to
submit for permits on the landowner's behal
shall sign the annGnation. If any applicant is a corporation, trust, association, or other organized group or
legal entity, it shall provide the date of such creation, and, if a foreign corporation, a copy of the certificate
of authority filed with the state of Washington, Secretary of State's Office.
B. An affidavit signed by the applicant, landowner (co- applicant), and the antenna support structure
owners, if different, indicating that:
They agree to dismantle and remove the WCF /antenna support structure and restore the
site to its approximate original pre- structure condition within the applicable time limits set forth in
YMC 15.29.120 following receipt of a letter from the city indicting that the facility is deemed
abandoned or in violation of this chapter; and,
2. In the case of freestanding /antenna support structures, they consent to co- location, at
reasonable terms, of as many antennas and related equipment as feasible, including those of
other communication providers, on the applicant's structure /site.
C. Complete application for conditional use permit, including State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
checklist if required.
D. A "balloon test" and nhete simulatign als rJecnriherJ in c11hcen+ign F helew are is required for any
application requiring a conditional use permit or variance (except for proposed small cell installations). In
order to better inform the public„ the applicant shall, prior to the public hearing on the application, hold a
balloon test. The applicant shall arrange to fly, or raise upon a temporary mast, a brightly colored balloon,
that is representative in size of the initial antenna array including all standoffs, at the maximum height of
the proposed tower. The dates, (including a second date, in case of poor visibility on the initial date) times
and location of this balloon test shall be advertised by the applicant seven (7) and fourteen (14) days in
advance of the first test date in a newspaper with a general circulation in the City. The applicant shall
inform the City, in writing, of the dates and times of the test, at least fourteen (14) days in advance. The
balloon shall be flown for at least four consecutive hours sometime between 7:00 am and 4:00 om on the
dates chosen. The primary date shall be on a weekend, but in case of poor weather on the initial date, the
secondary date may be on a weekday. No trees shall be removed to conduct the balloon test. A report
with pictures from various locations of the balloon shall be provided with the application. pFepesed
hearing on the permit applinatmea Photos of the balloon test from three (3) locations located
approximately three hundred feet from the base of the proposed tower and spaced evenly in a
circumference around the proposed tower, and three (3) locations located approximately one - quarter mile
19
from the base of the proposed tower shall be submitted within two weeks after the commencement of the
balloon test;
th@ Gity to better und-orlstand the height and visual impaGt Of th@ pFepesed tewe.r and antenna away and to
idGd W GAAMAKS Of FGGE)Fd Of PFE)p@14y Within 300 ot ef the halleen test site 2--rh netire shall he
City wilt may also post notice at a location or locations deemed appropriate by the city, and
will provide notice to the governing body of any affected historic district association or organization.
Additionally, and without limitation, the city may use any other means deemed advisable to provide
advance notice to the public.
E. Other related requests may include any combination of site plans, surveys, maps, technical reports,
or written narratives necessary to convey the information required by this chapter in addition to any
additional requirements of YMC Title 15, and other applicable ordinances;
F. A photo -sim Ala# visual impact assessment with photo - simulation of the proposed facility is
reauired for all applications that reauire a conditional use permit or variance.
the nommonnomon# of the balloon test; As part of such application, unless waived or modified for
proposed small cell installations ,,,the applicant shall furnish a visual impact assessment, which shall
include:
(1) If a new tower or or substantial modification increasing the height of an existing structure is
proposed, a computer generated "Zone of Visibility Map" at a minimum of one mile radius from the
proposed structure, with and without foliage shall be provided to illustrate locations from which the
proposed installation may be seen.
(2) Pictorial representations of "before and after" (photo simulations) views from key viewpoints
within the Zone of Visibility.. Guidance will be provided, concerning the appropriate key sites at the pre -
application meeting. Provide a map showing the locations of where the pictures were taken and distance
from the proposed structure.
20
(3) A written description of the visual impact of the proposed facility including; and as applicable
the tower base, guy wires, fencing and accessory buildings from abutting and adjacent properties and
streets as relates to the need or appropriateness of camouflaging.
G. A site elevation and landscaping plan indicating the specific placement of the facility on the site, the
location of existing structures, trees, and other significant site features, the type and location of plant
materials used to ssresff camouflage the facility, and the proposed materials used to construct and
color(s) of the facility;
H. A signed statement indicating that (1) the applicant and landowner agree they will allow co- location
of additional personal wireless service facilities by other providers on the applicant's structure or within
the same site location, subject to good faith negotiation of compensation according to pFevailing market
rates, and (2) the applicant and /or landlord agree to remove the facility within 69 90 days after
abandonment;
I. Signed documentation such as the "Checklist to Determine Whether a Facility is Categorically
Excluded" to verify that the wireless telecommunication facility with the proposed installation will be in full
compliance with the current FCC RF Emissions guidelines (NIER). If not categorically excluded, a
complete RF Emissions study is required to provide verification;
PaFagFaph 1.1307, E)F, On the event that �an FGG onvirenmental assessment is Pet FequiFed, a st.atement
J. A signed statement that the proposed installation will not cause physical or RF interference with other
telecommunications devices;
K. A copy of the FCC license applicable for the intended use of the wireless telecommunications
facilities;
L .L. A site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed tower or antenna support
structure and antenna, accessory buildings, fencing, landscaping, topographic contours of the site at two -
foot intervals, on -site land uses and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent roadways, proposed
means of access, setbacks from property lines, elevation drawings of the proposed tower; and all other
items required in this chapter;
M A current map and aerial showing the location of the proposed tower, a map showing the locations
and service areas of other personal wireless service facilities operated by the applicant, or sites acquired
by applicant for the benefit of, or on behalf of, any other personal wireless service facility operator, and
those proposed by the applicant that are close enough to impact service within the city;
21
Legal description of the parcel, if applicable;
The approximate distance between the proposed tower and the nearest residential unit, platted
residentially zoned properties, and unplatted residentially zoned properties;
PN. A landscape and irrigation plan showing specific landscape materials and irrigation system;
QQ. Method of fencing, and finished color and, if applicable, the method of camouflage and illumination;
A letter signed by the applicant stating the tower will comply with all FAA regulations and EIA
Standards and all other applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations;
A statement by the applicant that the design of the tower will accommodate co- location of
additional antennas for future users;
The telecommunications company must demonstrate that it is licensed by the FCC if required to be
licensed under FCC regulations, and will meet FCC requirements;
US. The applicant, if not the telecommunications service provider, shall submit proof of lease
agreements with an FCC licensed telecommunications provider if such telecommunications provider is
required to be licensed by the FCC; and
VT. At the time of site selection, the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposed site fits into its
overall network within the city.
IWNJU A map showing the location of any properties that are within 200 feet one - quarter mile of the
proposed site that are protected areas.
15.29.080 Co- location.
To minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation of towers, co- location of personal
wireless service facilities on existing or new towers is encouraged as follows:
A. Proposed facilities may, and are encouraged to, co- locate onto existing towers. Such co- location is
permitted by right and a new or additional conditional use permit approval is not required, unless
additional height or dimensions are proposed that constitute a substantial change to the tower and /or
base station pursuant to Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012_
Changes to towers and base systems that consitute a substantial change as defined by 15.29.035 are
subject to variance procedures and reasonable conditions to assure consistency,
droll ho oAGGGM Jichori on o .,,anR@r ,.ORROMARt with the policy, site criteria, and
camouflaging provisions contained in this chapter.
22
C. The city may deny an application to construct new facilities if the applicant has not shown by
substantial evidence that it has made a diligent effort to mount the facilities on an existing structure or
tower within one - quarter mile of the proposed facility.
D. To reduce the number of antenna support structures needed in the city in the future, new proposed
support structures shall be designed to accommodate antennas for more than one wireless service
provider, unless the applicant demonstrates why such design is not commercially practicable or is not
feasible for technical or physical reasons; or for aesthetic reasons necessary to preserve camouflaging or
stealth structures in residential or protected areas.
E.
The applicant shall examine the
feasibility of designing the proposed tower to accommodate future demand for at least four (4) additional
commercial applications, for example, future co- locations. The tower shall be structurally designed to
accommodate at least four (4) additional antenna arrays equal to those of the applicant, and located as
close to the applicant's antenna as possible without causing interference. This requirement may be
waived, provided that the applicant, in writing, demonstrates that the provisions of future shared usage of
the tower is not technoloaicallv feasible. is commerciallv impracticable or creates an unnecessary and
unreasonable burden. based upon
( (1)The kind of wireless telecommunications facilities site and structure proposed:
(2) The number of existing and potential licenses without wireless telecommunications facilities
spaces /sites;
(3) Available space on existina and approved towers or other appropriate structures
The owner of a proposed tower, and his /her successors in interest, shall negotiate in good faith for the
shared use of the proposed tower by other wireless service providers in the future, and shall:
(1)Respond within 60 days to a request for information from a potential shared -use applicant;
23
(2) Negotiate in good faith concerning future requests for shared use of the proposed tower by
other telecommunications providers;
(3) Allow shared use of the tower if another telecommunications provider agrees in writing to pay
reasonable charges. The charges may include, but are not limited to, a pro rata share of the cost of site
selection, planning, project administration, land costs, site design, construction and maintenance
financing, return on equity, less depreciation, and all of the costs of adapting the tower or equipment to
accommodate a shared user without causina electromaanetic interference.
Failure to abide by the conditions outlined above may be arounds for revocation of the special
use permit.
F. All pef&epal-wireless service providers or lessees or agents thereof shall cooperate in good faith to
accommodate co- location with competitors. if a dispute arises ah-eut the feasibility of nn_IGGatinn the pity
15.29.090 Design criteria.
A. As provided above, new facilities shall be designed to accommodate co- location, unless the
applicant demonstrates why such design is commercially impracticable or not feasible for
technical or physical reasons.
B. All facilities shall comply with the following standards:
1. Setback. A tower's setback shall be measured from the base of the tower to the property
line of the parcel on which it is located. In residential zones or where a proposed tower is on
property abutting a residential use, towers shall be set back from all property lines a distance
equal to one hundred percent of tower height as measured from ground level. In all other zones,
or where a proposed tower site does not adjoin an existing residential use, towers shall be set
back a minimum of thirty feet. When making a decision on a variance application to reduce
setbacks, the hearing examiner shall consider the following:
a. Impact on adjacent properties, including viewsheds, shadowing, visual dominance of
the tower and base structures as seen from streets and rights -of -way, and historic integrity
of the neighborhood;
b. Alternative sites for personal wireless facilities; and
24
c. The extent to which screening and camouflaging will mitigate the effects of the
personal wireless facilities.
2. Right -of -Way Setback Exception. The setback requirement is waived if the antenna and
antenna support structure are located in the city right -of -way, provided the antenna is attached to
an existing utility pole and does not substantially increase the height of the utility pole and /or
extend above the utility pole by an amount determined to be a substantial modification pursuant
to Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 and applicable
interpretations of the Federal Communications Commission, or the minimum separation required
by the owner of the utility pole -. `"1 °less f ° ^' + °° Small cell installations attached to utility poles
are permitted in all zones (with the exception of conditional use permits required for installation
upon utility poles within protected areas) subject to approval by the city in its sole discretion, and
pursuant to license or franchise agreements with the city.
3. Tower and Antenna Height. The applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating that the
tower and antenna is the minimum height required to meet the proven communications need. No
tower or antenna that is taller than this minimum height shall be approved. No tower or mount
together with antenna shall exceed sixty Meet in all single - family, multifamily residential,
Downtown Commercial, and Professional Office zones or one hundred ten feet in other zones.
Additional height may be permitted to accommodate co- location of other providers.
4a. Color. Towers shall have a dark color such as forest green, charcoal or dark brown,
depending on the surroundings or background that minimizes their visibility, unless a different
color is required by the €SG or FAA. Colors shall be maintained and repainted as necessary to
maintain original color, to repair fading through weathering, and to prevent flaking.
56. Lights, Signals and Signs. No signals, lights, or signs shall be permitted on towers unless
required or allowed by the FCC or the FAA. Should lighting be required, in cases where there
are residents located within a distance that is three hundred percent of the height of the tower,
then dual mode lighting shall be requested from the FAA.
. Fencing. A well- constructed wall or wooden fence not less than six feet in height from the
finished grade shall be provided around each personal wireless service facility. Access to the
tower shall be through a locked gate. The use of chain link, plastic, vinyl, or wire fencing is
25
prohibited unless it is fully screened from public view by a minimum eight- foot -wide landscaping
strip.
8. Landscaping.
a. Landscaping. Landscaping is an element of camouflage. Landscaping, as described
herein, shall be required to buffer personal wireless service facilities to soften the
appearance of the cell site. The city may permit any combination of existing vegetation,
topography, walls, decorative fences or other on -site features instead of landscaping, if
they achieve the same degree of screening as the required landscaping. Wire fencing may
be allowed if it is fully screened. If the antenna is mounted flush on an existing building, and
other equipment is housed inside an existing structure, landscaping shall not be required.
b. Buffers. The visual impacts of a personal wireless service facility shall be mitigated
through landscaping or other screening materials at the base of the tower and ancillary
structures. The following landscaping and buffering shall be required around the perimeter
of the tower and accessory structures. Landscaping shall be installed on the outside of
fences. Further, existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent practicable
and may be used as a substitute for or as a supplement to landscaping requirements.
i. A row of evergreen trees a minimum of six feet tall at planting a maximum of six
feet apart shall be planted around the perimeter of the fence.
ii. A continuous hedge at least thirty -six inches high at planting capable of growing
to at least forty -eight inches in height within eighteen months shall be planted in front
of the tree line referenced above.
iii. An automatic irrigation system providing irrigation as needed according to plant
type, season and maturity of plantings.
iv. To guarantee required landscaping the applicant shall provide the city with a two -
year landscape maintenance guarantee.
v.. In the event that landscaping is not maintained at the required level after the two -
year landscape guarantee period, the city after giving thirty days' advance written
notice may maintain or establish the landscaping and bill both the owner and lessee
for such costs until such costs are paid in full.
9. Screening. Screening, camouflaging or otherwise integrating a telecommunications facility
into existing features on the site in order to make the facility as visually unobtrusive as possible,
shall take priority over increased height to accommodate co- location. A personal wireless
telecommunications facility shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the
existing "character" of the site so as to be visually unobtrusive or screened. To be considered
screened the tower or mount shall be placed amongst and adjacent to (within twenty feet) of the
drip line of three or more evergreen trees at least seventy -five percent of the height of the facility.
To ensure the screening trees are preserved the following note shall be recorded on the property
title:
All trees within 50 feet of the telecommunications facility located on this property, which
serve to screen the telecommunications facility shall be retained for the life of the
telecommunications facility. Screening trees may only be removed if deemed diseased or
dangerous by a certified arborist. Before any trees can be removed a report from the
certified arborist shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Unless approved
by the City, only that portion of the tree required to remove the hazard can be removed.
If located in or within 300 feet of a residential zoning district or in or within 300 feet of a protected
area es#ohlishor# or pending fed@Fal state or lonol historic r#is#rin# overlay zones
6#r61G41rOS si#os or ohion #s lis #or# in the Notional Donis #or of His toric Dlonos state onr#
, camouflaging shall
be accomplished by designing the facility to look like surrounding evergreen trees or
other customary structures in the area, unless the applicant establishes that such
construction is technologically or commercially impracticable under the facts and
circumstances.
10. Required Parking. If the cell site is fully automated, adequate parking shall be required for
maintenance workers. If the site is not automated, arrangements for adequate off - street parking
shall be made and documentation thereof provided to the city. Security fencing should be
colored or should be of a design which blends into the existing environment.
11. Antenna Criteria. Antenna on or above a structure shall be subject to the following:
a. The antenna shall be architecturally compatible with the building and wall on which it is
mounted, and shall be designed and located so as to minimize any adverse aesthetic
impact.
b. The antenna shall be mounted on a wall of an existing building in a configuration as
flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project above the wall on which it is
mounted unless it must be for technical reasons. In no event shall an antenna project more
than sixteen feet above the roofline, including parapets.
c. The antenna shall be constructed, painted, or fully screened to match as closely as
possible the color and texture of the building and wall on which it is mounted.
27
d. The antenna may be attached to an existing GGRfGFMiRgmechanical equipment
enclosure which projects above the roof of the building, but may not project any higher than
the enclosure.
e. If an accessory equipment shelter is present, it must blend with the surrounding
buildings in architectural character, materials and color. lhall 18 hrin4, split fare
f. The antenna and any accessory buildings must be architecturally and visually (color,
size, bulk) compatible to the extent feasible with surrounding existing buildings, structures,
vegetation, and uses. Such facilities will be considered architecturally and visually
compatible if they are camouflaged to disguise the facility.
g. Site location and development shall preserve the pre- existing character of the site as
much as possible. Existing vegetation should be preserved or improved, and disturbance of
the existing topography of the site should be minimized, unless such disturbance would
result in less visual impact of the site on the surrounding area. The effen+i.,ene66 Of .061 '01
mi #in o #inn +onhnin61oc ho A-Valllo#8d by the 0-ity, in the nity'6 60-18 r7i6nre #inn
h. On buildings thirty feet or less in height, the antenna may be mounted on the roof if the
following additional criteria are satisfied:
i. The city finds that it is not technically possible or aesthetically desirable to mount
the antenna on a wall.
ii. Roof - mounted antenna and related base stations are may- substantially
screened from view by materials that are consistent and compatible with the design,
color, and materials of the building.
iii. No portion of the antenna may exceed sixteen feet above the height of the
existing building.
28
If the antenna is placed on the roof or above the top of a building, it shall provide to the
extent feasible a minimum setback equal to the height of the panel antenna from the
rooftop edge.
Antenna, antenna arrays, and support structures shall not
extend more than sixteen feet above the highest point of the structure on which they are
mounted. The antenna, antenna array, and their support structure shall be mounted so as
to blend with the structure to which the antenna is attached. The antenna and its support
structure shall be designed to comply with applicable building code standards. withstand u
.A.f.R + fnrne of nne hl lnr+red miles nor hn--r v.fi +heut the use of swppei king gWy wiras. The
antenna, antenna array, and their support structure shall be a color that matches the field
or trim color of the structure on which they are mounted.
j. Guy Wires Restricted. No guy or other support wires shall be used in connection with
such antenna, antenna array, or its support structure except when used to anchor the
antenna, antenna array, or support structure to an existing building to which such antenna,
antenna array, or support structure is attached.
12. Equipment Structures.
a. Ground level equipment, buildings, and the tower base shall be screened from public
view and from the view of abutting properties. The standards for the equipment buildings
are as follows:
b. The maximum floor area is three -five hundred square feet and the maximum height is
twelve feet, unless the applicant demonstrates that a larger area and /or height is
reasonably necessary to accommodate the proposed facility and possible co- location..
c. Except in unusual circumstances or for other public policy considerations the
equipment building may be located no more than two hundred fifty feet from the tower or
antenna. Depending upon the aes +he +ins and- n +her issues +he pity, in i +s snle disnre +inn
d. Ground level buildings shall be screened from view by landscape plantings, fencing, or
other appropriate means, as specified herein or in other city ordinances.
e. In instances where equipment buildings are located in residential zones, equipment
buildings shall comply with setback requirements and shall be designed so as to conform in
appearance with nearby residential structures, including building form, materials and color.
29
f. Roof - mounted. Equipment buildings mounted on a roof shall be designed to match and
be integrated into the exterior design and materials of the building. Equipment for roof -
mounted antenna may also be located within the building on which the antenna is mounted.
Equipment buildings, antenna, and related equipment shall occupy no more than twenty -
five percent of the total roof area of the building the facility is mounted on, which may vary
.e city's sole r+isrre +inn if co- location and as adequate screening stFurfi-re camouflage
is used.
13. Federal Requirements. All towers must meet or exceed current standards and regulations
of the FAA, the FCC, and any other agency of the federal government with the authority to
regulate towers and antennas. If those standards and regulations are changed, then popsenal
wireless service providers governed by this chapter shall bring their towers and antennas into
compliance with the revised standards and regulations within three six months of their effective
date or the timelines provided by the revised standards and regulations, whichever time period is
longer. The revised c +andarr+s and+ regula tions ore nn+ re +rear +ively annlirahle to existing
pFov
Failure to bring towers and
antennas into compliance with the revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for
revocation of permit. the ri b„ to remove a nrnvirJer's farili +ies a+ the nrnvir+er's evnense
14. Building Codes — Safety Standards. To ensure the structural integrity of towers, the owner
of a tower shall ensure that it is maintained in compliance with standards contained in applicable
city building codes and the applicable standards for towers that are published by the Electronic
Industries Association ( "EIA "), as amended from time to time. If, upon inspection, the city
concludes that a tower fails to comply with such codes and standards and constitutes a danger
to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the owner
shall have thirty days to bring the tower into compliance with such standards. If the owner fails to
bring its tower into compliance within thirty days, the city may remove the tower at the owner's
expense.
15. Structural Design. Towers shall be constructed to the applicable EIA Standards, which may
be amended from time to time, and to all applicable construction /building codes. Further, any
improvements or additions to existing towers shall require submission of site plans stamped by a
professional engineer that demonstrates compliance with the EIA Standards and all other good
industry practices. The plans shall be submitted and reviewed at the time building permits are
requested.
No personal wireless service provider or lessee shall fail to assure that its antenna complies at
all times with the current applicable FCC RF Emission standards. AUP ins +ally +inn h„+ nrinr +n
nrnfessinnal engineer +n +ha+ offer-,t. In the even+ +ha+ an an +enna is nn_Inna +er+ v.fi +h ann +her
30
16. Antenna Support Structure Safety. The antenna support structure shall be secured against
unauthorized entry. The annlinant shall demonstrate that the nrnnnsed antenna and sunnnrk
failure, falling ine OF n #her rtehris OF interferenne All support structures shall be fitted with anti -
climbing devices, as approved by the manufacturers.
15.29.100 Permits required.
In addition to the other provisions of this chapter the following permits are required unless otherwise
stated:
A. The following, which are subject to administrative review, approval and permit:
1. Modifications to eligible existing facilities pursuant to 15.29.035 and 15.29.080 that do not
constitute a substantial change; modifications that constitute a substantial change require a
variance;
2. Small cell installations in any zoning district, except locations within a protected area, as
approved by the City.
32-. Antennas, towers and related facilities located within or upon government -owned property
or structures where such antennas, towers and related facilities are disguised by camouflaged as
anrt /nr stealth meas--res approved by the city;
44. Antennas, towers and related facilities located on appropriate rights -of -way and existing
structures, such as buildings, towers, and water towers, in industrial and commercial zoning
districts where such antennas, towers and related facilities are disguised by camouflaged mar
stealth measwFes approved by the city;
54. Antennas, towers and related facilities located within industrial zones of the city, including
proposed locations within 300 feet of residential zoned districts, where such antennas, towers
and related facilities are disguised by camouflaged as anrtInr stealth measwFes approved by the
city;
. Antennas, towers and related facilities located within the Local Business District (B -2) and
Large Convenience Center (LCC) zoning districts where such proposed site is (a) more than 300
feet from residentially zoned districts and more than 300 feet from a protected area, and (b) such
structures are camouflaged and eF disguised by stealth measwFes as approved by the city.
31
An applicant that wishes to locate a new antenna, antenna support structure or tower within the
B -2 or LCC districts, and within 300 feet from residential zoned districts or within 300 feet of a
protected area, shall demonstrate that a diligent effort has been made to locate the proposed
communications facilities on a site, private institutional structure, or other appropriate existing
structures more than 300 feet from residential zoned districts or more than 300 feet from a
protected area, and that due to valid considerations including physical constraints, and
technological feasibility, no more appropriate location is available. Such antennas, towers and
related facilities may approved by the administrator, subject to the administrator's approval of
camouflage or disguise by stealth. Such proposed structures are also subject to the balloon test
and /or photo - simulation requirements of 15.29.070 in order to assist the administrator in
determining appropriate camouflage and /or stealth requirements.
B. Except as set forth in subsection A above, a conditional use permit is required for all proposed
antennas, towers and related facilities.
C. Procedures governing variances are set forth in Chapter 15.21 YMC; provided, however, that the
criteria for variance approval shall be governed by the following provisions. A variance from the height or
area limit that constitutes a substantial change may be granted if the applicant can show by evidence that
the additional height is necessary to provide adequate service to the residents of the city and no other
alternative is available. When granting a variance the examiner shall require that a significant portion of
the tower and related facilities be screened by existing evergreen trees or existing structures.
1. The purpose of this subsection is to provide a means of increasing the maximum height of
tower and antenna in specific instances where the strict application of those limits would deprive
a tower or antenna operator from achieving the minimum height required to meet the proven
communications need.
2. The examiner shall have the authority to grant a variance from the maximum height allowed
for tower or antenna when, in his /her opinion, the conditions as set forth in subsection (3) herein
have been found to exist. In such cases a variance may be granted which is in harmony with the
general purpose and intent of this chapter.
3. Before a height variance can be granted, it shall be shown that the applicant demonstrates
all of the following:
a. That there is evidence that additional height is required to provide adequate service to
the residents of the city and that no other alternative is available;
b. That there are special circumstances applicable to the subject property such as shape,
topography, location, or surroundings that prevent the operator from achieving the
minimum height required to meet the proven communications need;
32
c. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity;
d. That any visual impacts will be mitigated to the greatest extent possible using
camouflage or screening, including but not limited to strategic placement next to existing
buildings or vegetation or incorporation with architectural features of existing buildings or
structures;
e. That the location of the tower and antenna has been chosen so as to minimize the
visibility of the facility from residentially zoned land and to minimize the obstruction of
scenic views from public properties; and
f. That the variance is the minimum necessary to grant relief to the applicant.
4. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed variance meets all of the criteria
in subsection (13)(3) of this section, Decision Criteria.
5. The examiner may approve an application for a variance with additional requirements above
those specified in this title or require modification of the proposal to comply with specified
requirements or local conditions.
6. The examiner shall deny a variance if the proposal does not meet or cannot be conditioned
or modified to meet subsection (13)(3) of this section,
a. Project permit review procedures are specified in YMC Title 16, Administration of
Development Permit Regulations. The following table specifies the permits required for the
various types of personal wireless service facilities that meet the standards of this chapter:
Type of Use
Co- location (No Substantial Change)
Co- location (Substantial Change)
Small cell installation
Permit Table*
Permit Required
Administrative Permit
Variance
Administrative Permit
33
New Tower (City -owned Property)
New Tower (Public Property)
New antenna (existing structures, industrial
and commercial zoning districts)
New Tower (industrial zoning district,
more than 300 feet from residential zone
and more than 300 feet from
protected area)
New Tower (industrial zoning district,
within 300 feet of residential zone)
New Tower (industrial zoning district, within
300 feet of protected area)
Administrative Permit /Lease
Administrative Permit (with approval
of camouflage )
Administrative Permit (with approval
of camouflage )
Administrative Permit (with approval
of (Sight °^F° °Ring` camouflage)
Administrative Permit (with approval
of camouflage )
Conditional Use Permit
New Tower (B -2 or LCC zoning district,
Administrative Permit (with approval
more than 300 feet from residential zone and
of camouflage )
more than 300 feet from protected area)
New Tower (B -2 or LCC zoning district,
Administrative Permit
within 300 feet of residential zone or within
(with approval of camouflage4tealth
300 feet of protected area)
New Tower in or within 300 feet of residential
Conditional Use Permit
zoning district, not in B -2 or LCC district)
New Tower in or within 300 feet of
Conditional Use Permit
protected area, not in B -2 or LCC district)
* Applicable permits include building permits and other permits required for installation.
34
15.29.110 Inspection requirements.
Within 60 days of any required safety inspection performed in accordance with EIA and FCC standards,
the facility operator shall file a copy of the report with the city. Each year after the facility becomes
operational the facility operator shall file with the city a copy of maintenance reports for the prior twelve
months. The applicant shall provide a financial guarantee in the form of a bond or other financial
instrument acceptable to the city in an amount sufficient to reimburse all costs associated with facility
removal should it be necessary.
15.29.120 Non - use /abandonment.
A. Abandonment. No less than thirty days prior to the date that a personal wireless service provider
plans to abandon or discontinue operation of a facility, the provider must notify the city of Yakima by
certified U.S. mail of the proposed date of abandonment or discontinuation of operation. In the event that
a licensed carrier fails to give notice, the facility shall be considered abandoned upon the city's discovery
of discontinuation of operation. Upon such abandonment, the provider shall have sixty days or additional
period of time determined in the reasonable discretion of the city within which to:
Reactivate the use of the facility or transfer the facility to another provider who makes actual
use of the facility; or
2. In the event that abandonment as defined in this chapter occurs due to relocation of an
antenna at a lower point on the antenna support structure, reduction in the effective radiated
power of the antenna or reduction in the number of transmissions from the antennas, the
operator of the tower shall have six months from the date of effective abandonment to co- locate
another service on the tower. If another service provider is not added to the tower, then the
operator shall promptly dismantle and remove the portion of the tower that exceeds the minimum
height required to function satisfactorily. Notwithstanding the foregoing, changes which are made
to personal wireless facilities which do not diminish their essential role in providing a total system
shall not constitute abandonment. However, in the event that there is a physical reduction in
height of substantially all of the provider's towers in the city or surrounding area then all of the
towers within the city shall similarly be reduced in height.
3. Dismantle and remove facility. If the tower, antenna, foundation, and facility are not removed
within the sixty -day time period or additional period of time allowed by the city, the city may
remove such tower, antenna, foundation, and related facility at the provider's expense. If there
are two or more providers co- locating on a facility, except as provided for in the paragraph
above, this provision shall not become effective until all providers cease using the facility.
At the earlier of sixty days from the date of abandonment without reactivating or upon completion of
dismantling and removal, city approval for the facility shall automatically expire.
35
15.29.130 Third party review.
Personal wireless service providers use various methodologies and analyses, including geographically -
based computer software, to determine the specific technical parameters of their services and low power
mobile radio service facilities, such as expected coverage area, antenna configuration, topographic
constraints that affect signal paths, etc. In certain instances, a third party expert may need to review the
technical data submitted by a provider. The city may require a technical review as part of a permitting
process for a variance or conditional use permit. The costs of the technical review shall be borne by the
provider.
The selection of the third party expert may be by mutual agreement between the provider and the city, or,
at the discretion of the city, with a provision for the provider and interested parties to comment on the
proposed expert and review its qualifications. The expert review is intended to address interference and
public safety issues and be a site - specific review of technical aspects of the facilities or a review of the
providers' methodology and equipment used and not a subjective review of the site that was selected by
a provider. Based on the results of the expert review, the city may require changes to the provider's
application. The expert review shall address the following:
A. The accuracy and completeness of submissions;
B. The applicability of analysis techniques and methodologies;
C. The validity of conclusions reached; and
D. Any specific technical issues designated by the city.
15.29.140 Conditional use permits — Procedures — Conditions for granting.
A. Application. An application for a conditional use permit under this chapter shall be submitted
to the director of the city's community development department ( "administrator ") who shall review such
application for completeness and compliance with filing requirements under this chapter and applicable
codes of the city, in accordance with the provisions and procedures of YMC 1.43.090 and Title 16 YMC.
Drier to icc-Zinn a detorminatinn of nemnlo#oness the diron#er The administrator shall have authority to
request additional information and reports from the applicant necessary to make the application complete,
including but not limited to third party review in accordance with YMC 15.29.130 and reports, surveys and
tests as provided in YMC 15.29.070, when the administrator d+restsr, in his or her sole discretion, deems
such additional information necessary or appropriate to make the application complete, to address
mitigation measures identified in SEPA, NEPA or other environmental reviews, to address issues of site
screening or other measures to mitigate impacts upon the surrounding neighborhood, or to address any
other impact to the life, health, safety or persons, or quiet enjoyment of property, identified by the
administrator d+rester as likely, with reasonable probability, to result from the proposed project.
Upon the d+restsr's administrator's determination that the application is complete and in compliance with
filing requirements of this chapter, the administrator d+restsr, in coordination with the hearing examiner,
9 L1.1
shall be responsible for assigning a date for and assuring due notice of public hearing for each
application, which date and notice shall be in accordance with the provisions of Title 16 YMC.
B. Hearing Examiner. When considering an application for a conditional use permit, the hearing
examiner shall consider the applicable standards, criteria and policies established by this title as they
pertain to the proposed use and may impose specific conditions precedent to establishing this use.
(1) Before any conditional use may be granted, it shall be shown that:
(a) The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the
subject property is located;
(b) The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in
the zoning district the proposed use will occupy;
(c) The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses
in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design;
(d) The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the comprehensive
land use policy plan;
(e) All reasonable and commercially practicable measures have been taken to minimize the
possible adverse impacts, which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located.
(2) The conditions may:
(a) Increase requirements in the standards, criteria or policies established by this title;
(b) Stipulate the exact location as a means of minimizing hazards to life, limb, property
damage, erosion, landslides or traffic;
(c) Require structural features or equipment essential to serve the same purpose set forth
above;
(d) Impose conditions similar to those set forth in subsections (2)(b) and (2)(c) of this section
as deemed necessary to establish parity with uses permitted in the same zone in their freedom
from nuisance generating features in matters of noise, odors, air pollution, wastes, vibration,
traffic, physical hazards, and similar matters; provided, the hearing examiner may not, in
connection with action on a conditional use permit, reduce the requirements specified by this
title as pertaining to any use or otherwise reduce the requirements of this title in matters for
which a variance is the remedy provided;
37
(e) Assure that the degree of compatibility with the purpose of this title shall be maintained
with respect to the particular use on the particular site and in consideration of other existing and
potential uses, within the general area in which the use is proposed to be located;
(f) Recognize and compensate for variations and degree of technological processes and
equipment as related to the factors of noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibration, odors, and hazard
or public need; and
(g) Require the posting of construction and maintenance financial security sufficient to secure
to the city one hundred fifty percent of the estimated cost of construction and /or installation and
fifteen percent maintenance of required improvements.
15.29.150 Conditional use permits — Effect of hearing examiner decision.
The decision of the hearing examiner on a conditional use permit shall be final and conclusive with right
of appeal to the city council in accordance with YMC 16.08.030.
15.29.160 Application form.
The director of the city's community development department may prescribe the form in which
applications are made for a conditional use permit and other applications authorized pursuant to this
chapter. The director may prepare and provide printed forms for such purpose and may prescribe the
type of information to be provided in the application by the applicant. No application shall be accepted
unless it complies with such requirements.
15.29.170 Filing fees.
The application for a conditional use permit shall be accompanied by a filing fee in the amount of
15.29.180 Notice of hearing — Conditional use permits.
Notice of all public hearings shall be given and prepared as required by Chapter 16.05 YMC.
15.29.190 Reapplication.
Upon final action as set forth in this chapter in denying an application for a conditional use permit, the city
shall not accept further filing of an application for substantially the same matter within one year from the
date of any final denial of an application.
15.29.200 Transfer of ownership.
A conditional use permit runs with the land; compliance with the conditions of any such permit is the
responsibility of the current owner of the property, whether that is the applicant or a successor. No permit
38
for which a financial security is required shall be considered valid during anytime in which the required
financial security is not posted.
15.29.210 Vacation of permits.
A. Any conditional use permit issued pursuant to this chapter may be vacated upon approval by the
current landowner; provided, that:
1. The use authorized by the permit does not exist and is not actively being pursued; or
2. The use has been terminated and no violation of terms and conditions of the permit exist.
B. Requests to vacate a permit shall be made in writing to the zoning code administrator who shall
determine if the above conditions are present prior to authorizing the vacation. Vacation of any permit
shall be documented by the filing of a notice of land use permit vacation on a form provided by the
community development department with the city.
15.29.220 Violation — Penalty.
Compliance with the requirements of this code shall be mandatory. Any violation of the provisions of this
chapter shall be a misdemeanor subject to the penalties and remedies established in YMC 6.02.050.
Additionally, any violation of the provisions of this chapter, and any installation and /or operation of any
structure in violation of the provisions of this chapter, shall be deemed a public nuisance and violation
subject to penalties and remedies available under state law and city codes. The enforcement actions
authorized under this code shall be supplemental to those general penalties and remedies of Chapter
6.02 YMC and the public nuisance penalties and remedies available under state law and city codes.
15.29.230 Relief, Waiver, Exemption.
Any applicant desiring relief, waiver or exemption from any aspect or requirement of this chapter may
request such, pursuant to and in compliance with the applicable provision on variances, provided that the
relief or exemption is contained in the submitted application for permit, or in the case of an existing or
Previously granted permit a request for modification of its tower and /or facilities. Such relief may be
temporary or permanent, partial or complete. No such relief or exemption shall be approved unless the
applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that, if granted the relief, waiver or exemption
will have no significant affect on the health, safety and welfare of the City, its residents and other service
providers.
15.29.240 Severability.
(a) If any word, phrase, sentence, part, section, subsection, or other portion of this chapter or any
application thereof to any person or circumstance is declared void, unconstitutional, or invalid for any
reason, then such word, phrase, sentence, part, section, subsection, or other portion, or the proscribed
application thereof, shall be severable, and the remaining provisions of this chapter, and all applications
thereof, not having been declared void, unconstitutional, or invalid, shall remain in full force and effect.
39
(b) Any permit issued under this chapter shall be comprehensive and not severable. If part of a
permit is deemed or ruled to be invalid or unenforceable in any material respect, by a competent
authority, or is overturned by a competent authority, the permit shall be void in total, upon determination
by the City.
40
Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Staff,
Tonight I come before you to speak in favor of an extension to the current 6 month
moratorium on Cell Tower Installation within the City of Yakima that will end on
October 1, 2013. This ordinance requires due diligence to be correct and all -
encompassing for both the communication industry and the citizens of Yakima alike to
at least a range of perfection in the 90 percentile. tiat - krlr►.e, c i reutet') 4- ocdt /"" ee
rg,
e com as4 ,.t n t cork - Au-4 -k-6w•e
As you will recall, 5 months ago, citizens of a Barge Chestnut Neighborhood
Association came before you requesting in order to stop the rampart
installation of cell towers throughout the City of Yakima with little or no regulations
other than a request to the planning department for a permit. They also provided City
staff with copies of ordinances from other cities to review and use as they deemed
beneficial in the preparation of an ordinance for the City of Yakima. So far today, City
staff has worked tirelessly in the preparation of an ordinance in conjunction with the
communications industry and the citizens of Yakima to prepare a just and acceptable
ordinance for all parties. Many meetings have been held so far (i.e. 2 Public Hearings
with the City Council, 2 public hearings with the Planning Commission, and 1 Special
Board meeting of the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Association) where all parties got
to speak, discuss and review information presented, and then have it passed on to staff
for consideration.
The truth is that this is a work in progress, taking on many changes in order to "GET
IT RIGHT ". It requires time, and not to be rushed, but all parties also understand that
it cannot drag on without an end date for your vote. We also understand that once it
comes to you for a vote, and if it passes, it would take 30 days for it to be enacted or
take effect.
The first request by the City Planning Commission was going to be for a 1 month
extension to November 1, 2013, and that is, according to the Yakima Herald, what our
City Manager is recommending. But that would not be beneficial or fair to staff given
that the Council Business Meetings are the first and third Tuesday of each month, and
the Planning Commission also needs to meet, understand, and approve forwarding this
ordinance to the Full Council when it is completed; as do all interested parties.
My reasons for proposing to the Planning Commission that they change from a
November 1S extension date to a December 31' date was based on many things. First,
the Council Business meetings are only the first and third Tuesday of each month (Sept
3 and 17 Oct 1s and 15 and Nov 5 and 19 and Sept 3rd would be too late
because the current ending date of the moratorium of Oct 1S will pass and no updated
ordinance will be in place, and we will be back at square one. Secondly, I would not
like to see the moratorium end before the ordinance is enacted, thereby allowing a
small window of opportunity to be utilized by some in the communications industry.
Thirdly, the Nov e extension date will mean that this ordinance must be completed,
approved by the Planning Commission, and forwarded to the Council for approval no
later than Oct 1S . If, for any reason, this is not done or delayed, the Nov 1 extension
date will have to be extended once again.
So, why not extend the moratorium to Dec 31 and when the ordinance is complete,
and approved by the Council, the council can also choose to vote, if necessary, to
terminate the moratorium on the date the ordinance takes effect.
Seeing what has taken place so far, the work that staff has done to date, and the
constant changes being requested by all parties, I have faith in our staff personnel that
when the time is right for final presentation, it shall be forwarded for the necessary
approvals, and will be done sooner than later. We are all on the right track together;
please give the project the necessary room to succeed.
I strongly urge you to extend the moratorium to Dec 31, 2013 for the benefit of all
concerned.
Thank you,
Bill Duerr
3206 W Yakima Ave
Yakima, WA 98902