HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-02-2019 PC 4.2.19 Agenda PacketPlanning Commission Meeting
April 2, 2019 - 7:00 P M
City Hall Council Chambers
A GE NDA
I .C AL L T O O RD E R
A .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM
B .P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E
I I .AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S
A .March 5, 2019 Draft Minutes from the P lanning Commission Regular Meeting
I I I .P UB L I C HE ARI NG S
A .P S E R N - E ME R G E NC Y W I R E L E S S C O MMUNI C AT I O N FA C I L I T Y ( Z O A 18-
0001)
A mend the City’s Zoning Code – Title 18 to allow the use and siting of emergency
community W C F s within the I , I nstitutional zoning district of the A uburn City Code
(A C C)
I V.O T HE R B US I NE S S
A .Discuss joint meeting of the P lanning Commission and City Council proposed
for the regular City Council S tudy S ession meeting in M ay
V.C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT
Update on Community Development Services activities.
V I .AD J O URNM E NT
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides
recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land
use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the
Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of
recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision.
Page 1 of 48
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
March 5, 2019 Draft Minutes from the Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Date:
March 20, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Draft Minutes March 5, 2019
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission review and approve the March 5, 2019 regular meeting minutes.
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:DIXON
Meeting Date:April 2, 2019 Item Number:
Page 2 of 48
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 5, 2019
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
a.) ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Commissioner
Mason, Vice-Chair Lee, Commissioner Stephens, Commissioner Khanal, and
Commissioner Moutzouris.
Staff present included: Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon, Planner II Alex
Teague, and Community Development Administrative Assistant Tina Kriss.
Members of the public present: Ricquel Cardoza, representative of PSERN,
Commander Jamie Douglas, and Jeff Watson.
b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. January 23, 2019, 2019
The Commission asked staff to update the language under Section V.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, changing the word “off” to “on” in Paragraph 3, 1st
sentence. The Paragraph should read as follows:
“Staff reported that the former Heritage building on Main Street has been partially
removed after experiencing the fire damage.”
Commissioner Moutzouris moved and Vice-Chair Lee seconded to approve the
minutes from the January 23, 2019 meeting as amended.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6-0
III. PUBLIC HEARING
No items were brought forward for public hearing.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS
A. PSERN – Emergency Wireless Communication Facility (ZOA18-0001)
Planner II, Alexandria Teague, provided the staff report for PSERN, ZOA18-0001.
Page 3 of 48
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 5, 2019
Page 2
Planner Teague regarding the proposed facility and code amendment by PSERN
provided an overview. She described the function and purpose, the proposed facility
and summarized the amendments to Auburn’s Zoning Code.
PSERN stands for Public Safety Emergency Radio Network and is intended to
replace the current King County (KC) E-911 Emergency Radio Communications
System. First responders to communicate during emergency incidents will use much
of the King County (KC) E-911 Emergency Radio Communications System, and the
proposed facility in Auburn is part of the system used by all jurisdictions in King
County.
The applicant proposes to amend the City’s Zoning Code, Title 18 to allow the use
and siting of emergency community WCFs within the I, Institutional Zoning district to
accommodate their self-supporting, 180-foot, unmanned, wireless communications
facility. Under the current city code, the proposed project would not be allowed, so
code changes are being requested.
The three sections of the code to be amended are 18.04, “Definitions”, 18.31,
“Supplemental Development Standards”, and 18.35, “Special Purpose Zones” which
contains the use and zoning development standards for the I, Institutional zoning
district.
Staff shared information in response to Commission questions from the last meeting.
Staff reported that the lease term for PSERN is approximately 20 years with renewal
options. To answer the question if the WCF tower proposed is needed for adequate
emergency coverage in Auburn, staff showed comparison maps and explained that
existing gaps in communication signal coverage will be mitigated with the proposed
PSERN tower. This site would be one tower in the network for King County
completing the coverage in Auburn and the vicinity.
The Commission and staff discussed the footprint of the tower and area of base
station and parking area. Staff explained that each side of the three-sided tower is
approximately 14 feet long. The parking area is approximately 60 x 70 feet, or
approximately 4,200 square feet. For comparison, staff recounted that the minimum
standards for a typical R5, Residential zoned lot allowing for 5 dwelling units per acre
within the zoning district, is 4,500 square feet.
The Commission and staff discussed the height, siting, and collocation standards
recommended by staff. A discussion was held regarding the administrative use
permit process, conditional use process to authorize increases in height and the
public comment opportunities associated with each land use approval process. The
question was asked if a site-specific approval for this proposal could be allowed, or if
the option must be open to other sites with similar zoning.
Staff explained, that approval of this proposal is requested through a code
amendment process. Generally, code amendments are not made on a site-specific
basis. Amendments are proposed through the land use and zoning designations
which provide a certain fairness to all property owners with similar circumstances
and within the same zoning district.
Page 4 of 48
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 5, 2019
Page 3
Staff noted that the approach discussed in this case, making it exclusive to the
circumstances of a facility proposed by a public agency for emergency
communication purposes, and including a significant restrictions can effectively
reduce the likelihood of similar requests in the future.
The Commission and staff discussed having a cap height maximum of 185 feet.
Members of the Commission asked staff to bring back an amendment proposal that
provides a height cap of 185 feet with no land use approval process for increases in
height beyond this cap. Staff also explained certain Federal Communication
Commission (FCC) pre-emptions for what are considered minor
increases/expansions to wireless communication facilities that the city cannot
preclude.
A discussion was held regarding collocation of non-commercial entities. The
commission sought clarification of what was meant by non-commercial and it was
clarified that these include Federal, State, or Local public governments or agencies.
The Commission asked staff to provide language that highlights the specific FCC
definition of non-commercial collocation which only includes Federal, State or Local
public governments or agencies.
The Commission asked staff to return with language within the code amendment
providing the following:
A height cap limit of 185 feet with no land use approval process for increases.
Collocation of non-commercial Local, State, and Federal public agencies only
(include specific Federal Communication Commission (FCC) noncommercial
collocation language)
Allow the minimum facility changes for expansion of equipment under FCC
Section 6409
o Require an Administrative Use Permit (land use process) for any
request for collocation
Staff asked if the Commission would be comfortable if staff brings back draft,
language to hold a public hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of April 2.
The Commission concurred.
B. Modification of Rules of Procedures
Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon explained that at the January 23, 2019
Planning Commission meeting the Commission recommended changes to the
adopted June 5, 2018, Planning Commission Rules of Procedure.
Staff indicated that their packet this evening, includes strikethrough and underline
changes for the Commission based on the changes that were requested. The
Commission concurred on the recommended changes as proposed by staff to
Section II. Meetings, 4. Special Meetings with changes to the 1st sentence and
replacing the word “shall” with “may”.
Page 5 of 48
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 5, 2019
Page 4
After discussion and review, the Commission took action on the proposed
amendments to the Rules of Procedure.
Vice-Chair Lee moved and Commissioner Stephens seconded to adopt the amended
Rules of Procedure with the updated language to Section II. Meetings, 4. “Special
Meetings” as follows:
“Special meetings of the Planning Commission may be called by the Chair.
Special meetings of the Planning Commission may also be called by any three
members of the Commission. A minimum notice of 24 hours shall be provided for
special meetings in accordance with State Law.”
Staff will provide a copy of the March 5, 2019 adopted Rules of Procedure to the
Commission Members at the next meeting.
V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Planning Services Manager Dixon explained that staff would like to schedule a joint
meeting between the Planning Commission and City Council at their May 13, 2019 City
Council Study Session at 5:30 p.m.
Staff explained that in the past the Commission has routinely met with Council to discuss
operations, the comprehensive plan, and other matters. The meeting would be
informational; the Council transacts no business during their Study Session Meetings.
Staff explained, if there are specific subjects the Commission would like to discuss, it
would be advantageous to inform staff so that each body can be aware of discussion
expectations. The Planning Commission joint meeting would be the first part of the City
Council meeting and include other subjects for discussion by the City Council.
A formal presentation is not necessary, yet if the Commission would like to discuss
specific topics and have a presentation by staff, staff can prepare. The Commission and
staff will discuss Commission member availability, potential topics, and format at their
next meeting.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:36 p.m.
Page 6 of 48
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
PSERN - EMERGENCY WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
FACILITY ( ZOA18-0001)
Date:
March 25, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
PSERN- Staff Report
Exhibit A - PSERN Code Amendments
Exhibit B - PSERN Admin Decision
Exhibit C - PSERN Public Comments
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission to review and take action on PSERN - Emergency Wireless
Communication Facility (ZOA18-0001)
Background Summary:
Please see the attached memorandum
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Other: Planning and Legal
Councilmember:Staff:TEAGUE
Meeting Date:April 2, 2019 Item Number:PH.1
Page 7 of 48
March 2019 1
Memorandum
TO: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Roger Lee, Vice-Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
FROM: Alexandria Teague, Planner II, Department of Community Development
DATE: March 21, 2019
RE: City File No.: ZOA18-0001 – PSERN Zoning Code Amendments
PROPOSAL: The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network (PSERN) has submitted applications for code
amendment and associated environmental review to change the following three zoning code chapters:
• Chapter 18.04 (Definitions),
• Chapter 18.31 (Supplemental Development Standards), and
• Chapter 18.35 (Special Purpose Zones)
The amendments establish a new land use category of “emergency wireless communication facility
(EWCF)”, modify the applicable zoning development standards and allow siting of EWCFs in the I,
Institutional zoning district.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Background & Proposal
1. Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network (PSERN) is a public safety wireless communications
network intended to replace the current King County (KC) Emergency Radio Communications
System, which is 20 years old and is limited in coverage. PSERN, much like the KC Emergency
Radio Communications System, will be used by first responders to coordinate activities during
emergency incidents, and will be used by all jurisdictions in King County. Due to the increase in
population within the region since the current system was initiated, additional radio coverage is
needed. The current system is to be replaced in order to provide greater coverage and increase
reliability. Replacing the KC Emergency Radio Communication System will involve both
upgrading existing WCFs and constructing new WCFs.
2. The new emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF) to be located in Auburn is proposed
to enhance E-911 emergency communications by increasing coverage throughout the region.
PSERN selected a site based on extensive technical analysis and site selection process. The site
elevation, tower height and presence of surrounding obstacles such as tree vegetation are
critical factors in site selection. EWCF siting is predicated on radio frequency (RF) engineering
which uses line-of-sight (LOS) technology. LOS technology requires an unobstructed path
between receivers and transmitters. Obstructions include trees, other structures, and even the
landscape (e.g. hills). Therefore, to achieve adequate communication signal coverage a tower
and its antennas must be of a higher than surrounding obstructions.
Page 8 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 2
3. The proposed EWCF in short, consists of a self-supporting tower that is 180 feet in height (185’
with lightning rod) with four (4) antennas and two (2) microwave dishes on the tower, and an at
grade equipment facility including an emergency backup power generator at the base of the
tower within a fenced yard.
4. The proposed EWCF is on an 8.38-acre parcel, located west of the intersection of Auburn Way S
and 32nd St SE, on Auburn Adventist Academy owned property.
5. The subject parcel is divided by two roadways; of Auburn Way South and 32nd St SE and is
currently split zoned as I, Institutional and R-5, Residential 5 dwelling units per acre. The
centerline of Auburn Way South defines the location of the split zone boundary (reference map
in Attachment Exhibit B). The land use designation of the subject property is also split between
“Single Family Residential” and “Institutional”. The split land use designation falls along exactly
the same lines as the split zoning. The majority of the 8.38 parcel is zoned (and though not
shown, is designated) “Institutional”. Due to the location and nature of the specific proposal in
Auburn and the compatibility of the Institutional zone with the proposed use, the Director of
Community Development issued an Administrative Decision, indicating that the entire subject
property will be regulated using the Institutional zone’s zoning development standards
(reference Attachment Exhibit B.
6. The City’s existing zoning code requirements, which are primarily oriented to private WCF
carriers, does not allow such a facility. Therefore PSERN has applied for zoning code changes to
accommodate the proposed facility.
7. The proposed zoning code amendment has been discussed with the Planning Commission
previously at two regular meetings. Staff has provided two memorandums and presentations as
follows:
a. At the January 23, 2019 Planning Commission regular meeting, staff provided the first
memorandum and presentation regarding the proposed amendments. This discussion
provided an overview of PSERN, its purpose and funding, the definition of a wireless
communication facility (WCF), the supplemental siting standards pertaining to WCFs, and
finally, examples of other jurisdictions’ standards pertaining to Emergency Wireless
Communication Facilities (EWCFs).
b. At the March 5, 2019 Planning Commission meeting, staff provided the second
memorandum and presentation. The purpose of the March 5th discussion was to respond to
the Commission’s questions of the first meeting and to outline options and seek guidance
on code direction for regulating collocation on and the height of EWCFs.
Procedural Steps
8. Pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 36.70A the proposed zoning code amendment
language was transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce requesting an
expedited review (consisting of a 14-day period) on December 10, 2019. On January 7, 2019 the
City received notice that expedited review had been granted, and that upon receipt of the email
the City met the notice to state agency requirements contained in RCW 36.70A.106. The City did
not receive any state agency comments.
9. A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) non-project environmental checklist was prepared that
evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed code amendments to Auburn City Code
(ACC) Chapter 18.04 (Definitions), Chapter 18.31 (Supplemental Development Standards), and
Chapter 18.35 (Special Purpose Zones) and to address the physical construction of the EWCF.
10. A combined SEPA determination of non-significance (DNS), Notice of Application (NOA), and
Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was issued on December 10, 2018. A revised DNS and NOA was
reissued on December 19, 2019 to solely cancel the NOPH, which was included in error. The
combined DNS and NOA established a 15-day SEPA public comment period which expired at
5:00 PM on December 25, 2018 (December 26, 2018 as December 25th is a federally observed
Page 9 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 3
holiday). The combined public notification provided public comment opportunity under both
SEPA (City file no. SEP18-0015) and the zoning amendment (City file no. ZOA18-0001).
11. As of the date of writing of this report, staff has received three public comments the comment
letters are included as Attachment Exhibit C. The comments were received from Jeff Watson
and Richard Wooding on December 19, 2018, December 21, 2018, and December 26, 2018. Two
of the comments were provided by Mr. Watson (on December 19, 2018 and December 21,
2018). The majority of Mr. Watson’s comments concerned the City’s procedures on issuing a
combined notice of application (NOA) and SEPA determination of non-significance (DNS). The
City provided written responses to both on December 21, 2018 and January 14, 2019 outlining
the City’s procedures for issuing a combined NOA and SEPA DNS, and addressing other general
inquires of Mr. Watson. Mr. Wooding provided comment (December 26, 2018) that he does not
anticipate the project impacting his property.
12. A Notice of Public Hearing was subsequently issued on March 22, 2019. Pursuant to ACC
Chapter 18.68 the following methods of noticing for the Planning Commission public hearing
were conducted:
a. The NOPH was published in the Seattle Times on March 22, 2019.
b. The NOPH was posted in three general public locations (City Hall, City Annex, and the
City’s Public Land Use Notice webpage).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Attached for the Planning Commission’s consideration is the draft code
language (Attachment Exhibit A). Staff recommends the Commission recommend approval of the
amendments, as proposed (Attachment Exhibit A), to the City Council.
In summary, the changes to the three zoning code chapters:
• Chapter 18.04 (Definitions),
• Chapter 18.31 (Supplemental Development Standards), and
• Chapter 18.35 (Special Purpose Zones)
Can be summarized as follows:
Item 1. Amend Chapter 18.04 to Establish a New Land Use Category of EWCFs
Chapter 18.04 Auburn City Code (ACC) contains the definition of a wireless communication facility and
its related components (e.g. antennas), and provides a breakdown of the different types of WCFs. The
purpose of the amendments to Chapter 18.04 is twofold: to define what constitutes an “emergency
wireless communication facility” and to create two new “Types” of wireless communication facility
intended to implement the new definition.
As provided in the proposed zoning code language included in Attachment Exhibit A – an EWCF will be
defined as follows:
K. “Emergency Wireless Communication Facility (EWCF)” means a wireless communications
facility for the purpose of an emergency communication system operated by a local public agency
responsible for providing emergency services.
Two new types of WCFs, intended to implement the new definition of EWCF, are also proposed:
3. TYPE 3. Type 3 is the erection of new (primary) support structures. There are three separate Type
3 categories described as follows:
Page 10 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 4
a. 3-A. Monopoles that are 75 feet or less in height.
b. 3-B. Monopoles that are more than 75 feet in height or lattice towers of any height.
c. 3-C. Monopoles or lattice towers that meet the definition of an EWCF and are 185 feet
or less in structure height.
4. TYPE 4. Type 4 are new antennas erected on existing EWCF (primary) support structures that have
previous city approvals. There is one Type 4 category, which is described as follows:
a. 4-A. Mounting of antennas cannot exceed the following thresholds: 1
i. Increase the height of an existing primary support structure by 10 percent, or 20
feet (whichever is less).
ii. Add an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the
outside edge of the tower more than 20 ft.
iii. Install more than four ancillary equipment facilities.
1This section is intended to be interpreted consistent with 47 CFR 1.40001, as amended.
The Type 3-C WCF is a primary support structure (i.e. monopole or lattice tower) that specifically meets
the definition of an EWCF and cannot exceed 185 ft. in structure height. A Type 4 WCF includes
antennas that are mounted on an existing EWCF; it should be noted that the word “antenna” in this
context corresponds to both an “antenna array” meaning one or more rods, panels, discs or similar
device, and an “equipment facility” meaning structure used to contain ancillary equipment for a WCF
which may include cabinets and shelters. A Type 4 WCF is subject to the thresholds listed above.
Item 2. Amend Chapter 18.31 – Modify the Supplemental Siting Standards for WCFs
Chapter 18.31 ACC contains the supplemental siting standards that normally apply to all WCFs. The
supplemental siting standards are intended to guide the location and development of WCF on properties
regulated under this title. The purpose of amending Chapter 18.31 is to create an exemption for EWCFs
and specify the type of permit required for a Type 3-C and Type 4-A WCF.
Exhibit 1. Required and Exempt Supplement Siting Standards Applicable to EWCFs
Required Standards Existing Exemptions Proposed Exemptions
• Co-Location Requirements(B.2)
• Fencing and Landscaping
• Aesthetics
• Lighting
• Abandoned Facilities
• Noise
• Separation between Facilities • Height (except C.4)
• Setbacks
• Co-Location (B.1)
As proposed EWCFs will be exempt from the supplemental height, setback, and co-location (B.1)
requirement siting standards. A couple of items to note regarding the above exemptions:
• Height: While EWCF will be exempt from supplemental height siting standard contained in
Chapter 18.31, by definition (contained in Chapter 18.04) an EWCF cannot exceed 185 ft. in
Page 11 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 5
structure height. The height exemption excludes C(4) which is the requirement that an applicant
provide evidence that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved the location of
the (primary) support structure.
• Co-location (B.1): Currently WCFs are required to execute and provide evidence of a
nonexclusive lease with the carrier that allows other carriers to place antennas on the (primary)
support structure. The purpose of the co-location exemption is to remove the requirement that
an EWCF must execute an nonexclusive lease and allow other carriers to locate on their support
structure.
Exhibit 2. Types of Permit Required for EWCFs
Zone Permitted Outright Administrative Use Permit Conditional Use
Permit
Institutional Zone 3-C 4-A N/A
As shown in Exhibit 2, the siting of a Type 3-C WCF (aka EWCF noted in item 1) will be permitted outright
in the Institutional zoning district. The collocating of a Type 4-A WCF (also defined in Item 1), on an Type
3-C WCF will be required to secure an administrative use permit (ADM) prior to the placement the Type
4-A WCF. The ADM process will provide the City the opportunity to review for potential impacts and
establish conditions mitigating impacts of the use and to assure compatibility with other uses in the
zone. It will allow the City the opportunity to solicit and consider public comments on each collocation
proposal.
Item 3. Amend Chapter 18.35 - Add EWCFs as an Allowed Use in the Institutional Zone
Each zoning district features a table of allowed uses that establishes whether a specific use is allowed in
a zone and whether that use is allowed as a permitted, administrative, or conditional use. The table of
allowed uses also indicates which uses are prohibited. Chapter 18.35 ACC contains the table of allowed
uses for the “Special Purpose Zones”. The Institutional zoning district is considered a “Special Purpose
Zone” and its table of allowed uses is included within this chapter. Therefore, the purpose of amending
Chapter 18.31 is to add EWCFs as an allowed use within the Institutional zoning district.
Page 12 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 6
Exhibit 3. Summary of Allowed and Prohibited Uses within the Institutional Zone
Allowed Prohibited
Permitted
• Government facilities, this excludes offices and
related uses that are permitted outright
• Municipal parks and playgrounds
• Campgrounds
• Recreational vehicle parks, private
• Commercial recreation facility – Indoor
• Library, museum
• Meeting facility, public or private
• Private school – specialized education/training
(for profit)
• Public schools (K-12) and related facilities
• Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre
• Religious institutions, lot size more than one
acre
• Home occupation
• Nursing home, assisted living facility
• Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare
center, preschools or nursery schools
• Home-based daycare
• Other uses may be permitted by the planning
director or designee if the use is determined to
be consistent with the intent of the zone and is
of the same general character of
the uses permitted
• Emergency Wireless Communication Facilities
(EWCF) – subject to the standards for specific
land use contained in ACC 18.04.912, 18.31.100
• Marijuana processor
• Marijuana producer
• Marijuana researcher
• Marijuana retailer
• Marijuana transporter business
• Animal shelter, public
• Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.
• Marijuana cooperative
• Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone
• One detached single-family dwelling
• Banking and related financial institutions,
excluding drive-through facilities (4)
• Medical services – Clinic or urgent care (4)
• Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium
• Personal service shops
• Pharmacies
• Utility facilities, substations, utility
transmission or distribution line
Administrative
• Cemetery, public
• Cemetery, private
• College, university, public
• Commercial recreation facility – Outdoor
• Conference/convention facility
• Duplex
• Live/work, work/live unit
• Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone
• Senior housing
• Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop, excluding drive-
through facilities
• Professional offices
(4) Permitted within a public college or university as an amenity or service provided to students. A stand-alone bank or medical
services/clinic is not permitted.
Page 13 of 48
EWCF: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
March 2019 7
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A – Proposed PSERN EWCF Code Amendment
Exhibit B – PSERN Administrative Decision
Exhibit C – Received Public Comments
Page 14 of 48
Page 15 of 48
Page 16 of 48
Page 17 of 48
Page 18 of 48
Page 19 of 48
Page 20 of 48
Page 21 of 48
Page 22 of 48
Page 23 of 48
Page 24 of 48
Page 25 of 48
Page 26 of 48
Page 27 of 48
Page 28 of 48
Page 29 of 48
Page 30 of 48
Page 31 of 48
Page 32 of 48
Page 33 of 48
PSERN – Zoning Code Amendment
Emergency Wireless Communication Facility
ZOA18-0001
EXHIBIT C – PUBLIC COMMENTS
Page 34 of 48
From:Alexandria Teague
To:"Jeffrey.Watson@muckleshoot.nsn.us"
Cc:Jeff Dixon
Subject:RE: ZOA18-0001 SEP18-0015
Date:Friday, December 21, 2018 11:14:13 AM
Attachments:PSERN subject parcel excerpt land use designation map.pdf
PSERN subject parcel excerpt zoning map.pdf
PSERN Administrative Decision.pdf
Sheet 10_PSERN Prelim Civil Plans.pdf
Good morning Jeff,
Thank you for your questions, repeated below in bold. In your e-mail of December 19, 2018, you
posed 7 questions. It appears that questions 2 ,3, 5, and 7 have been addressed. This e-mail
addresses the remaining 3 questions by providing the following responses regarding questions 1, 4,
and 6. I’ve also provided a further response to question 7.
· Question 1 - Maybe I’m seeing things, but your map (HERE) shows the zoning for the
project site listed on the Notice of Application (NOA) as R-1; land use appears to me as
being “Single Family Overlay”
To be responsive to your question, I’ve attached an excerpt of the zoning map and a
separate excerpt of the land use designation map (Comprehensive Plan). The subject parcel,
highlighted in blue on the attached maps, is “split zoned” consisting of R-5, Residential 5
dwelling units per acre and I, Institutional. Also, the subject parcel also features a split land
use designation of “Single Family Residential” and “Institutional”. It should be noted that the
majority of the subject parcel has both zoning and land use designation of Institutional
categories. The Director has issued an Administrative Decision that provides that the
subject parcel will be regulated using the “I, Institutional “ zoning standards for the specific
purpose of accommodating the proposed use (the emergency communication wireless
communication facility (WCF)). The basis of this decision is explained in the attached
Administrative Decision.
The majority of the parcel is developed with institutional-type uses while the portion located
southwest of Auburn Way South is currently vacant. Provision of these maps with the
parcel outlined should clear up your question of the classifications that apply.
· Question 4 – WAC 197-11-355 provisions for the “expected” DNS and the single
integrated comment period; this NOA seems to indicate that the DNS is being issued as of
12/14/2018
Not sure what you’re referring to when you say “expected DNS”. The section of the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) that you reference WAC 197-11-355 provides for an
“Optional DNS Process”. This section allows the city combine the comment period under
SEPA with those a notice of application (NOA) for a Determination. The purpose of the WAC
197-11-355 is “to use a single integrated comment period to obtain comments on the notice
of application and the likely threshold determination for the proposal”. While it is not clear,
your question appears to put emphasis on the use of the word “project”. The purpose of
WAC 197-11-704 is to define what is an “action” subject to SEPA. As provided in WAC 197-
11-704 both the specific project proposal (the construction of the emergency
Page 35 of 48
communication WCF) and the non-project proposal (the proposed text amendment to Title
18 “Zoning”) are both “actions” subject to SEPA . Further, the SEPA rules under WAC 197-
11-060 promote and require combining proposals or parts of proposal that are closely
related. I’ve highlighted the pertinent section of WAC 197-11-060 below. It should also be
noted that the specific project proposal and non-project proposal are consistent with b(i)
and b(ii) below.
Code excerpt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
WAC 197-11-060
Content of environmental review.
(1) Environmental review consists of the range of proposed activities, alternatives,
and impacts to be analyzed in an environmental document, in accordance with
SEPA's goals and policies. This section specifies the content of environmental review
common to all environmental documents required under SEPA.
(2) The content of environmental review:
(a) Depends on each particular proposal, on an agency's existing planning
and decision-making processes, and on the time when alternatives and
impacts can be most meaningfully evaluated;
(b) For the purpose of deciding whether an EIS is required, is specified in the
environmental checklist, in WAC 197-11-330 and 197-11-444;
(c) For an environmental impact statement, is considered its "scope" (WAC
197-11-792 and Part Four of these rules);
(d) For any supplemental environmental review, is specified in Part Six.
(3) Proposals.
(a) Agencies shall make certain that the proposal that is the subject of
environmental review is properly defined.
(i) Proposals include public projects or proposals by agencies,
proposals by applicants, if any, and proposed actions and regulatory
decisions of agencies in response to proposals by applicants.
(ii) A proposal by a lead agency or applicant may be put forward as
an objective, as several alternative means of accomplishing a goal, or
as a particular or preferred course of action.
(iii) Proposals should be described in ways that encourage
considering and comparing alternatives. Agencies are encouraged to
describe public or non-project proposals in terms of objectives
rather than preferred solutions. A proposal could be described, for
example, as "reducing flood damage and achieving better flood
control by one or a combination of the following means: Building a
new dam; maintenance dredging; use of shoreline and land use
controls; purchase of flood prone areas; or relocation assistance."
(b) Proposals or parts of proposals that are related to each other closely
enough to be, in effect, a single course of action shall be evaluated in the
same environmental document. (Phased review is allowed under subsection
(5).) Proposals or parts of proposals are closely related, and they shall be
discussed in the same environmental document, if they:
Page 36 of 48
(i) Cannot or will not proceed unless the other proposals (or parts of
proposals) are implemented simultaneously with them; or
(ii) Are interdependent parts of a larger proposal and depend on the
larger proposal as their justification or for their implementation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, the DNS was originally issued on December 10, 2018 as a combined Notice of
Application (NOA), Determination of Non-significance (DNS), and Notice of public hearing
(NOH); the notice was re-issued on December 19, 2018 solely to remove the notice of public
hearing as the date and time of the Planning Commission public hearing is yet to be
determined. As an interested party, you were sent both the original and revised notices.
The Notice describes a formal comment period being observed until December 26, 2018
(due to the holiday). There will be additional opportunity for public comment at the future
public hearing when it is held.
· Question 6 - Permitted outright in the “I” zone? At the very least I would think a ACUP
would be warranted; there’s a lot of SFR up there.
Yes, the current proposal by staff is to allow the use to be permitted outright in the I,
Institutional zoning district. This approach is similar to several nearby jurisdictions. Thank
you for your comment, that you believe a conditional use permit (CUP) is warranted; it will
be considered in our discussions of the proposed text amendment with the Planning
Commission.
· Question 7 - I haven’t gone through all of your documentation but I don’t see a “site
plan”; the exact location of the proposed tower would be helpful as there is a lot of
infrastructure in a 180 ft. radius depending on placement.
As stated in the notice, the application materials, including site plan, associated with the
combined NOA and DNS are included on the City’s “Public Land Use Notices” webpage. The
preliminary civil plan, included on the public notice page for the PSERN project, depict a site
plan and the location of the proposed WCF facility relative to the property lines. The tower
is proposed to be located on the portion of the lot located southwest of Auburn Way South.
I’ve attached a sheet from the preliminary civil plan that depicts the location of the tower.
Thank you again for your questions. I believe between this e-mail and the previous ones, staff has
fully answered your questions. If you have further specific questions or concerns, I would be happy
to meet with you to disucss.
Sincerely,
Alexandria
Alexandria Teague, Planner II
Community Development
Page 37 of 48
City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov
253.931.3088 | ateague@auburnwa.gov
Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001
Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 (Click Here for Map)
Customer Service Survey | https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/XNSL95J
Application Forms | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/forms.htm
Zoning Maps | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/maps.htm
From: Jeffrey Watson <Jeffrey.Watson@muckleshoot.nsn.us>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 4:39 PM
To: Alexandria Teague <ateague@auburnwa.gov>
Subject: RE: ZOA18-0001 SEP18-0015
… although… not to split hairs but I don’t how you can issue a DNS (especially under 197-11-355)
for both the project and the non-project code amendment… by definition you can’t use 355 as it is
for the “… integrated project review process (RCW 36.70B.060).”WAC 197-11-704
Action.
(1) "Actions" include, as further specified below:
(a) New and continuing activities (including projects and programs) entirely or partly
financed, assisted, conducted, regulated, licensed, or approved by agencies;
(b) New or revised agency rules, regulations, plans, policies, or procedures; and
(c) Legislative proposals.
(2) Actions fall within one of two categories:
(a) Project actions. A project action involves a decision on a specific project, such as
a construction or management activity located in a defined geographic area. Projects include
and are limited to agency decisions to:
(i) License, fund, or undertake any activity that will directly modify the environment,
whether the activity will be conducted by the agency, an applicant, or under contract.
(ii) Purchase, sell, lease, transfer, or exchange natural resources, including publicly
owned land, whether or not the environment is directly modified.
(b) Nonproject actions. Nonproject actions involve decisions on policies, plans, or
programs.
(i) The adoption or amendment of legislation, ordinances, rules, or regulations that
contain standards controlling use or modification of the environment;
(ii) The adoption or amendment of comprehensive land use plans or zoning ordinances;
(iii) The adoption of any policy, plan, or program that will govern the development of
a series of connected actions (WAC 197-11-060), but not including any policy, plan, or
program for which approval must be obtained from any federal agency prior to
implementation;
Page 38 of 48
(iv) Creation of a district or annexations to any city, town or district;
(v) Capital budgets; and
(vi) Road, street, and highway plans.
(3) "Actions" do not include the activities listed above when an agency is not involved.
Actions do not include bringing judicial or administrative civil or criminal enforcement
actions (certain categorical exemptions in Part Nine identify in more detail governmental
activities that would not have any environmental impacts and for which SEPA review is not
required).
From: Jeffrey Watson
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 3:51 PM
To: 'Alexandria Teague'
Subject: RE: ZOA18-0001 SEP18-0015
After digging into the file a bit I think you can disregard questions 2,3,5, and 7 for now…
From: Jeffrey Watson
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 9:51 AM
To: 'Alexandria Teague'
Subject: ZOA18-0001 SEP18-0015
Good Morning Alex,
A few quick questions:
1) Maybe I’m seeing things but your map (HERE) shows the zoning for the project site listed on
the NOA as R-1; land use appears to me as being “Single Family Overlay”
2) Are you really able to alter your Zoning code outside of the comp plan amendment process?
3) It appears that the SEPA checklist is project specific; is there not a separate SEPA process for
the Code Amendment?
4) 197-11-355 provisions for the “expected” DNS and the single integrated comment period;
this NOA seems to indicate that the DNS is being issued as of 12/14/2018
5) No Building Permit?
6) Permitted outright in the “I” zone? At the very least I would think a ACUP would be
warranted; there’s a lot of SFR up there.
7) I haven’t gone through all of your documentation but I don’t see a “site plan”; the exact
location of the proposed tower would be helpful as there is a lot of infrastructure in a 180 ft
radius depending on placement.
Page 39 of 48
Jeffrey A. Watson
Planner III; Planning Division
Community Development Services
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
39015-A 172nd Ave. S.E.,
Auburn, WA 98092
Office: 253-285-4048
Cell: 253-350-6515
Fax: 253-876-3182
Email: Jeffrey.Watson@muckleshoot.nsn.us
Page 40 of 48
Page 41 of 48
Page 42 of 48
Page 43 of 48
Page 44 of 48
Page 45 of 48
Page 46 of 48
From:Richard Wooding
To:Alexandria Teague
Cc:Richard Wooding
Subject:Re: PSERN Notice of Application Materials
Date:Wednesday, December 26, 2018 12:41:04 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Alexandria,
It appears from the photos that there would be no direct impact on my property. As I indicated in our conversation I would object to any action that would
have an impact on my present use of my property. I will be out of state and not able to attend any meetings.
Thank you for taking the time to inform me on the proposal.
Dick Wooding
253-732-8940
From: Alexandria Teague <ateague@auburnwa.gov>
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 4:50 PM
To: 'f-vlornaingrid@msn.com'
Subject: RE: PSERN Notice of Application Materials
The location is the parcel with the yellow border that also contains the blue dot.
Sincerely,
Alexandria
Alexandria Teague, Planner II
Community Development
City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov
253.931.3088 | ateague@auburnwa.gov
Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001
Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 (Click Here for Map)
Customer Service Survey | https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/XNSL95J
Application Forms | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/forms.htm
Zoning Maps | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/maps.htm
From: Alexandria Teague
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 4:48 PM
To: 'f-vlornaingrid@msn.com' <f-vlornaingrid@msn.com>
Subject: PSERN Notice of Application Materials
Good afternoon Mr. Wooding,
Page 47 of 48
Here is the link to the City’s land use notice page. For more information regarding the PSERN proposal (the letter you received) please visit this website:
https://www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Once you are on this page, please look for the link titled “PSERN Emergency Wireless Communication Facility”.
Sincerely,
Alexandria
Alexandria Teague, Planner II
Community Development
City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov
253.931.3088 | ateague@auburnwa.gov
Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001
Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 (Click Here for Map)
Customer Service Survey | https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/XNSL95J
Application Forms | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/forms.htm
Zoning Maps | http://www.auburnwa.gov/services/resource_library/maps.htm
This message is private and privileged. If you are not the person meant to receive this message, please let the sender know, then delete it. Please do not copy
or send it to anyone else.
Page 48 of 48