Loading...
A. Except as provided herein, all wireless communications services facilities shall comply with the provisions of this chapter.
The standards and process requirements of this chapter supersede all other review process, setback, height or landscaping requirements of the Orting Municipal Code.
B. Environmental: All proposed installations are subject to a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) according to Chapter 15-14 OMC unless categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800. All proposals are subject to the critical area requirements and the shoreline master program (Title 11 of this code.)
C. Master Permit Agreement Needed:
1. Consistent with RCW chapter 35.99 and Chapter 8-8 of this code, any person, corporation or entity that proposes to locate any portion of a wireless communications services facilities within the City right-of-way must have a valid fully executed master permit with the City before submitting applications for right-of-way construction permits.
2. Wireless providers interested in obtaining a master permit must apply according to the procedures of Chapter 8-8 of this code as well as supplying the following, in order to have a complete application:
a. Submit three valid fully executed master permits that the provider has with other cities in Washington state, PROVIDED THAT, this requirement shall be excused to the extent that the provider does not have sufficient valid master permits in other jurisdictions to meet that requirement;
D. Right-of-Way Construction Permit: A right-of-way construction permit is required prior to performing any work within the City right-of-way pursuant to Title 8 of this code.
(Ord. 2019-1049, 9-25-2019)
The following are exemptions from the provisions of this chapter:
A. Routine maintenance or repair of wireless communication facilities.
B. Radar systems for military and civilian communication and navigation.
C. Handheld, mobile, marine and portable radio transmitters and/or receivers.
D. Satellite antennas, including direct to home satellite services.
E. Licensed amateur (ham) radio stations and citizen band stations.
F. Earth station antenna(s) one meter or less in diameter and located in any zone.
G. Earth station antenna(s) two (2) meters or less in diameter and located in the business and commercial zones.
H. A temporary wireless communications facility or COW installed for providing coverage of a special event such as news coverage or sporting event, subject to approval by the City. The wireless facility shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter for up to two (2) weeks before and after the duration of the special event.
I. A temporary wireless communication facility or COW installed for a period of up to one hundred eighty (180) days, subject to renewals at the City's discretion, to provide service during repair, replacement, or relocation of an existing facility or construction of a new facility.
J. Subject to compliance with all other applicable standards of this chapter, in the event of an emergency, the emergency provisions of Chapter 8-8 of this code shall be followed.
(Ord. 2019-1049, 9-25-2019)
A. The following wireless communications services facilities are prohibited in Orting:
1. Guyed towers.
2. Lattice towers.
B. Monopoles are prohibited in the following locations:
1. All residential zones;
2. MUTC Mixed Use-Town Center Zone;
3. OS Open Space and Recreation Zone;
4. Within the City rights-of-way.
(Ord. 2019-1049, 9-25-2019)
A. The City of Orting encourages wireless communication providers to use existing sites or more frequent, less noticeable sites instead of attempting to provide coverage through use of taller towers. To that end, applicants shall consider the following priority of preferred locations for wireless communications services facilities:
1. Co-location, without an increase in the height of the building, pole or structure upon which the facility would be located;
2. Co-location, where additional height is necessary above existing building, pole, or structure;
3. A replacement pole or structure for an existing one;
4. A new pole or structure altogether.
B. Co-location shall be encouraged for all wireless communications services facilities applications and is implemented through less complex permit procedures.
1. To the greatest extent technically feasible, applicants for new monopole facilities shall be required to build mounts capable of accommodating at least one other carrier.
2. New macro wireless communications services facilities that are not co-located will require a conditional use permit (C) under the provisions of section 13-6-2 of this code and shall be processed in accordance with Title 15 of this code for a Type III permit. Separation requirements will be a condition of approval.
C. Noise: Any facility that requires a generator or other device which will create noise audible beyond the boundaries of the site must demonstrate compliance with Chapter 5-8 of this code, Noise Control. A noise report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted with any application to construct and operate a wireless communications services facility that will have a generator or similar device.
The City may require that the report be reviewed by a third-party expert at the expense of the applicant.
D. Business License Requirement: Any person, corporation or entity that operates a wireless communications services facility within the City shall have a valid business license issued annually by the City. Any person, corporation or other business entity which owns a monopole also is required to obtain a business license on an annual basis.
E. Signage: Only safety signs or those mandated by a government entity with jurisdiction may be located on wireless communications services facilities. No other types of signs are permitted on wireless communications services facilities.
F. Any application must demonstrate that there is sufficient space for temporary parking for regular maintenance of the proposed facility.
G. Finish: A monopole may be constructed of laminated wood, fiberglass, steel, or similar material. The pole shall be a neutral color so as to reduce its visual obtrusiveness, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA or FCC.
H. Design: The design of all buildings and ancillary structures shall use materials, colors, textures, screening and landscaping that will blend the facilities with the natural setting and built environment. All macro towers must be approved by the Architectural Design Board.
I. Color: All antennas and ancillary facilities located on buildings or structures other than monopoles shall be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and ancillary facilities as visually unobtrusive as possible.
J. Lighting: Monopoles shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC or other government entity with jurisdiction. If lighting is required and alternative lighting options are permitted, the City shall review the lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding area. No strobe lighting of any type is permitted on any monopole, unless required by the FAA.
K. Advertising: No advertising is permitted at wireless communications services facilities sites or on any ancillary structure or facilities equipment enclosure.
L. Equipment Enclosure: Each applicant shall use the smallest equipment enclosure practical to contain the required equipment and a reserve for required co-location.
M. Radio Frequency Emissions Compliance: The applicant shall demonstrate that the project will not result in levels of radio frequency emissions that exceed FCC standards, including FCC Office of Engineering Technology (OET) Bulletin 65, Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, as amended.
N. Landscaping And Screening:
1. The visual impacts of wireless communications services facilities should be mitigated and softened through landscaping or other screening materials at the base of a monopole, facility equipment compound, equipment enclosures and ancillary structures. If the antenna is mounted flush on an existing building or camouflaged as part of the building and other equipment is housed inside an existing structure, no landscaping is required. The City may reduce or waive the standards for those sides of the wireless communications services facilities that are not in public view, when a combination of existing vegetation, topography, walls, decorative fences or other features achieve the same degree of screening as the required landscaping; in locations where the visual impact of the facility would be minimal; and in those locations where large wooded lots not capable of subdivision and natural growth around the property perimeter provide a sufficient buffer.
2. Landscaping shall be installed on the outside of fences. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent practicable and may be used as a substitute for or as a supplement to landscaping or screening requirements. The following requirements apply:
a. A solid screen of evergreen trees or shrubs shall be placed around the perimeter of the equipment cabinet enclosure, except that a maximum ten-foot (10’) portion of the fence may remain without landscaping in order to provide access to the enclosure.
b. Landscaping area shall be a minimum of five feet (5’) in width around the perimeter of the enclosure.
c. Vegetation selected should be native and drought tolerant.
d. Landscaping shall be located so as not to create sight distance hazards or conflicts with other surrounding utilities.
3. When landscaping is used, the applicant shall submit a performance assurance pursuant to section 13-5-2 (H) of this code.
4. The use of chain link, plastic, or wire fencing is prohibited. Ornamental metal, stone, wood, or vinyl fencing materials are preferred.
(Ord. 2019-1049, 9-25-2019)
A. No person may place, construct, reconstruct, modify or operate a wireless communications services facility, subject to this chapter, without first having in place a master permit agreement for right-of-way locations with a subsequent right-of-way permit and/or a building permit, as applicable, issued in accordance with this chapter. Except as otherwise provided herein, the requirements of this chapter are in addition to the applicable requirements of this title and Title 8 (Public Ways and Property) and Title 11 (Critical Areas and Shoreline Management) of this code.
B. Applications will be reviewed based on the type of wireless communications services facilities requested to be permitted. Each wireless communications services facility requires the appropriate type of project permit review, as shown in Table A. In the event of uncertainty on the type of a wireless facility, the City Administrator or designee shall have the authority to determine what permits are required for the proposed facility.
TABLE A
Request | Location | Building Permit Required | Right-Of-Way (ROW) Permit Required | FCC Shot Clocks For Permit Review |
Eligible facilities request | Existing tower or base station | Yes, if any elements on private property | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | 60 days |
New macro facility | Co-location | Yes, if any elements on private property | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | 90 days |
New macro facility | Yes, if any elements on private property | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | 150 days | |
Small wireless facility (small cell node) | Co-location | Yes, if any elements on private property | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | 60 days |
Small wireless facility (small cell node) | New structure or freestanding small cell pole | Yes, if any elements on private property | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | 90 days |
Temporary facility | Varies | Yes, if applicable | Yes, if any elements in the ROW | Standard permit quotes |
C. Timelines:
1. Macro Cell: The application review period begins when all required application materials have been received and fees paid. If the City determines that the application is incomplete and provides notice to the applicant within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of application, the clock stops. The clock restarts when the City receives the applicant's supplemental submission in response to the City's notice of incompleteness. For subsequent determinations of incompleteness, the clock tolls (pauses) if the City provides written notice within ten (10) days that a supplemental submission did not provide the requested information. For new structures or monopoles, see section 13-9-5 (B)(2) above for C Permit requirement.
2. Small Wireless Facility (Small Cell Node): The application review period begins when all required application materials have been received and fees paid. If the City determines that the application is incomplete and provides notice to the applicant within ten (10) calendar days of the date of application, the clock stops. The clock resets to zero (0) when the City receives the applicant's supplemental submission in response to the City's notice of incompleteness. For subsequent determinations of incompleteness, the clock tolls (pauses) if the City provides written notice within ten (10) days that a supplemental submission did not provide the requested information.
D. Batched Small Wireless Facility (Small Cell Node) applications: If an applicant is applying for a small wireless network in a contiguous service area, multiple identical small wireless facilities may be batched into one application. The City may approve, deny or conditionally approve all or any portion of the small wireless facilities proposed in the application. The denial of one or more small wireless facility locations within one submission shall not be the sole basis for a denial of other locations or the entire batched application for small wireless facilities. Should an applicant file a single application for a batch that includes both collocated and new structures for small wireless facilities, the longer 90-day shot clock shall apply to ensure the City has adequate time to review the new construction sites.
E. Any application submitted pursuant to this chapter for projects located on public or private property shall be reviewed and evaluated by the City as described in this chapter. The Public Works Director or his/her designee shall review all proposed wireless communications services facilities that are located partially or fully within the City rights-of-way. All applications will be reviewed and evaluated pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
F. All applications for wireless communications services facilities shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable design standards. Permits for all macro towers must be approved by the Architectural Design Board.
G. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all other permits and approvals from any other appropriate governing body or agency with jurisdiction (i.e., Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Federal Aviation Administration, Puget Sound Energy, etc.).
H. No provision of this chapter shall be interpreted to allow the installation of a wireless communications services facilities which minimizes parking, landscaping, or other site development standards established by this code.
I. Wireless communications services facilities that are governed under this chapter shall not be eligible for variances under section 13-6-3 of this code. Any request to deviate from this chapter shall be based solely on the exceptions set forth in this chapter, including alternative methods of compliance under section 13-9-1 (F) of this code.
J. Third-Party Review: Applicants may use various methodologies and analyses, including geographically based computer software, to determine the specific technical parameters of the services to be provided utilizing the proposed wireless communications services facilities, such as expected coverage area, antenna configuration, capacity, and topographic constraints that affect signal paths. In certain instances, a third-party expert may be needed to review the engineering and technical data submitted by an applicant for a permit. The City may at its discretion require third-party engineering and technical review as part of a permitting process. The costs of the technical third-party review shall be borne by the applicant.
1. The selection of the third-party expert is at the discretion of the City. The third-party expert review is intended to address interference and public safety issues and be a site- specific review of engineering and technical aspects of the proposed wireless communications services facilities and/or a review of the applicants' methodology and equipment used, and is not intended to be a subjective review of the site which was selected by an applicant. Based on the results of the expert review, the City may require changes to the proposal. The third-party 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;
d. The viability of other site or sites in the City for the use intended by the applicant; and
e. Any specific engineering or technical issues designated by the City.
K. Notwithstanding other remedies that may be available under federal law, failure of the City to issue permits within or otherwise comply with the FCC shot clock requirements does not provide a "deemed" grant of approval for macro or small wireless facilities, as it does for an eligible facilities request. No work may occur until the permit issues.
(Ord. 2019-1049, 9-25-2019)
Loading...