Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-05-2002MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 5, 2002 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on March 5, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS: Dave Peace, Ronald Douglass, Renee Larsen and Yvonne Ward STAFF :Lynn Rued, David Osaki and Patti Zook The following members were absent: Gama Jones, Peter DiTuri, Karen Ekrem The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dave Peace. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was concurred by the Planning Commission that the minutes of the February 5, 2002 meeting be approved as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING: ZOA01-0007 - Zoning Ordinance Amendments related to Height of Wireless Communications Facilities in P-1, Public Use Zone Chairman Peace opened the public hearing. Assistant Planning Director Rued presented the staff report. The proposed revisions are a result of a contested Zoning Code interpretation in which the issue was the height of a cell phone tower in the P1, Public Use district. City Council enacted a four month moratorium for staffto propose revised standards to the regulations. The proposal is for the P1 zone to have a maximum height for cell towers of 45 feet. The changes also provide additional setbacks adjacent to residential areas, placement of antennas on field light poles, colocation on existing towers. Monica Babcock, Tetratech, 2950 Northrup Way, Suite 110, Bellevue, WA, 98004, is working with Cingular Wireless. She was informed about the moratorium today and only had this afternoon to review the proposed changes and indicated concern about the proposed changes. Their intent is to provide customers with services they are demanding. A big concern is location and the provision of services in residential areas. Utility poles in the right of way allow them to colocate in residential areas. She urged Commission to allow this as an option or additional language to allow the use of the poles. They must provide coverage to customers because people want to use wireless at home. Therefore, they must locate in residential areas to provide coverage and capacity to meet demand. She acknowledged this is a tough issue regarding aesthetics. Being allowed to locate on light poles in the right of way addresses coverage issue and aesthetics issue. The antenna blends in and is painted same color as the pole and is not obtrusive. This has been used in other areas and is encouraged by many jurisdictions such as Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland and Lynnwood. This will mitigate concerns regarding visual impacts of the antennas and will eliminate the need to erect a separate structure. They need facilities within areas to service residential areas and the need to be located where used. The micro cell defmition is limited, wireless providers need panel antennas or directional antennas for additional coverage. She described panel antenna as a flat antenna, 5 to 6 feet tall, flat on the front, 8 inches deep and 6 inches wide. Panel antennas are very important. The def'mition for micro cell should be increased. She described the difference in antennas. The micro cell defmition is limited and most carriers use panel antennas. Some jurisdictions defme micro-facility where equipment cabinet is used. The changes will allow them to have different options. The 2:1 setback is a concern and she talked with other carriers and was told about Auburn's small parcels, and wondered with this requirement if there will be any locations where facility can be done. She suggested the Planning Director could reduce the setbacks in appropriate areas as other jurisdictions haVe allowed. Commissioner Ward asked Ms. Babcock if she has any objection to the height limit as proposed and Ms. Babcock asked if public zone includes parks and if height of light poles can be raised. The 45 feet height limit would not be -1- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 5, 2009, helpful to them and in other areas they sought 60 feet. Ms. Babcock believes the 2:1 requirement would not make site usable. This could be an issue when trying to provide coverage. Assistant Planning Director Rued indicated at in the C3, MI and M2 zones the height can go up to 120 feet with additional setbacks. Commissioner Ward is concerned about impacts of antennas in residential areas. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that the City could allow micro cells attached to utility poles, with restriction of antenna and dish attached. This can be looked at and reviewed later and does not have to be part of moratorium issue. He said the City has not been approached by carriers to change references to different technology. Chairman Peace commented that it seems preferable to put antennas on existing poles. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied that there are provisions to allow micro cells now and on pole can only have antenna with a maximum height of 45 feet. There are limitation on size of antennas on poles. There could be some small revisions to this section. If Ms. Babcock has specifications or numbers, this could be addressed at the time of the City Council meeting. He indicated willingness to discuss this with her. In response to questions from Commissioner Larsen, Ms. Babcock said they need 50 feet to work and are finding this out when they try to locate on poles. She spoke of the minimum 10 foot separation between the antenna base and top of the pole. Puget Sound Energy has said this is non-negotiable. Cingular Wireless sites on utility poles are 60 feet high with less than 10% taller. Commissioner Ward commented that wireless carrier needs must be balanced with what residents have to deal with. The change of technology should not stop the process. With the moratorium in place, she wondered how best to accommodate changes. Assistant Planning Director Rued related that the Zoning Code can be changed at any time. Ms. Babcock said that unicell type technology blends in with poles and she understands Commissioner Ward's concern about utilizing poles in residential areas. The impact of utility pole is already there and an additional 15 feet would not be much of an impact. She believes it is this minimal impact versus a new monopole in the area. Utility poles are an option and their impact can be mitigated by blending into existing pole. Many communities have insisted colocating on existing utility poles. In response to questions from Commissioner Ward, Assistant planning Director Rued indicated that power pole height is not the issue. Light poles have to meet City standards which includes height. The height of light poles is not the issue with moratorium - the moratorium is for height of cell towers in P1 zoned areas. Commissioner Ward commented that they are under a deadline by City Council. The Zoning Code can be amended in the future. She asked Ms. Babcock about any current projects. Ms. Babcock is unaware of any projects under way now. She is unsure what the impact of 45 feet height in P1 zones will be. For carriers wanting to locate on utility poles this might not be an option. Commissioner Douglass requested that Ms. BabCock provide the Commissioners and staffwith written information as presented tonight and Ms. Babcock agreed. Commissioner Douglass asked if there is difficulty in reception at 45 feet and Ms. Babcock responded that it depends on the area, topography, location, and other slructures. Antennas have to be at a certain height to connect within the area and with the user. There can be line of sight issues and antenna separation is required by utility company. Chairman Peace wondered about trying to implement something on the existing poles and if there are certain requirements on exiting light standards that would not accommodate. Assistant Planning Director Rued explained that lighting standards are City-wide standards and there is not an exception for higher. Ms. Babcock said the idea of 60 feet is workable with wireless companies and minimizes impacts; however, this might not work for every location. She spoke of allowing flexibility in the code. The Planning Director can make the decision on exemptions or screening requirements to allow flexibility. She believes the language related to panel antennas could be worked out with additional language to the Planning Department. She will provide information for Planning Department staff so they can get an idea of what she is talking about. She recommends this be included as an option in the micro cell def'mition. Chairman Peace asked Assistant Planning Director Rued if this can be worked out before the City Council meeting. Assistant Planning Director Rued said the information would be needed by the end of this week. Planning and -2- · MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 5, 2907, Community Development Committee will review next Monday and forward to City Council on March 18 and the adjustment should be easy to do. Chairman Peace suggested that recommendation be for some changes before PCDC meeting and then to City Council. The light standards to be addressed as technology changes in order to meet moratorium deadline. The panel antenna language could be incorporated into the changes. Assistant Planning Director Rued will receive specifications fi.om Ms. Babcock in a couple days and this will be forwarded to PCDC for review with the proposed changes. Council can then make changes to what is proposed. Chairman Peace closed the public hearing. Commissioner Ward made a motion to recommend forwarding amendments to Sections 18.04.912 and 18.48.100 to the City Council as submitted and with recommendation to add panel antennas to the proposed changes and to review the cell phone revisions as that technology changes. Commissioner Larsen seconded the motion which passed. Commissioner Ward was excused at 7:50 p.m. CALL PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 2, 2002: ZOA01-0006 - Zoning Ordinance amendments to Chapter 18.26 - C- 1, Light Commercial zoning district, regarding what the building height should be for the C-1 zone The Planning Commission consented to scheduling the public hearing for April 2, 2002.. DISCUSSION: 1. Sensitive Areas Ordinance and set date for Work Session JD reminded Commissioners about the draft presented at the last meeting. Changes to that were incorporated and were shown in strikeout/underline format. To date, the Commission's changes from the last meeting have been made and is being reviewed by City staff again in order to how the document works with City regulations and standards. He will provide another draft in strikeout/underline format to the Commission prior to the work session and this will be reviewed at the work session. This way the Commission can see how their comments as well as other changes are addressed in the draft. The State Office of Trade and Economic Development is formulating a model critical areas ordinance which is under development now. It is a model that cities and counties can use to update their sensitive areas regulations. It is not required that they adopt these regulations, but they can be used as a pattern. Ifa particular component of the model ordinance works for Auburn it could be adopted as part of Auburn's SAO. Staff will compare and evaluate the provisions of the model ordinance to see if any improvements can be made and to ensure that the regulations are up to date. This model should be available sometime in March which should allow timely review. Since the goals of the critical areas ordinance are similar major changes are not anticipated, but the model may provide some ref'mements in some areas that Auburn can incorporate. JD spoke about the opportunity for a work session on the SAO and that he will provide a draft incorporating recent changes. He hopes to receive from Public Works Department a new section to replace aquifer recharge and be able to provide this for Commissioners for review. The term 'water resource protection areas' will be used in this new section to encompass wellhead and aquifer protection areas. As there were only three Commissioners left present, it was decided that they will be contacted by telephone regarding their availability on March 19 or March 26 for the work session. -3- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 5, 2002 Principal Planner Osaki remarked that the following items are for information purposes only. INFORMATION: 1. 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Summary Matrix 2. Urban Centers - Discussion at March 4 City Council Meeting 3. Terminal Park Neighborhood Plan Stakeholders Meeting Notice No discussion occurred on these items. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Elections will be held at the April meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: Chairman Peace brought up issue of new adult use business in south end of the City. Assistant Planning Director Rued advised that City Council adopted a moratorium on adult uses and Zoning Code revisions will come back to Planning Commission to review and make recommendations to City Council. ADJOURNMENT: With no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. PCXAGXMIN03 -2002 -4-