10.A September 12, BMC Personal Wireless Services Facilities Code Amendment Public Hearing -Comprehensive Plan Amendment Housing Policies

Transcription

1 AGENDA Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, August 22, 2018 City Hall, 400 SW 152nd St., Council Chambers Page # 1. ROLL CALL 2. AGENDA CONFIRMATION 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3.A July 25, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting - 25 Jul Minutes PUBLIC COMMENT Public comment will be accepted on topics not scheduled for a public hearing. 5. NEW BUSINESS AGENDA 5.A Staff Presentation and Discussion BMC Personal Wireless Facilities Code Amendment Discussion Personal Wireless Facilities 5.B Staff Presentation and Discussion Comprehensive Plan Amendment on Housing policies and strategies Housing Policy OLD BUSINESS 7. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS 8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 9. ADJOURNMENT Page 1 of 63

2 10. FUTURE AGENDAS (TENTATIVE) 10.A September 12, BMC Personal Wireless Services Facilities Code Amendment Public Hearing -Comprehensive Plan Amendment Housing Policies September 26, BMC Personal Wireless Services Facilities Code Amendment Recommendation -BMC Sign Code Amendment Discussion -Comprehensive Plan Amendments Introduction to Map Amendments PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Curtis Olsen (Chair) Kim Davis Kaelene Nobis (Vice Chair) Hugo Garcia Christopher Guizlo Kate Kelly Anna Markee Language interpretation services are available upon request. Please phone at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request assistance. Servicios de interpretación de espanol están disponibles bajo petición. Por favor de llamar al numero por lo menos 48 horas antes de la reunion para solicitar asistencia. Planning Commission meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation and assisted listening devices are available upon request. Please phone at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request assistance. Las reuniones del Comisión de Planificación son accesibles a personas con discapacidades. Interpetacion de lengua de señas americana y aparatos de escucha asistida están disponibles bajo petición. Por favor de llamar al numero por lo menos 48 horas antes de la reunion para solicitar asistencia. Page 2 of 63

3 Agenda Item #3.3.A R:\PL\Commission\Minutes2018\072518\072518DRAFTPCminits.docx City of Burien BURIEN PLANNING COMMISSION July 25, :00 p.m. Multipurpose Room/Council Chambers MINUTES To hear the Planning Commission s full discussion of a specific topic, or the complete meeting, watch the videostream available at CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Chair Olsen called the July 25, 2018, meeting of the Burien Planning Commission to order at 7:01 p.m. Present: Christopher Guizlo, Anna Markee, Kaelene Nobis and Curtis Olsen Absent: Kim Davis, Hugo Garcia and Kate Kelly, excused Administrative staff present: Chip Davis, Community Development Department director; Thara Johnson, senior planner; Colleen Brandt-Schluter, Human Services manager AGENDA CONFIRMATION Motion was made by Commissioner Nobis and seconded by Commissioner Guizlo to confirm the agenda. The vote was 4 in favor, 0 against. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Nobis and seconded by Commissioner Markee to approve the minutes of the July 11, 2018, meeting. The vote was 4 in favor, 0 against. PUBLIC COMMENT Sue Anderson, th Ave SW spoke in opposition to proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment PLA , which requests a change in the Comprehensive Plan designation of the former Milam Recovery Center parcel from Office to High-Density Multi-Family Neighborhood for Mary s Place. She asked the commissioners to walk through her portion of the Shorewood neighborhood with her to visualize her concerns. NEW BUSINESS A. Staff Presentation on Housing and Human Services Thara Johnson, senior planner, introduced Colleen Brandt-Schluter, Burien s Human Services manager, who gave the commissioners a brief overview of Burien s human services program. She started by outlining the three main roles of the Human Services manager: planner, convener and funder. She explained that absent a Burien specific equity and social justice plan, the City uses the King County Equity and Social Justice Initiative to guide its efforts. She said that in late 2017 the Burien City Council established the seven-member Human Services Commission to advise the council on human service issues in Burien and on human services funding allocations. She noted that community engagement is a key component in designing services to meet the needs of residents, including those who have been historically underrepresented in the civic process and decisions that impact their community. Ms. Brandt-Schluter said that early this year the commission established funding priorities for the human services funding request for proposals (RFP). The five high-level priorities are: secure 1 Page 3 of 63

4 Agenda Item #3.3.A affordable housing and food; education and job skills; safe from violence within families, neighborhoods and communities; early childhood education and youth success; and physical and mental health for all residents. She described for the Planning Commission some of the work she has done so far this year, including meeting with community groups, advocating for services to return to the Alturas apartments, and visiting homeless encampments. She said her latest endeavor is to implement a platform for strengthening families in Burien. She said she also has been working to ensure that Burien and South King County are adequately represented at key policy and working groups at the sub-regional and regional levels, which are sometimes dominated by Seattle and Eastside representation. She outlined the challenges faced by Burien, including funding for human services, meeting the needs of the diverse community, stability of federal funding, investments in prevention, greater public awareness, and creating opportunity for all. Ms. Brandt-Schluter said the Human Services Commission is looking forward to participating in a joint housing workshop with the Planning Commission sometime soon. Chair Olsen asked for an infographic on the public health statistical information Ms. Brandt-Schluter presented to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Markee asked if there has been any thought given to coordinating volunteer activities. Ms. Brandt-Schluter said she has been exploring the possibility of at least having a listing of volunteer opportunities on the City s website. Commissioner Guizlo asked if the City would be doing a citywide human services needs assessment. Ms. Brandt-Schluter pointed out that the recently completed community survey did identify items of concern for each city department. She noted that surveys are difficult to design and implement in order to accurately collect the information specifically sought. B. Staff Presentation and Discussion BMC Personal Wireless Facilities Code Amendment Discussion Ms. Johnson gave a brief overview of the background information and topic areas of the anticipated proposed changes to the personal wireless facilities code that will be brought before the commissioners at future meetings. She explained the changes are necessary to bring the code into compliance with changes made to the federal Telecommunications Act in 2012 and subsequent additional rules that added clarity. The changes require jurisdictions to approve certain types of wireless facilities including co-locations or modifications to existing cell sites if said modifications do not constitute a substantial change to the physical dimensions of the existing facilities. The federal law states if the jurisdiction does not approve an eligible facility modification within 60 days, the requested modification is deemed automatically approved. She reviewed what constitutes a substantial change. Ms. Johnson said the draft code update language essentially will be proposing a streamlined process in order to meet the 60-day deadline. There also will be a new section on small cell facilities, which often are located on utility poles in the city s right-of-way. She said staff is working on finalizing the draft code and will be giving the wireless providers and Seattle City Light and Puget Sound Energy the opportunity to review and comment on technical issues or implications they may see in the proposed changes. She said she anticipates the draft regulations being provided to the Planning Commissioners at the August 22 nd meeting, followed by a public hearing at a subsequent meeting. The City Council would be given the Planning Commission s recommendation sometime in the fall. Chip Davis, Community Development director, noted that the federal government has pre-empted local jurisdictions from weighing health considerations when processing permit requests for cell sites. R:\PL\Commission\Minutes2018\072518\072518DRAFTPCminits.docx 2 Page 4 of 63

5 Agenda Item #3.3.A C. Staff Presentation and Discussion BMC Sign Code Amendment OLD BUSINESS None. Ms. Johnson reviewed the legal need to amend the City s sign code and the aspects of signage that the City is allowed by law to regulate. She then spoke about the areas of Burien s sign code that will be amended to conform with recent Supreme Court decisions regarding content-neutral regulation of signs. The processes for enforcement of the sign code also will be amended. Ms. Johnson said she will be providing the Burien Business and Economic Development Partnership with an overview of the proposed changes soon. She added that staff hopes to conduct the public outreach component in mid- to late-august, and expects to provide the commissioners with the slate of proposed changes at either its August 22 nd or September 12 th meeting, with a subsequent public hearing. Commissioner Nobis suggested contacting the local sign companies during the public outreach process. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS None. DIRECTOR S REPORT Mr. Davis said the August 8 th meeting will be canceled. He reminded the commissioners to let staff know of planned absences as soon as possible in case there is difficulty getting a quorum for a meeting. He said he anticipates the commission agenda will be full for the remainder of the year. ADJOURNMENT Direction/Action Motion to adjourn the meeting as made by Commissioner Markee and seconded by Commissioner Guizlo. The vote was 4 in favor, 0 against. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. APPROVED: Curtis Olsen, chair Planning Commission R:\PL\Commission\Minutes2018\072518\072518DRAFTPCminits.docx 3 Page 5 of 63

6 Page 6 of 63

7 MEMORANDUM To: From: Burien Planning Commission Thara Johnson, Senior Planner Date: August 22, 2018 Subject: Personal Wireless Service Facilities Code Amendment PURPOSE The purpose of this agenda item is for the Planning Commission to receive a briefing from staff and review the draft code language relating to amending BMC Personal Wireless Service Facilities. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission received an introduction to the Personal Wireless Facilities amendment from city staff at the June 27 th, meeting, when an overview of the different types of small cell facilities were provided to the Commission; as well as the background for the need for the amendment to the City s existing regulations relating to Personal Wireless Service Facilities. Staff also provided the Commission with an summary of some of the proposed changes that would be reflected in the draft code at the July 25 th meeting. The City of Burien has been working as part of a consortium with representatives from several jurisdictions within Washington State led by attorneys from Ogden Murphy Wallace (OMW). Since the July 25 th meeting, city staff along with the OMW team has provided an opportunity for the wireless providers such as Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T- Mobile, and other carriers as well as Seattle City Light and Puget Sound Energy to review the regulations and provide feedback on the proposed changes. Page 7 of 63 1

8 In response, AT&T, Verizon and Seattle City Light provided the City with comments on the draft code language. The wireless carriers did identify some issues that they had concerns with, both relating to macro facilities and small cell facilities. Staff has made some of the modifications that the carriers have requested, but are also ensuring that the City s goals and vision while adhering to the requirements under the Telecommunications Act are being complied with. Attachment 1 includes the proposed amended language to BMC 19.50, Personal Wireless Service Facilities (PWSF) regulations. The following is a summary of the changes reflected in the amended draft code to comply with changes made to the Federal Telecommunications Act, under the Spectrum Act (6409 (a)): 1. PWSF Locations and Permit Process: i. Adding a permit process for Eligible facilities requests ii. Adding a permit process for small cell facilities and providing thresholds for locations such as limiting the location in the Downtown Commercial zone 2. Small Cell Facility Design Criteria: i. Adding a new section (BMC ) which addresses design criteria and height requirements for small cell facilities 3. Eligible Facilities Requests: i. Adding a new section (BMC ) which includes proposed language to provide thresholds and requirements for Eligible facilities requests, which comply with the requirements set by the Spectrum Act (BMC ) a. Definitions which address eligible facilities per the Spectrum Act b. Application requirements and criteria for the parameters of what types of wireless service facilities qualify as eligible facilities 4. Small cell facilities in the public right of way: i. Adding a new section BMC which provides requirements for small cell facilities being proposed in the public right of way. a. Criteria which addresses when new poles or support structures are allowed in the public rights of way b. Design requirements for small cell facilities located in the public right of way c. Language which provides for a deviation process for applicants that cannot comply with the regulations being proposed due to technical infeasibility 5. Definitions: i. Amending existing definitions to comply with the Spectrum Act ii. Adding new definitions for small cell facilities and small cell networks. R:\PL\Commission\Packets2018\ \PWSF Code Amendment\Staff Memo Personal Wireless Facilities Code Amendment.docx Page 8 of 63 2

9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION No action is needed at this meeting. Staff is providing the Commission with the draft language that includes the proposed changes to the PWSF regulations within BMC 19.50, and also providing the Commission with an opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback in advance of the public hearing, which is tentatively being scheduled for September 12, If you have any questions before the meeting, please contact Thara Johnson at (206) or by at Attachments: 1. BMC Personal Wireless Service Facilities Draft regulations R:\PL\Commission\Packets2018\ \PWSF Code Amendment\Staff Memo Personal Wireless Facilities Code Amendment.docx Page 9 of 63 3

10 1.Chapter Personal Wireless Service Facilities User Guide Purpose Exemptions PWSF Locations and Permit Process Collocation Design Criteria RepealedSmall Cell Facility Design Criteria Facility Removal Application Requirements Third Party Review Bonds Other Wireless Communication Facilities Conflict Eligible Facilities Requests New Structures in the Rights-of-Way and Concealment Element Designs User Guide. This Chapter contains a variety of regulations and standards that apply to the use and development of personal wireless service facilities (PWSF). If you are operating or are interested in proposing a PWSF, you should read this Chapter.[Ord , 1999] Purpose. These standards were developed to protect the public health, safety and welfare, to protect property values and minimize visual impacts while furthering the development of enhanced telecommunication services in Burien. These standards were designed to comply with the Telecommunications Act of The provisions of this Chapter are not intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or 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. [Ord , 1999] Exemptions. The following are exempt from the provisions of this Chapter and shall be permitted in all zones: {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 1 Page 10 of 63

11 1. Temporary PWSF during an emergency declared by the City; 2. Licensed amateur (ham) radio stations; 3. Satellite dish antennas less than two meters in diameter when located in non-residential zones, and satellite dish antennas less than one meter in diameter when located in residential zones, including direct to home satellite services, when used as an accessoryuse accessory use of the property; 4. PWSF which legally existed or had a vested application on or prior to the effective date of this Chapter; except that this exemption does not apply to modifications of such facilities; 5. Routine maintenance or repair of a PWSF and related equipment (excluding structural work or changes in height or dimensions of antennas, support structures, utility poles or buildings), provided that compliance with the standards of this Code are maintained. [Ord , 1999] PWSF Locations and Permit Process. 1. The following table indicates the hierarchy of locations to be used in reviewing an application for a PWSF. The applicant bears the burden to show that location in a higher priority is not technically feasible. Pursuant to WAC (27Small cell facilities not requiring new poles or structures and eligible facilities requests are exempt from this hierarchy requirement and shall follow the permit processes outlined in subsections 3 and 4 below. Pursuant to WAC (25), some PWSF may require a SEPA Review as part of the review processes outlined below. Priority (highest to lowest) Special Review Process (See Chapter 19.65) Type of PWSF and Location 1 None A. Collocation of antennas on an existing support structurein structure in a non-residential zone. B. Attachment of antennas to existing structures in the I, CR, CC-1, CC-2, and AI zones. C. Antennas attached to existing or replacement ball field light standards, electrical transmission towers, water tanks or existing utility poles in any zone, or in any public street. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 2 Page 11 of 63

12 Priority (highest to lowest) Special Review Process (See Chapter 19.65) Type of PWSF and Location D. Any PWSF located in the public rights-of-way will require a rightof-way use permit. E. Any PWSF located outside of the public rights-of-way will require a building permit. 2 Type 1 A. Attachment of antennas to existing structures (except single detached dwelling units and their accessorystructuresaccessory structures) in the O, SPA-1, SPA-2, SPA-3, DC, CI, PR, RM and RS zones. B. New support structures or poles in the public rights-of-way proposed to site new small cell facilities, provided that the requirements of BMC are met, except in those public rights-of-way in the DC zone. 3 Type 2 Any PWSF not listed above, except for the following which are prohibited: lattice towers in all zones, new monopolesin monopoles and new structures that support small cell facilities in the DC zone and in public rights-of-way in the DC zone and new monopoles in residential zones. 2. An applicant for a Type 2 review for a PWSF to be located within a residential zone or within 100 feet of a residential zone shall demonstrate that the proposed facility cannot be located in a non-residential zone, or greater than 100 feet from a residential zoneand zone and that due to valid considerations including physical constraints, or technological feasibility, no other location is available. The applicant is required to demonstrate that it contacted the landowners or owners of structures in excess of thirty feet (30') in heightwithin height within a one-quarter mile radius of the proposed site (except single detached dwelling units and their accessory structures), and asked for permission to build the support structure or install the antenna on an existing structure. The information submitted by the applicant shall include a map of the area to be served by the facility, field-strength test data (a drive test) of existing coverage quality within the area to be served by the facility, its relationship to other sites in the applicant s network (within and outside of Burien city limits), and, an {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 3 Page 12 of 63

13 evaluation of existing available land, buildings and structures taller than thirty feet (30') within one-quarter mile of the proposed site. [Ord. 529, 2009, Ord , 2003, Ord , 1999] 3. Small cell facilities not requiring new poles or structures and meeting the requirements of this Chapter are permitted in any zone with a right-of-way use permit (if located in the right-of-way) or a building permit (if located outside of the right-of-way). 4. If the applicant is proposing a PWSF located in the public rights-of-way, then the applicant must apply for a franchise. The Director may process the application for a PWSF permit concurrently with an application for a franchise, but any such permit will be conditioned on approval of the franchise by the City Council. 5. Permits issued under this BMC Chapter for PWSF in the public rights-of-way shall comply with the process requirements in BMC Chapter except that such decisions are exempt from RCW 36.70B.60 through 36.70B.080 and RCW 36.70B.110 through 36.70B Collocation. To minimize potential adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation of PWSF support structures, collocation of PWSFantennas PWSF antennas on existing or new support structures is encouraged, as follows: 1. Collocation shall be accomplished in a manner consistent with the provisions of this Chapter. 2. This subsection applies to both new and existing PWSF. The terms and conditions for collocating late-comer providers on collocatable PWSF facilities shall be reasonable and based on current market rates for comparable facilities. Imposition of unreasonable or higher than market rate terms and conditions by the host provider shall be considered failure to cooperate in good faith to accommodate collocation with competitors and shall be subject to the provisions of BMC below. 3. The City may deny an application to construct a new monopole if the applicant has not shown by substantial evidence that it has made an effort to mount the proposed antennas on an existing building or support structure that would provide adequate service to the proposed coverage area. The applicant shall use the following collocation protocol: A. Prior to or with an application for approval of a PWSF, the applicant shall demonstrate that the following notice was mailed via certified mail to all other PWSF providers licensed to provide service within the City: {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 4 Page 13 of 63

14 Pursuant to the requirements of City of Burien Municipal Code Section , (name of wireless provider) is hereby providing you with notice of our intent to submit an application with the City of Burien for construction of a new freestanding personal wireless service facility that would be located at (location). In general, we plan to construct a monopole of feet in height for the purpose of providing (cellular, PCS, ESMR, etc.) service in the frequency range. Please inform us whether you have any existing or planned personal wireless service facilities within one mile of the proposed facility that may be available for possible collocation. If you do not have a facility available for collocation, please indicate whether you would be interested in collocating on our proposed facility. Please provide us with this information within 10 business days after the date of this letter. Your cooperation is appreciated. B. Copies of any responses to the collocation request letter shall be provided to the City prior to or with the PWSF application. If a response to a collocation request letter is received by an applicant indicating an opportunity for collocation, the applicantshall applicant shall make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of collocation. This analysis shall be submitted with an application for any monopole and shall include, at a minimum: i. A statement from a qualified engineer indicating whether the necessary service can or cannot be provided by collocationat collocation at the possible collocation site. ii. Evidence that the lessor of the possible collocation site either agrees or disagrees to collocation on his/her property. iii. Evidence that adequate space exists or does not exist at the possible collocation site to accommodate needed equipment and meet the applicable requirements of this Code. iv. Evidence that adequate access does or does not exist at the possible collocation site. 4. To reduce the number of future support structures needed in the City, new support structures shall be designed to accommodate antennas for more than one user, unless the applicant demonstrates why such design is not feasible for economic, technical or physical reasons. 5. Unless collocation is not feasible, an applicant s site plan shall reserve an area for at least one other provider s equipment near the base of the applicant s monopole. An option agreement to lease the area at the base of the monopole for a second provider shall not expire prior to the underlying lease. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 5 Page 14 of 63

15 6. Personal wireless service providers, their lessees and agents shall cooperate in good faith to accommodate collocation with competitors, including responding in a timely manner to a collocation letter required by BMC If a dispute arises about the feasibility of collocating, the Director may require a third party technical study, pursuant to BMC , to resolve the dispute. Failure to accommodate collocation may be grounds for revocation of permit and removal of the PWSF under public nuisance abatement procedures (Chapter 1.15 BMC).[Ord (Exh. A), 2012; Ord , 1999] 7. Small cell facilities located within the public rights-of-way are exempt from the collocation requirements of BMC Design Criteria. Unless otherwise included, small cell facilities are exempt from the design criteria of BMC The location and design of PWSF sites shall consider the visual and physical impacts of the facility on the surrounding neighborhood. 2. PWSF shall be architecturally compatible with the surrounding buildings and land uses and screened or otherwise integrated, through location and design, to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site and its surroundings. 3. As provided in BMC , new monopoles shall be designed to accommodate collocation, unless the applicantdemonstrates applicant demonstrates why such design is not feasible for economic, technical or physical reasons. 4. Setbacks. The setback requirements in this section apply to PWSFs located outside of the right-of-way and are not subject to a variance (BMC ). The Director may waive or reduce the setback requirement for a camouflaged PWSF. A. All monopoles and all above-ground equipment enclosures shall be setback at least 10 feet from property lines. This setbackshall setback shall be measured from the closest point of the antenna, monopole and equipment enclosure to the property lines on the lot on which it is located. B. When located within 100 feet of a residential zone, all monopoles and above-ground equipment enclosures shall be setbackfrom setback from the residential zone boundary 10 feet plus at least one foot for every one foot of height of the antenna and monopole. This setback shall be measured from the closest point of the antenna, monopole and equipment enclosure to the residential zone boundary. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 6 Page 15 of 63

16 C. Antennas installed on building rooftops shall be setback from the edge of the roof at least one foot for each foot of antennaheight antenna height as measured from the top of the roof (or parapet, if one exists) to the highest point of the antenna. D. Small cell facilities attached to new poles must comply with these setback requirements. 5. View corridors. PWSF, including small cells, shall be located and designed to not obstruct or significantly diminish views of Mt. Rainier, Puget Sound or the Cascade or Olympic Mountains from public streets and public property. 6. Height. The height limits in this section are not subject to a variance (BMC ). A. PWSF shall not exceed the minimum height required to function satisfactorily. B. Monopoles shall not exceed: 100 feet in height in the CR and I zones; and 60 feet in height in all other zones where monopoles are allowed. C. Whip antennas located on existing structures shall not be higher than 15 feet above the highest point of the structure. Panel antennas located on existing structures, other than a utility pole, shall not exceed 10 feet above the highest point of the structure. 7. Screening. A. All PWSF shall be designed and located on a site to take maximum advantage of existing trees, mature vegetation, structures and/or topography to screen as much of the facility as possible from view, and so that the facility blends into the background. B. The visual impacts of monopoles and ground-mounted equipment enclosures shall be mitigated through installation of a 5 wide Type I landscape strip around the perimeter of the monopole, equipment enclosure and the outside of the security fence(if any). The City may waive or modify this requirement for those sides of the facility that are not visible from streets or adjacent property. C. Landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy, thriving condition. Landscaped areas shall be irrigated either by an irrigation system, or by regular servicing and irrigation by a landscape maintenance company. In the event that landscaping is not maintained as required, the City after giving thirty (30) days advance written notice to the PWSF provider and property owner, may maintain or establish the {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 7 Page 16 of 63

17 landscaping. Both the PWSF provider and property owner shall be billed for such costs until the City is paid. D. Equipment enclosures mounted on a roof shall be screened or have a finish and appearance similar to the exterior buildingwallsbuilding walls. 8. Antennas. The requirements in this section are not subject to a variance (BMC ). A. Antennas mounted on buildings. Antennas 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. Panel antennas shall not be mounted on a pitched rooftop. A wall-mounted antenna shall be as flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. Antennas and any visible mounting brackets and cables 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, or otherwise blend into its background. The antennas may be attached to existing conforming or new roof structures allowed pursuant to BMC [1]. Antennas shall not project any higher than the roof structure. New roof structures shall be the minimum necessary to achieve the desired outcome and purpose of the building height projection allowed by BMC [1]. [Ord , 2008] B. Antennas mounted on other structures. Antennas shall be integrated into the design of the structure to which they are attached. Antenna platforms are prohibited. External projections from the structure shall be limited to the smallest projection technically feasible. 9. Locating on utility poles. The requirements in this section do not apply to small cell facilities and are not subject to a variance (BMC ). PWSF located on existing or replacement utility poles shall conform to the following design criteria: A. The utility pole at the proposed location may be replaced with a taller pole for the purpose of accommodating a PWSF; provided, that the new pole shall not exceed a height that is a maximum of fifteen (15) feet taller than the existing pole; B. Panel antennas shall not project out from the surface of the utility pole by more than twelve (12) inches, shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, and shall be placed such that the top of the panel antenna does not extend above the height of the utility pole; {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 8 Page 17 of 63

18 C. A cylindrical antenna may be mounted as an extension on top of an existing utility pole, but the existing pole shall not be replaced with a taller pole for the purpose of accommodating the cylindrical antenna. A cylindrical antenna mounted on top of a utility pole shall not exceed eighteen (18) inches in diameter and eight (8) feet in height; D. A whip antenna may be mounted as an extension on top of an existing utility pole, but the existing pole shall not be replaced with a taller pole for the purpose of accommodating the whip antenna. A whip antenna mounted on top of a utility pole shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height, and shall be enclosed within a cylinder that is painted to match the pole; E. All PWSF, including but not limited to antennas, equipment, cables and conduit which are mounted on utility poles shall be painted to match the pole; F. The visual effect of the PWSF on all other aspects of the appearance of the utility pole shall be minimized to the greatest extent possible; G. The use of the utility pole for the siting of a PWSF shall be considered secondary to the primary function of the utility pole. If the primary function of a utility pole serving as the host site for a PWSF becomes unnecessary and any regulation requires its removal, the utility pole shall not be retained for the sole purpose of accommodating the PWSF and the PWSF and all associated equipment shall be removed immediately; H. Equipment enclosure(s) for PWSF located on utility poles in residential zones shall be located underground, unless an existing building other than a single-family residence, such as a garage, which has been in place for at least one year prior to the date of application, is available to accommodate the equipment enclosure(s). Equipment enclosure(s) which are located underground may be located within the front setback in all zones; I. In all cases where a utility pole is replaced for the purpose of accommodating a PWSF installation, the cables and other wiring necessary for the PWSF shall be routed inside the new pole, provided such pole is a non-wooden pole. If routing inside the pole is not allowed by the utility and that determination is confirmed in writing by the utility, then all cable, wiring and conduit routed outside the pole shall be painted to match the pole; J. There is no collocation requirement for PWSF located on utility poles and there shall be no more than one (1) PWSF located on any one utility pole. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 9 Page 18 of 63

19 H. PWSF located on utility poles shall be located no closer than one thousand (1,000) feet a quarter mile from any other PWSF (except a small cell facility) located on a utility pole in a residential operated by the same applicant in any zone or within the public rights-of-way within any zone. I. Any replacement pole shall substantially conform to the design of the pole it is replacing or the neighboring pole design standards utilized in the continuous right-of-way. 10. Special Planning Area 3 (Gateway). All new support structures, including monopoles, and equipment enclosure(s) shall be camouflaged and the applicant shall provide clear and convincing evidence, in a manner as outlined in BMC , that there are no existing support structures which will support the proposed new antennas in the SPA-3 zone. 11. Downtown Commercial Zone. All new antennas in the DC zone shall be located on the following: A. Any existing support structure which has been in place for at least one year prior to the date of application, or B. Any building or structure, which was not constructed for the sole purpose as a support structure for an antenna. All new antennas, cables, conduit and equipment enclosure(s), shall be camouflaged to protect pedestrian views in the DC zone. Locating antennas PWSF on utility poles is prohibited in the DC zone and in the public rights-of-way within the DC zone, expect for small cell facilities located on existing or replacement utility poles. 12. Color. PWSF shall have colors generally matching the surroundings or background that minimizes their visibility. In the event that the FCC or FAA requires special marking, the City may require the applicant to request dual mode lighting as an alternative to the marking requirement. 13. Lights, signals and signs. No lights, signals, signs, banners or similar devices shall be permitted on support structures or antennas unless provided pursuant to BMC Lights, signals and signs. No signage, message, or identification other than the manufacturer s identification or identification required by federal or state law is allowed to be portrayed on any PWSF, including small cell facilities, and any such signage on equipment enclosures shall be of the minimum amount possible to achieve the intended purpose; provided that, signs are permitted as concealment techniques where appropriate or as otherwise permitted pursuant to BMC {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 10 Page 19 of 63

20 14. Noise. PWSF, including small cell facilities, shall comply with applicable State and local noise regulations. 15. Federal requirements. PWSF. including small cell facilities, providers and lessees shall assure that its facility complies at all times with current Federal standards. Failure to maintain PWSF in compliance with current Federal standards and regulations shall constitute a nuisance. [Ord , 2003, Ord , 1999] Repealed [Ord , 2003] 16. Cumulative effects. Subject to BMC , the City may consider the cumulative visual effects of PWSFs mounted on an existing structure in determining whether additional permits may be granted so as to not adversely affect the visual character of the City Small Cell Facility Design Criteria In addition to the requirements of this Chapter 19.50, except where otherwise specifically excluded, the following design criteria shall apply to small cell facilities. Applicants desiring the placement of new poles or structures in the right-of-way to support small cell facilities must comply with the requirements of BMC In lieu of a variance process, subsection 5 below shall apply. 1. Small Cell Facilities Attached to Wooden Poles. Small cell facilities located on wooden poles shall conform to the following design criteria: A. The wooden pole at the proposed location may be replaced with a taller pole for the purpose of accommodating a small cell facility; provided, that the replacement pole shall not exceed a height that is a maximum of ten (10) feet taller than the existing pole, unless a further height increase is required and confirmed in writing by the pole owner and that such height extension is the minimum extension possible to provide sufficient separation and/or clearance from electrical and wireline facilities. Replacement wooden poles may either match the approximate color and materials of the replaced pole or shall be the standard new wooden pole used by the pole owner in the city. B. Panel antennas shall not be mounted more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the wooden pole or the minimum distance required by Seattle City Light or Puget Sound Energy, shall not exceed three (3) feet in height (excluding shrouding), and shall be placed such that the top of the panel antenna does not extend above the height of the wooden pole, unless a pole extender is used. Each antenna shall not be more than three (3) cubic feet in volume. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 11 Page 20 of 63

21 C. A canister antenna may be mounted on top of an existing or replacement wooden pole, which may not exceed the height requirements described in subsection A above. A canister antenna mounted on top of a wooden pole shall not exceed the diameter of the pole by more than twelve (12) inches measured at the top of the pole. The canister antenna shall be colored or painted to match the pole. The canister antenna must be placed to look as if it is an extension of the pole. In the alternative, the applicant may propose a side mounted canister antenna, so long as the inside edge of the antenna is no more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the wooden pole. All cables shall be concealed either within the canister antenna or within a sleeve between the antenna and the utility pole. D. An omni-directional antenna may be mounted on top of an existing utility pole, provided such antenna is no more than four (4) feet in height and is mounted directly on the top of a pole or attached to a sleeve made to look like the exterior of the pole as close to the top of the pole as technically feasible. All cables shall be concealed within the sleeve between the bottom of the antenna and the mounting bracket. E. Multiple antennas are permitted on a wooden pole provided that each antenna enclosure shall not be more than three (3) cubic feet in volume, with a cumulative total antenna volume not to exceed nine (9) cubic feet, unless additional volume is technically necessary which is such cases the total volume may not exceed twelve (12) cubic feet. Antennas should be placed in an effort to minimize visual clutter and obtrusiveness. F. All equipment for small cell facilities, including but not limited to ancillary equipment, radios, cables, associated shrouding, microwaves, and conduit which are mounted on utility poles shall not be mounted more than six (6) inches from the surface of the pole unless a further distance is required by the pole owner. G. Equipment for small cell facilities must be attached to the utility pole, unless otherwise permitted to be ground mounted pursuant to subsection 4.A below. The equipment must be placed in the smallest enclosure possible for the intended purpose. The primary equipment enclosure may not exceed seventeen (17) cubic feet. Multiple equipment enclosures may be acceptable if designed to more closely integrate with the pole design and does not cumulatively exceed seventeen (17) cubic feet. The applicant is encouraged to place the equipment enclosure behind any banners or road signs that may be on the pole, if such banners or road signs are allowed by the pole owner. H. An applicant who desires to enclose its antennas and equipment within a Unified Enclosure may do so, provided that such Unified Enclosure does not exceed four (4) cubic feet. To the extent possible the {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 12 Page 21 of 63

22 Unified Enclosure shall be placed so as to appear as an integrated part of the pole or behind banners or signs. The Unified Enclosure may not be placed more than six (6) inches from the surface of the pole, unless a further distance is technically required and confirmed in writing by the pole owner. I. A pole extender may be used instead of replacing an existing pole but may not increase the height of the existing pole by more than ten (10) feet, unless a further height increase is required and confirmed in writing by the pole owner and that such height increase is the minimum extension possible to provide sufficient separation and/or clearance from electrical and wireline facilities. The pole extender shall be painted to approximately match the color of the pole and shall substantially match the diameter of the pole measured at the top of the pole. A pole extender as used herein is an object affixed between the utility pole and the antenna for the purpose of increasing the height of the antenna above the pole. J. Antennas, equipment enclosures, and all ancillary equipment, boxes and conduit shall be colored or painted to match the approximate color of the surface of the utility pole on which they are attached, or consistent with the paint requirements of Seattle City Light or Puget Sound Energy. K. Cable and wires may be routed through conduit exterior to the pole. The outside conduit shall be colored or painted to match the pole. The number of conduit shall be minimized to the number technically necessary to accommodate the small cell facility. L. The visual effect of the small cell facility on all other aspects of the appearance of the utility pole shall be minimized to the greatest extent possible. M. The use of the utility pole for the siting of a small cell facility shall be considered secondary to the primary function of the utility pole. If the primary function of a utility pole serving as the host site for a small cell facility becomes unnecessary or any regulation requires its removal, the utility pole shall not be retained for the sole purpose of accommodating the small cell facility and the small cell facility and all associated equipment shall be removed. 2. Small Cell Facilities Attached to Non-Wooden Light Poles and Other Non-Wooden Poles. Small cell facilities attached to existing or replacement non-wooden light poles and other non-wooden poles in the public rights-of-way or non-wooden poles outside of the public rights-of-way shall conform to the following design criteria: {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 13 Page 22 of 63

23 A. Antennas and the associated equipment enclosures (including disconnect switches and other appurtenant devices) shall be fully concealed within the pole, unless such concealment is otherwise technically infeasible or is incompatible with the pole design, then the antennas and associated equipment enclosures must be camouflaged to appear as an integral part of the pole or flush mounted to the pole in a manner that integrates the equipment enclosure into the design of the pole and minimizes clutter and visual impact. If the equipment enclosure is permitted on the exterior of the pole, the applicant is encouraged to place the equipment enclosure behind any banners or road signs that may be on the pole. For purposes of this section, incompatible with the pole design may include a demonstration by the applicant that the visual impact to the pole or the streetscape would be reduced by placing the antennas and equipment exterior to the pole. B. All conduit, cables, wires and fiber must be routed internally in the non-wooden pole. Full concealment of all conduit, cables, wires and fiber is required within mounting brackets, shrouds, canisters or sleeves if attaching to exterior antennas or equipment, except for the minimum amount necessary to directly connect to the antennas or equipment. C. Any replacement pole shall substantially conform to the design of the pole it is replacing or the neighboring pole design standards utilized within the contiguous right-of-way. D. The height of any replacement pole, inclusive of the antenna, may not extend more than ten (10) feet above the height of the existing pole, unless a different height is required by the pole owner due to technical or safety requirements. E. The diameter of a replacement pole shall comply with the City s setback and sidewalk clearance requirements, shall not be more than a 25% increase in the diameter of the existing pole measured at the base of the pole, and shall comply with the requirements in subsection 5.F below. If additional diameter is needed in order to conceal equipment within the base of the pole, then the applicant shall propose a Concealment Element Design consistent with BMC below. Further, the diameter of the pole must comply with the pole owner s design requirements. F. An antenna on top of an existing pole may not extend more than six (6) feet above the height of the existing pole and the diameter may not exceed the diameter of the pole by more than twelve (12) inches, measured at the top of the pole, unless the applicant can demonstrate that more space is technically or aesthetically needed. Antennas on top of a replacement pole may not extend above the height of the replacement pole unless specifically approved by the Director. The antennas shall be integrated into the pole design so that it appears as a continuation of the original pole, including colored or painted to match the pole, and shall be shrouded or screened to blend with the pole except for canister antennas which shall not require screening. All cabling and mounting hardware/brackets {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 14 Page 23 of 63

24 from the bottom of the antenna to the top of the pole shall be fully concealed and integrated with the pole. G. The use of a non-wooden pole for the siting of a small cell facility shall be considered secondary to the primary function of the non-wooden pole. If the primary function of a non-wooden pole serving as the host site for a small cell facility becomes unnecessary or any regulation requires its removal, the non-wooden pole shall not be retained for the sole purpose of accommodating the small cell facility and the small cell facility and all associated equipment shall be removed. 3. Small Cell Facilities Attached to Buildings. Small cell facilities attached to existing buildings or structures, shall conform to the following design criteria: A. Small cell facilities may be mounted to the sides of a building if the antennas do not interrupt the building s architectural theme. B. The interruption of architectural lines or horizontal or vertical reveals is discouraged. C. New architectural features such as columns, pilasters, corbels, or other ornamentation that conceal antennas may be used if they complement the architecture of the existing building. D. Small cells shall utilize the smallest mounting brackets necessary in order to provide the smallest offset from the building. E. Skirts or shrouds shall be utilized on the sides and bottoms of antennas in order to conceal mounting hardware, create a cleaner appearance, and minimize the visual impact of the antennas. Exposed cabling/wiring is prohibited. F. Small cell facilities shall be painted and textured to match the adjacent building surfaces. 4. General Requirements. A. Ground mounted equipment in the rights-of-way is prohibited, unless such facilities are placed underground, or the applicant can demonstrate that pole mounted, or undergrounded equipment is technically infeasible. If ground mounted equipment is necessary, then the applicant shall submit a Concealment Element Design consistent with BMC Generators located in the rights-of-way are prohibited. B. The design criteria as applicable to small cell facilities described in this Section shall be considered concealment elements and such facilities may not be expanded upon an Eligible Facilities Request described in BMC {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 15 Page 24 of 63

25 `C. Small cell facilities may not be placed on traffic signal poles. D. Small cell facilities may not be placed on decorative poles, as such poles are identified in the City s Road Design and Construction Manual. E. Side arm mounts for antennas or equipment are prohibited. F. Replacement poles and new poles shall comply with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), City construction and sidewalk clearance standards, and state and federal regulations in order to provide a clear and safe passage within the rights-of-way. Further, the location of any replacement pole must: be physically possible, cannot obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic or the clear zone, not interfere with utility or safety fixtures (e.g., fire hydrants, traffic control devices), and not adversely affect the public welfare, health or safety. G. Replacement poles shall be located as near as possible but no more than five (5) feet from the existing pole with the requirement to remove the abandoned pole. H. Any replacement pole shall substantially conform to the design of the pole it is replacing or the neighboring pole design standards utilized in the continuous right-of-way. I. The preferred location of a small cell facility on a pole is the location with the least visible impact. J. Antennas, equipment enclosures, and ancillary equipment, conduit and cable, shall not dominate the building or pole upon which they are attached. K. The City may consider the cumulative visual effects of small cells mounted on poles within the rightsof-way when assessing proposed siting locations so as to not adversely affect the visual character of the City. L. Except for locations in the right-of-way, small cell facilities are not permitted on any property containing a residential use in the residential zones. M. The design standards in this Section are intended to be used solely for the purpose of concealment and siting. Nothing herein shall be interpreted or applied in a manner that dictates the use of a particular technology, nor prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 16 Page 25 of 63

26 5. In lieu of a variance process, if the applicant demonstrates to the City s satisfaction that it is not technically feasible to site a small cell facility consistent with the requirements of this Chapter 19.50, the City reserves the right to approve such proposed small cell facilities if a denial would be in violation of federal or state law, as determined by the City through a Type 2 review process Facility removal. 1. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for a PWSF facility, the property owner shall sign an affidavit agreeing to remove the PWSF at his or her expense pursuant to this section. The form of the affidavit shall be approved by the City Attorney. 2. In the event the use of any support structure or antenna will be discontinued for a period of sixty (60) consecutive days, the owner or operator shall so notify the City in writing, and the support structure or antenna shall thereafter be deemed to be abandoned. Determination of the date of abandonment shall be made by the City which shall have the right to request documentation and affidavits from the support structure or antenna owner or operator regarding the issue of support structure or antenna usage. Upon such abandonment, the owner or operator of the support structure or antenna or the owner of the property upon which such facility is located shall have an additional sixty (60) days within which to: A. Reactivate the use of the support structure or antenna or transfer the support structure or antenna to another owner or operator who makes actual use of the support structure or antenna; or B. Dismantle and remove the support structure or antenna. If such support structure or antenna is not removed within said sixty (60) days from the date of abandonment, the City may remove such support structure or antenna at the facility owner s and property owner s expense. If there are two or more users of a single support structure, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the support structure. At the earlier of sixty (60) days from the date of abandonment without reactivation or upon completion of dismantling and removal, City approval for the support structure or antenna shall automatically expire. [Ord , 1999] Application Requirements. The City shall decide upon either approve or deny a PWSF application upon receipt of a complete PWSF application within a reasonable period of time (pursuant to BMC 19.65), taking into account {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 17 Page 26 of 63

27 the nature and scope of the request and the federal and state time period requirements. Any decision to deny such a request shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. A pre-application meeting is required prior to submitting an application for a PWSF. The purpose of a preapplication meeting is to discuss the nature of the proposed deployment, review process and schedule, and applicable plans, policies and regulations. Upon written request from the applicant, the Director may waive the pre-application meeting. A pre-application meeting is not required for an Eligible Facilities Request. All applications to locate a PWSF, including small cell facilities, shall be submitted to the City with the applicable requested information (depending upon the type of facility which is involved). A detailed plan that complies with the submittal requirements of this Chapter, and other regulations and ordinances of the City, along with other pertinent information requested by the City shall also be submitted. An applicant ssubmission applicant s submission may utilize any combination of site plans, surveys, maps, technical reports or written narratives necessary to convey the following information depending upon the type of facility which is involved: 1. A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed support structure, poles with small cell facilities, antennas, on-site land uses and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent streets, proposed means of access, and setbacks from property lines and residential zones. Locational information including GIS coordinates for placement of antennas or small cell facilities on utility poles if applicable. The City may waive or modify the requirement for a full, detailed site plan if the antenna is to be mounted on an existing structure. 2. Scaled elevation drawings of the proposed support structure or pole, and equipment enclosure. 3. Photosimulations Photo simulations of the proposed facility from public rights-of-way, public properties and affected residentially-zoned properties. Photo simulations must include all cable, conduit and/or ground mounted equipment necessary for and intended for use in the deployment regardless of whether the additional facilities are to be constructed by a third party. 4. Legal description of the lot, if applicable. 5. Approximate Except for small cell facilities on existing and replacement poles, approximate distance between the proposed antennas and the nearest residentially zoned property. 6. A landscape plan showing size, type, and location of specific landscape, screening and fencing materials, if applicable. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 18 Page 27 of 63

28 7. Manufacturers information indicating compliance with adopted noise standards. 8. The City may require submittal of propagation maps showing that the proposed PWSF is required for network coverage in order to satisfy the requirements of the provider s grid system. The maps shall also demonstrate that the requested height is the minimum height necessary for the support structure, utility pole, and antennas, as applicable. The maps shall show the neighboring or regional facilities with which the facilities in the City can communicate. The City may require additional propagation maps showing coverage areas at lower heights. See also BMC if the proposed PWSF is in or within 100 feet of a residential zone. [Ord , 1999] 9. The applicant must show that it has an underlying lease right or other authorization from the owner of the pole or structure for the installation of its PWSF on such pole or structure. For City-owned poles or structures, the applicant must obtain a lease agreement from the City. 10. If the applicant is applying for a small cell network, the applicant can batch up to twenty (20) small cell facilities in one application provided they are in a contiguous service area. The City may allow up to five (5) additional facilities in order to consider all small cell facilities within one contiguous service area. The City may approve, deny or conditionally approve all or any portion of the small cell facilities proposed in the application. The denial of one or more small cell facility locations within one submission shall not be the sole basis for a denial of other locations or the entire application for small cell facilities. 11. The applicant shall submit a sworn affidavit signed by an RF Engineer with knowledge of the proposed project affirming that the PWSF will be compliant with all FCC and other governmental regulations in connection with human exposure to radio frequency emissions for every frequency at which the PWSF will operate ( Emissions Report ). If facilities necessary to the PWSF are to be provided by a third party, and if such facilities will emit RF emissions, an additional Emissions Report shall address the cumulative impact of the RF emissions and certify compliance with federal requirements. A modification of the facility by an Eligible Facilities Request requires a new RF certification. For small cell facilities, an applicant may provide one Emissions Report within the same batch of applications if the applicant is using the same small cell facility configuration for all installations within that batch or may submit one Emissions Report for each subgroup installation identified in the batch. 12. Any application for a PWSF which contains an element which is not exempt from SEPA review shall simultaneously apply under Chapter 43.21C RCW. 13. Such additional information as the City may require to evaluate the proposed PWSF. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 19 Page 28 of 63

29 Third Party Review. In certain instances there may be a need for expert review by a third party of the technical data submitted by the PWSF applicant. The City may require such a technical review, to be paid for by the PWSF applicant. The selection of the third party expert may be by mutual agreement between the applicant and the City, or at the sole discretion of the City. Such mutual agreement not to be unreasonably withheld by either party. The third - party expert shall have recognized training and qualifications in the field of radio frequency engineering or structural engineering, as appropriate. The expert review is intended to be a site-specific review of technical aspects of the personal wireless services, facilities and other matters as described herein, and not a subjective review of the site selection. In particular, but without limitation, the expert shall be entitled to provide a recommendation on the height of the proposed facilities relative to the applicant s coverage objectives and system design parameters, or the structural requirements for accommodating collocation. Such a review should address the accuracy and completeness of the technical data, whether the analysis techniques and methodologies are legitimate, the validity of the conclusions and any specific technical issues outlined by the City or other interested parties. Based on the results of the third party review, the City may require changes to the application for the PWSF that comply with the recommendations of the expert. [Ord , 2003, Ord , 1999] Bonds. 1. Prior to issuance of any construction permits for the proposed PWSF (which includes any new or replacement poles for small cell facilities), the applicant shall submit a completion bond, or equivalent financial security, equal to 150% of the cost of installation of site improvements associated with the PWSF. 2. Prior to final inspection of the project, the applicant shall submit a landscape maintenance bond, or equivalent financial security, equal to 100% of the cost of the landscaping and irrigation installation. The length of the bond, or equivalent financial security, shall cover the first two growing seasons following installation of the landscaping. The City may waive the bond, or equivalent financial security, requirement if the applicant submits a copy of a valid contract with a landscaper or landscape maintenance firm to maintain and replace the landscaping as required in this section. [Ord , 2003, Ord , 1999] Other wireless communication facilities. All of the provisions of this Chapter, which address personal wireless services and personal wireless service facilities, shall also be deemed to cover other wireless communications facilities (and, in particular, but without limitation, television and AM/FM radio towers) to the maximum extent allowed by law. [Ord , 1999] {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 20 Page 29 of 63

30 Conflict. To the extent that any provisions of this Chapter are inconsistent or in conflict with any other provision of the Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan or any ordinance or regulation of the City, the provisions of this Chapter shall be deemed to control. [Ord , 1999] Eligible Facilities Requests. 1. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to Eligible Facilities Requests only as described in this section and shall not apply throughout BMC Chapter A. Base Station : A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables FCClicensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined herein nor any equipment associated with a tower. Base Station includes, without limitation: i. Equipment associated with wireless communications services as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. ii. Radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including Distributed Antenna Systems ( DAS ) and small cell networks). iii. Any structure other than a tower that, at the time the relevant application is filed (with jurisdiction) under this section, supports or houses equipment described in subparagraph (i) and (ii) above that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing that support. The term does not include any structure that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the City under this section, does not support or house equipment described in subparagraph (i) and (ii) above. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 21 Page 30 of 63

31 B. Collocation : The mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communication purposes. C. Eligible Facilities Request : Any request for modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station, involving: i. Collocation of new transmission equipment; ii. Removal of transmission equipment; or iii. Replacement of transmission equipment. D. Eligible support structure : Any tower or base station as defined in this section, provided that it is existing at the time the relevant application is filed with the City. E. Existing : A constructed tower or base station is existing if it has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, provided that a tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not in a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition. F. Substantial Change : A modification substantially changes the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria: i. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the 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 (20) feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten (10) feet, whichever is greater; ii. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty (20) feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 22 Page 31 of 63

32 eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six (6) feet; iii. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and Base Stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; iv. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site; v. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or vi. It does not comply with conditions associated with the siting approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, provided, however, that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non-compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified above. G. Tower : Any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixes wireless services such as microwave backhaul and the associated site. H. Transmission equipment. Equipment that facilitates transmission for any FCC-licensed or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes equipment associated with wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 23 Page 32 of 63

33 backhaul. 2. Application. The Director shall prepare and make publicly available an application form used to consider whether an application is an Eligible Facilities Request. The application may not require the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification. 3. Qualification as an Eligible Facilities Request. Upon receipt of an application for an Eligible Facilities Request, the Director shall review such application to determine whether the application qualifies as an Eligible Facilities Request. 4. Timeframe for Review. Within sixty (60) days of the date on which an applicant submits an Eligible Facilities Request application, the Director shall approve the application unless it determines that the application is not covered by BMC Tolling of the Time Frame for Review. The sixty (60) day review period begins to run when the application is filed and may be tolled only by mutual agreement by the Director and the applicant or in cases where the Director determines that the application is incomplete. The timeframe for review of an Eligible Facilities Request is not tolled by a moratorium on the review of applications. A. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the Director shall provide written notice to the applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application, clearly and specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application. B. The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a supplemental submission in response to the Director s notice of incompleteness. C. Following a supplemental submission, the Director will notify the applicant within ten (10) days that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified in this sub-section. Second or subsequent notice of incompleteness may not specify missing documents or information that was not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness. 6. Determination That Application Is Not an Eligible Facilities Request. If the Director determines that the applicant s request does not qualify as an Eligible Facilities Request, the Director shall deny the application. 7. Failure to Act. In the event the Director fails to approve or deny a request for an Eligible Facilities Request {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 24 Page 33 of 63

34 within the timeframe for review (accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed granted. The deemed grant does not become effective until the applicant notifies the Director in writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the application has been deemed granted New Structures in the Rights-of-Way and Concealment Element Designs. This BMC applies to all small cell facilities requiring new support structures or poles in the public rights-of-way. 1. New support structures or poles in the public rights-of-way are permitted only when the applicant establishes that the following pursuant to a Type 1 process: A. The proposed small cell facility cannot be located on an existing utility pole, light pole, electrical transmission tower or on a site outside of the public rights-of-way such as a public park, public property, parking lot pole or in or on a non-residential use in a residential zone whether by roof or panel-mount or separate structure; and B. The proposed small cell facility receives approval for a Concealment Element Design; and C. The proposed small cell facility also complies with shoreline, critical areas requirements, and SEPA, if applicable; and D. The location of the small cell facility is physically possible, does not obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic or the clear zone, complies with ADA and city construction and sidewalk clearance standards and state and federal regulations in order to provide a clear and safe passage within the rights-of-way, does not interfere with utility or safety fixtures (e.g., fire hydrants, traffic control devices), and does not adversely affect the public welfare, health or safety. 2. The applicant shall show that the proposed small cell facility cannot be located on an existing structure due to valid considerations including physical constraints and technological feasibility. The information submitted by the applicant shall include a map of the area to be served by the facility, field-strength test data of capacity quality within the area to be served by the small cell facility, its relationship to other sites in the applicant s network (within and outside of Burien City limits), and, an evaluation of existing available land, buildings and appropriate structures within 500 feet of the proposed site. 3. The Concealment Element Design shall include the design of the screening, fencing or other concealment technology for a base station, tower, utility pole, or equipment structure, and all related transmission equipment or facilities associated with the proposed small cell facility, including but not limited to fiber and power connections. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 25 Page 34 of 63

35 A. The Concealment Element Design should seek to minimize the visual obtrusiveness of small cell installations. For small cell facilities, the proposed utility pole or structure should have similar designs to existing neighboring poles in the public rights-of-way, including to the extent technically feasible similar height and if neighboring poles are decorative, they shall mimic the design of the decorative poles. Other concealment methods include, but are not limited to, integrating the installation with architectural features or building design components, utilization of coverings or concealment devices of similar material, color and texture or the appearance thereof as the surface against which the installation will be seen or on which it will be installed, landscape design, or other camouflage strategies appropriate for the type of installation. Applicants are required to utilize designs in which all wirelines and conduit are installed internally in the structure. If evaluating concealment strategies for ground mounted equipment, the applicant is encouraged to use concealment techniques such as benches, kiosks, trash cans, planters, and other items which may be considered public amenities. B. If the Director has already approved a Concealment Element Design either for the applicant or another small cell facility along the same public street or the same pole type, then the applicant shall utilize a substantially similar Concealment Element Design, unless it can show that such Concealment Element Design is not physically or technologically feasible, or that such deployment would overwhelm the pole design. C. Any proposed new poles shall not be more than ten (10) feet above the existing poles on the same public street. 4. Even if an alternative location is established pursuant to subsection (1)(A), the City may determine, pursuant to a Type 1 process, that a new pole in the public rights-of-way is in fact a superior alternative based on the impact to the City, the Concealment Element Design, the City s Comprehensive Plan and the added benefits to the community. 5. Prior to the issuance of a permit to construct a new structure or pole in the public street, the applicant must obtain a site-specific agreement to locate such new structure or pole. This requirement also applies to replacement structures when the replacement structure is higher than the replaced structure, and the overall height of the replacement structure and the proposed small cell facility is more than sixty feet. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 26 Page 35 of 63

36 Definitions Antenna Any exterior apparatus designed for telephonic, radio, data, Internet or other communications through the sending and/or receiving of radio frequency signals including, but not limited to, transmission equipment attached to a support structure, pole, light standard, building or other structure for the purpose of providing personal wireless services and its attendant base station. Types of antennas include: 1. An omni-directional antenna receives and transmits radio frequency signals in a 360 degree radial pattern. A whip antenna is an omni-directional antenna that is up to 15 feet in height and up to four inches in diameter. A cylindrical antenna is an omni-directional antenna that is up to 8 feet in height and up to 18 inches in diameter. 2. A directional or panel antenna receives and transmits radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than 360 degrees. 3. Antennas attached as part of a small cell facility Monopole A support structure that consists of a single steel or wood pole sunk into the ground and/or attached to a concrete pad. Monopoles exclude poles used solely for small cell facilities Personal wireless service facility (PWSF) A site, building, and/or structure that contains facilities to provide personal wireless services. A personal wireless service facility includes at least one of the following: antenna, support structure, and/or equipment enclosure. Personal wireless service facilities include small cell facilities Small Cell Facility A personal wireless services facility that meets both of the following qualifications: (i) Each antenna is located inside an antenna enclosure of no more than three cubic feet in volume or, in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all of its exposed elements could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than three cubic feet; and (ii) Primary equipment enclosures are no larger than seventeen cubic feet in volume. The following associated equipment may be located outside the primary equipment enclosure and if so located, are not included in the calculation of equipment volume: Electric meter, concealment, telecomm demarcation box, ground-based enclosures, battery back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switch, and cut-off switch Small Cell Network A collection of interrelated small cell facilities designed to deliver personal wireless services. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 27 Page 36 of 63

37 Unified Enclosure A small cell facility providing concealment of antennas and equipment within a single enclosure. {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 28 Page 37 of 63

38 Exemptions. 1. The following permits and approvals are exempt from the provisions of this Chapter and from RCW 36.70B.060 through 36.70B.080 and RCW 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: landmark designations, street vacations, street use permits and right-of-way permits, and other permits or approvals to use, vacate or transfer streets, public rights-of-way, parks and similar types of public property. 2. The following permits and approvals are exempt from the provisions of this Chapter and from RCW 36.70B.060 and RCW 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: building and other construction permits, lot line adjustments, final plats, or similar administrative approvals categorically exempt from SEPA (Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter BMC). {ERZ DOCX;1/ /24/2018{ERZ DOCX;8/ / } 29 Page 38 of 63

39 Title Date & Time Comparison Time comparedocs version Comparison Details comparedocs Comparison Results 8/17/2018 9:30:42 AM 1.31 seconds v Original Document Modified Document Sources [# DOCX] [v1] Burien Personal Wireless Service Facilities.DOCX [# DOCX] [v8] Burien Personal Wireless Service Facilities.DOCX Comparison Statistics Insertions 95 Deletions 28 Changes 31 Moves 0 Font Changes 0 Paragraph Style Changes 0 Character Style Changes 0 TOTAL CHANGES 154 Word Rendering Set Markup Options Name Standard Insertions Deletions Moves / Moves Font Changes Paragraph Style Changes Character Style Changes Inserted cells Deleted cells Merged cells Changed lines Mark left border. Comments color By Author. Balloons False comparedocs Settings Used Category Option Selected Open Comparison Report after Saving General Always Report Type Word TrackChanges Character Level Word False Include Headers / Footers Word True Include Footnotes / Endnotes Word True Include List Numbers Word True Include Tables Word True Include Field Codes Word True Include Moves Word False Show Track Changes Toolbar Word True Show Reviewing Pane Word True Update Automatic Links at Open Word False Summary Report Word End Include Change Detail Report Word Separate Document View Word Print Remove Personal Information Word False Flatten Field Codes Word True Page 39 of 63

40 Page 40 of 63

41 Agenda Item #5.5.B MEMORANDUM To: From: Burien Planning Commission Thara Johnson Senior Planner Date: August 22, 2018 Subject: 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Housing Policy PURPOSE/REQUIRED ACTION At this meeting the Planning Commission will receive a briefing from staff regarding housing policies, which have been identified as a topic on the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Docket and Community Development Work Program. BACKGROUND On December 31, 2017, the City of Burien initiated the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment process for The final Comprehensive Plan Docket was adopted by City Council on April 16, 2018 following a recommendation by the Planning Commission which occurred on March 28, 2018, following a public meeting that was held on March 8, Also, as part of the periodic Comprehensive Plan update which occurred in 2016, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) provided the City with recommendations on a number of policy amendments that should be considered as part of future Comprehensive Plan amendments. One of the topic areas related to housing, and PSRC recommended that the City update the existing housing needs assessment, which was last updated in The housing needs assessment would include an inventory of existing housing stock in Burien, which would assist in developing and evaluating the City s current housing policies. In reviewing the City s current housing policies and addressing the growing concern of affordable housing, the lack of housing inventory in the Puget Sound area, as well as planning for future housing demand; it has become evident to staff that there are multiple approaches to evaluating existing housing policies. Due to the complexity of issues, and the Page 41 of 63 1

42 Agenda Item #5.5.B multidisciplinary nature of the issues that housing policies interact with, such as homelessness and housing affordability among others, a multiyear approach is anticipated. Staff has compiled a list of the relevant issues relating to the City s housing policy amendments that would need to be considered. The issues have been divided into long term and short term strategies. Short term strategies those that could be considered and evaluated as part of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. However, it is anticipated that the long term strategies will occur over a longer time frame ( ), since some of the results and outcomes from the short term strategies will inform and form the basis for the longer term policy development, such as the Housing Assessment Study. Attachment 1 includes the City s current policies which relate to housing from different elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Short Term Strategies 1. Housing Assessment Study Scope through South King County Regional ILA: The City of Burien is participating with a number of other cities and jurisdictions in South King County to create a collaborative and regional task force that would address affordable housing and homelessness needs. By creating a formal ongoing collaborative structure, new resources could be leveraged, work could be done on solutions that would benefit multiple cities, and it would create a needed focus on these issues. One of the initial projects that the organization would undertake would be a housing needs assessment, which would assist with evaluating the City s current housing policies, and the need for additional policies and measures to address the need for affordable housing and opportunities to provide resources for homeless. 2. Assess ADU policies in the Comprehensive Plan: Pol. HS 1.11 The development of accessory dwelling units in single-family residences should be allowed to continue. In addition: a. regulatory guidelines should minimize procedural requirements, but should address neighborhood compatibility; b. owner-occupation shall be a requirement of either the primary or accessory unit, and the City should determine and implement a means of enforcing this criteria; c. on large lots accessory units may be either attached or detached from the primary unit; d. a limitation shall be placed on the size of the accessory unit relative to the primary unit; and e. regulatory guidelines for accessory units shall include a provision for offstreet parking. The current policies relating to accessory dwelling units include specific requirements that are typically codified in zoning regulations, and are not typically found in a policy document which sets the vision for the City. In addition, there are a number of jurisdictions that have not required an ownership clause to their Accessory dwelling R:\PL\Commission\Packets2018\ \Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment\Staff Memo Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment.docx Page 42 of 63 2

43 Agenda Item #5.5.B unit regulations. Such an approach would provide additional rental opportunities and would be an additional avenue to achieving affordable housing for the community. 3. Review approach to the missing middle : o o o Setting minimum density targets/thresholds for residential and multi-family zones: The City s current Comprehensive Plan does not include policies which require achieving minimum density standards, which would allow multi-family zones to be developed at a lower density than it could accommodate. Evaluate the policy which allows single-family developments in multi-family zones: The City s current policies do not restrict developing single-family homes in multi-family zones, including the high-density multi-family zones, and since there are no minimum density thresholds this results in land that is zoned for multi-family being underutilized to its maximum development potential. Additionally this underutilization of development potential in multifamily zones reduces the City s ability to accommodate additional housing and population, as the City starts to plan towards meeting growth targets designated by PSRC s Vision 2040/2050. Attachment 2 includes an article which assesses how to address the Missing middle housing issue. Evaluate the need for policies addressing Air BNB and vacation rentals/ short term housing: The Comprehensive Plan does not currently include policies which address minimizing or providing thresholds for short term vacation rentals or Air BNB uses. Several jurisdictions including Burien are experiencing rental housing shortages as property owners and investors choose to rent properties in the short term through online brokers like Airbnb or VRBO. As a consequence, many residents who would normally have stable, affordable long-term rental options are being priced out of the increasingly expensive rental market and thereby decreasing the long-term rental housing inventory. Attachment 3 includes an article which reviews approaches by different jurisdictions across the country to manage and minimize the effects of the rise of short term housing. 4. Joint Planning Commission and Human Services Commission meeting to assess and set priorities for future housing policy evaluations. 5. City Council Briefing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment relating to housing policy. Long Term Approach: 1. Evaluate existing housing policies in the City s Comprehensive Plan. 2. Update the Housing Element in the Comprehensive Plan, using data from the Housing Assessment study results. 3. Redefine housing strategies and goals, as it relates to existing housing stock in Burien and achieving growth targets set by PSRC to meet Vision 2040/ Evaluate and define specific policies that relate to affordable housing. R:\PL\Commission\Packets2018\ \Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment\Staff Memo Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment.docx Page 43 of 63 3

44 Agenda Item #5.5.B PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission receive the briefing, supporting policies and materials for follow-up questions and discussion at this meeting. If you have any questions before the meeting, please contact Thara Johnson at (206) or by at Attachments: 1. Comprehensive Plan Housing Policies 2. Article on the missing middle 3. Article on Short-term vacation rentals R:\PL\Commission\Packets2018\ \Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment\Staff Memo Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment.docx Page 44 of 63 4

45 Agenda Item #5.5.B 2.2 LAND USE ELEMENT1 Goal LU.1 Establish a development pattern that is true to the vision for Burien by supporting the neighborhoods and preserving the character of the well-established neighborhoods as defined by the Neighborhood Plans, enhancing the attractiveness and vitality of the downtown core, and preserving the City s small town character. Pol. LU 1.4 Encourage a mix of residential, office and commercial uses within Burien's Urban Center to create a vibrant city center that reduces reliance on the automobile and provides a range of housing opportunities Residential Neighborhoods Goal RE.1 Provide a variety of attractive, well-designed housing choices that reinforce the character of the neighborhoods and meet the needs of existing and future City residents. Discussion: Burien residents are fortunate to live in a special environment. Five miles of Puget Sound shoreline, steeply wooded slopes, salmon-bearing streams and wetlands help define Burien, but also create potential constraints on land use and development. This plan strives to balance protection of critical areas and the right to use one s property. The functions of critical areas can be protected through a lower level of residential density and by critical area regulations. Development and land use also may be constrained by deficiencies in the type or level of services necessary for urban development, such as transportation (streets and non-motorized facilities), sewer, storm drainage or water. Pol. RE 1.8 The Moderate Density Multifamily Neighborhood designation allows multiple-family residential uses at a maximum density of 18 to 24 units per net acre. Accessory and non-residential uses that are compatible with a moderate density multi-family area may also be allowed, including offices in a mixed-use development. This designation is implemented by the RM-18 and RM-24 zoning categories. Designation Criteria: Properties designated Moderate Density Multifamily Neighborhood shall reflect all of the following criteria: 1. The area is already primarily characterized by multifamily residential development at 12 to 24 units per acre. 2. The area is within 1/8 mile of any commercial service node (as shown on Figure 2 LU-3, Commercial Nodes) or the urban center boundary as measured along an arterial. 1 Note: Policy numbers may not be consecutive. Through the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, some policies have been deleted from this chapter while existing policy numbers have retained their original sequence. Information on past Comprehensive Plan amendments is available at the City of Burien Community Development Department. Page 45 of 63

46 Agenda Item #5.5.B 3. The area is located within ¼ mile of a transit route with a peak transit frequency of at least every minutes. 4. The area does not have critical areas, except critical aquifer recharge areas. 5. The area is located adjacent to or has adequate access to an arterial. 6. The area is served by adequate and/or planned recreational facilities such as athletic fields or playgrounds. Pol. RE 1.9 The High Density Multifamily Neighborhood designation allows multiple-family residential uses at a maximum density of 48 units per net acre. Accessory and non-residential uses that are compatible with a high density multi-family area also may be allowed, including offices in a mixed use development. This designation is implemented by the RM-48 zoning category. Designation Criteria: Properties designated High Density Multifamily Neighborhood shall reflect all of the following criteria: 1. The area is already primarily characterized by multifamily residential uses at 18 or more units per acre. 2. The area is within 1/8 mile of moderate and high commercial service nodes (shown on Figure 2 LU-3, Commercial Nodes) as measured along an arterial. The designation is also appropriate within the urban center boundary or within 1/8 mile of the urban center boundary as measured along an arterial. 3. The area is located within ¼ mile of a transit route with peak transit frequency of at least every minutes. 4. The area does not have critical areas, except critical aquifer recharge areas. 5. The area is located adjacent to or has adequate access to a primary or minor arterial. 6. The area is served by adequate and/or planned recreational facilities such as athletic fields or playgrounds. Neighborhood Quality Goal NQ.1 Reinforce and enhance the City s neighborhoods. Pol. NQ 1.8 Multifamily housing shall be designed to high quality standards so that it contributes to the neighborhood character and is compatible with adjacent single family developments through: a. Site planning focused on neighborhood design integration; b. Building design architecturally linked with the surrounding neighborhood and style; Page 46 of 63

47 Agenda Item #5.5.B c. Streetscapes with trees and landscaping that encourage pedestrian use and safe transition to private spaces, and that reduces the visual effects of large paved areas; d. On-site recreational space and facilities; and e. Creative project design that provides a diversity of housing types within adopted design criteria, standards and guidelines. Downtown Burien Land Uses Pol. DB 1.25 Development of transit-oriented uses are encouraged on the current Burien Transit Center property. The City should continue to work with King County METRO and Sound Transit to facilitate development of a mixed use project on the property that accommodates the short-term needs of both the Transit Center and Park & Ride functions, as well as uses supportive of transit such as quality, high density housing, shops and offices. The City, King County METRO and Sound Transit should evaluate the feasibility of the long-term future transition of the Park and Ride functions (but not the Transit Center functions), to an alternative location or an enhanced configuration at the Transit Center property, as part of the mixed-use project. Page 47 of 63

48 Agenda Item #5.5.B 2.4 HOUSING ELEMENT2 Goal HS.1 Encourage the provision of a variety of attractive, well-designed housing types and densities that reinforce and retain the character of the neighborhoods and meet the needs of existing and future City residents, while recognizing the need for a range of affordable housing. Pol. HS 1.2 Burien should promote an economically diversified housing supply, including low, middle, and upper income levels, to serve a broad range of community needs. Discussion: Burien currently maintains a housing supply that has a significant majority that is affordable to very low and moderate income households. Burien will continue to provide its fair share of affordable housing and supports a regional approach ensuring that housing is affordable to all income levels. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 1.3 The City should encourage multi-family residential uses near and within designated commercial nodes and within its urban center, subject to development standards and design guidelines. Discussion: Mixed-use development provides a residential lifestyle that many people find desirable. Residents can minimize transportation costs and travel time by residing in commercial nodes close to employment, shopping, and leisure activities. Mixed-use development also provides businesses with consumers in the immediate vicinity. Mixed use can increase the perception of safety in commercial areas by providing eyes on the street at all times of the day. Allowing some of the new residential growth to locate in commercial nodes will also help to protect the character of existing single family neighborhoods. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 1.6 Neighborhood design considerations should be included in City land use policies and regulations, such as site standards, landscaping requirements and building design guidelines. Affordable Housing There is an important distinction between affordable housing and market rate housing. The term affordable housing could apply to many different household income levels and will vary depending on the total household income. Market rate housing may be a better term to use when describing housing costs for average incomes however, it is important that housing be available to all income levels and preferably near employment opportunities. Low income housing is particularly challenging to provide and is not often created by developers without some sort of financial assistance or incentives. Under the guidelines used by the federal 2 Note: Policy numbers may not be consecutive. Through the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, some policies have been deleted from this chapter while existing policy numbers have retained their original sequence. Information on past Comprehensive Plan amendments is available at the City of Burien Community Development Department. Page 48 of 63

49 Agenda Item #5.5.B Department of Housing and Urban Development, housing is considered affordable if monthly housing costs are no greater than 30% of a household s monthly income. The Countywide Planning Policies categorize affordability levels and establishes affordability targets to be applied to the Countywide Growth Targets as set forth in Table 2LU 2.1, and are as follows: Moderate - 16% of target (50-80% of Average Median Income) Low income - 12% of target (30-50% of Average Median Income) Very low income - 12% of target (0-30% of Average Median Income) (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 1.8 The City s affordable housing strategy shall place a high priority on conserving and improving the City's existing housing stock. The City should accomplish this through code enforcement, appropriate zoning, and participation in housing rehabilitation programs. Discussion: The comprehensive plan recognizes the existing housing stock as the most affordable form of housing within the community. Burien s existing housing stock is some of the most affordable in the Greater Seattle region, and its preservation is an appropriate mechanism for pursuing affordable housing choices for residents. This policy is particularly important because certain residential areas could transition to other uses due to airport noise, disinvestment, or other impacts.. Pol. HS 1.10 Pol. HS 1.11 The City s strategy for affordable housing will also include: a. allowing quality designed prefabricated housing within single family neighborhoods, b. facilitating the construction of multi family developments in downtown and in commercial nodes which are in close proximity to services and facilities; and c. allowing accessory dwelling units in single family neighborhoods. d. encouraging and allowing mixed use developments within identified commercial nodes. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) The development of accessory dwelling units in single-family residences should be allowed to continue. In addition: a. regulatory guidelines should minimize procedural requirements, but should address neighborhood compatibility; b. owner-occupation shall be a requirement of either the primary or accessory unit, and the City should determine and implement a means of enforcing this criteria; c. on large lots accessory units may be either attached or detached from the primary unit; Page 49 of 63

50 Agenda Item #5.5.B d. a limitation shall be placed on the size of the accessory unit relative to the primary unit; and e. regulatory guidelines for accessory units shall include a provision for off-street parking. Discussion: One option for achieving affordable housing in existing neighborhoods is to more efficiently use the existing housing stock. Accessory units can help meet the need for housing by opening up surplus space in single family homes through the conversion of a garage, basement, attic or extra bedroom. Income from these units can help first time home buyers purchase a home, allow seniors to remain in their homes after their children have grown, assist single parents in their living arrangements such as for child care, and provide an option for elderly with some need for assistance such as property maintenance or everyday errands. This income can also help preserve the City s existing housing by supplementing residents maintenance costs and thereby extending the life of a dwelling. Pol. HS 1.12 Existing mobile home parks in the City provide an important affordable housing choice for low-income residents and should be protected from closures without adequate relocation plans. The City should ensure that sufficient relocation plans are in place prior to closure of any housing that serves low-income residents. Discussion: Within Burien, mobile home parks could be closed or redeveloped. In such cases, mobile home park residents must either sell their home or relocate it. The costs of relocating a mobile home can be prohibitive for many low and moderateincome residents. By state law, mobile home park owners must give a year s notice before closing their park. The City will require mobile home park owners to prepare a relocation plan that outlines the options available to each tenant, and includes information on locations and phone numbers of mobile home parks with vacancies, apartment complexes with rent levels equivalent to monthly housing payments in mobile home parks, and data on any available state or regional relocation funding programs. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 1.13 Pol. HS 1.14 Pol. HS 1.15 The City should encourage the development of affordable housing through incentives including density bonuses. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) The City will coordinate its affordable housing analysis with the affordable housing policies of the King County Countywide Planning Policies. The City should compile and make available housing and housing agency services information to assist both low and moderate income families in finding adequate housing and to assist both non and for profit developers in locating affordable housing. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Page 50 of 63

51 Agenda Item #5.5.B Pol. HS 1.16 Pol. HS 1.17 Pol. HS 1.18 Pol. HS 1.19 Pol. HS 1.20 The City should periodically evaluate its development standards and regulations for effects on housing costs, and, where appropriate, modify development regulations that unnecessarily add to housing costs. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) The City should advocate for additional funding at County, Federal, State, and other levels to expand programs that facilitate home ownership by low and moderate income families, and provide assistance for repair, rehabilitation, energy efficiency, and weatherization. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) The City should ensure that affordable housing created or preserved using local public resources or by regulation retains its affordability over time. The City should establish a process for measuring the effectiveness of policies and regulations in meeting the housing needs of Burien residents. The City should create a Demonstration Housing Program to test innovative residential designs that would encourage affordable housing production. The pilot program should test alternative development standards that increase the diversity of housing types and levels of affordability. Discussion: Since Burien s incorporation in 1993, a low percentage of new housing has been introduced to the community relative to the total housing stock. Encouraging quality new affordable housing development in Burien is an important step towards providing housing for all residents and reaching Burien s housing target set for the year 2035 by the King County Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC). A pilot program could test new or more flexible regulations and processes that are not currently allowed under existing land use regulations in efforts to: Encourage housing production, particularly types of housing that are not readily available in Burien, or are not currently being produced, but that are in demand regionally. Stimulate innovative housing design that is consistent with the housing goals of a neighborhood, and that fits in with or improves the character of the neighborhood. Encourage the development of housing that will serve as a catalyst to stimulate housing production and/or improvement, particularly in neighborhoods where new or rehabilitated residential development has been limited. Serve as a model for other neighborhoods, demonstrating housing solutions that could have broader application in other neighborhoods. Increase the diversity of housing types and levels of affordability to meet the varied needs and goals of a neighborhood. Demonstration projects, which could include cottage housing or other clustered smalllot planning concepts, should be evaluated against program goals to determine whether amendments to the City s Land Use Code are appropriate to allow these housing types generally. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Page 51 of 63

52 Agenda Item #5.5.B Goal HS.2 Ensure adequate housing for all current and future residents of Burien by achieving and maintaining a high quality residential housing stock. Pol. HS 2.1 Pol. HS 2.2 Pol. HS 2.3 Pol. HS 2.4 Pol. HS 2.5 Burien s plans and regulations should facilitate home ownership and rental opportunities for all economic segments of the community. The City's existing housing stock should be conserved through: a. Code enforcement; b. Appropriate zoning; c. Supporting the maintenance, soundproofing, weatherization, rehabilitation, and long-term preservation of existing housing, especially for low and moderateincome citizens; d. Discouraging conversion to inappropriate nonresidential uses. Development standards and regulations for single family areas should avoid unnecessary barriers to the renovation and improvement of homes in established neighborhoods built to past standards. The City should give special attention to improving the quality of low-income neighborhoods and seek to implement programs which encourage rehabilitation of deteriorating structures and facilities in such neighborhoods. The city should consider established housing targets when evaluating land use designation changes. (Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 2.6 As necessary evaluate the performance of multifamily zoning designations and adjust development standards to increase efficient use of land. (Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Goal HS.3 Develop and preserve a variety of housing options for Burien citizens with special needs due to age, disability, or personal circumstance. Pol. HS 3.1 Pol. HS 3.2 Equal access to housing should be ensured for all people, without regard to special need, race, color, national origin, religion, sex, family status, or disability. The City should implement non-discriminatory zoning regulations for group homes that is consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act, enabling different classes of group homes to be permitted in appropriate residential neighborhoods. Page 52 of 63

53 Agenda Item #5.5.B Pol. HS 3.3 The City should encourage the dispersal of special needs and senior housing throughout the City. However, special needs and senior housing must still meet the development requirements of the underlying zone. Some clustering of special needs and senior housing may be appropriate if proximity to public transportation, medical facilities or other essential services is necessary. Discussion: Special needs housing serves persons with disabilities or other circumstances that face difficulty living independently and who require supportive services on a transitional or long-term basis. (Amended, Ordinance No. 614, December 2014) Pol. HS 3.4 In coordination with other local and regional agencies, the City should support and plan for assisted housing opportunities using available federal, state, and county resources. Discussion: Because of the need for deep subsidies, assisted housing must be addressed in conjunction with regional, state and federal resources. The City recognizes the role which other levels of government play in assisted housing, and supports such efforts. 2.9 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Goal CF.7 Utilize all available capital improvement revenues to finance facilities to meet the community s need as established in this comprehensive plan. Pol. CF 7.9 The community development block grant program should be used to supplement other on-going sources of revenue if the CBDG criteria can be met. Particular opportunities may include: Continuing the housing rehabilitation program as an implementing tool of the housing element; Improving local streets, especially installing sidewalks in higher density low-income neighborhoods, or near facilities serving qualifying population groups; Coordinating installation of handicapped facilities with CBDG funds and small-scale downtown improvements; and Supporting social service providers with supporting facilities, in accord with a Human Services Plan. Goal CF.8 Develop and implement an effective strategy that includes public health and safety to balance land use with capital facility development. Policy CF 8.1 Site and design public facilities to protect and promote public health, particularly in areas housing vulnerable populations. Page 53 of 63

54 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post The Washington Post Transportation Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving Page 1 of 6 Agenda Item #5.5.B By Katherine Shaver December 9, 2017 Cities and close-in suburbs looking to the future see a troubling trend: The millennials who rejuvenated their downtowns over the past decade are growing older and beginning to leave. The oldest are hitting their mid-30s, with many starting to couple up and have children. Meanwhile, the sleek high-rise apartment buildings built for them as single young professionals are no longer practical or affordable as they seek to buy homes with more space and privacy. There s been this huge wave of people in cities all over the country. Then they grow up. Then what?, said Yolanda Cole, who owns a D.C. architectural firm and chairs ULI Washington, part of the Urban Land Institute, a research organization dedicated to responsible land use. In an effort to retain these residents, some urban planners, developers and architects are reviving the kinds of homes that might be more familiar to millennials great-grandparents: duplexes, triplexes, bungalows, rowhouses with multiple units, and small buildings with four to six apartments or condos. It s the kind of housing that fell out of fashion after World War II, when young families and others fled cities for the houses, driveways and ample yards of the burgeoning suburbs. Planners and architects refer to it as the missing middle. It hits the middle in scale larger than a typical detached single-family home but smaller than a mid- or high-rise and typically serves people with middle-class incomes. Daniel Parolek, an architect based in Berkeley, Calif., who coined the term in 2010, said the need for more missing middle housing is hardly limited to millennials. But as they grow older, he said, questions have been raised about how cities will continue to evolve if many of the generation are priced out once they want to put down roots. Page 54 of /4/2018

55 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post Page 2 of 6 In particular with this generation, that played an important role in revitalizing cities, Parolek said, I think Agenda keeping Item them #5.5.B in cities is a major conversation. Washington residents Matthew Horn, 32, and his wife, Ana Bilbao Horn, 32, are struggling to stay in the city now that they want to buy. They love their neighborhood near Union Market in Northeast Washington, Matthew Horn said, but their one-bedroom apartment feels tight now that their 6-month-old daughter sleeps in a crib just off the living room. Rowhouses with at least two bedrooms are either extreme fixer-uppers or out of their price range. Horn, an architect, said being able to buy a home in a safe neighborhood and with a small yard for his daughter feels impossible. Right now I m having to come to terms with having to move out of the city, he said. I m realizing the things I want to provide for her, we won t be able to afford in D.C. In the District, about 35 percent o f the housing stock mostly rowhouses and apartment buildings with two to four units qualifies as missing middle, planners say. But many of the rowhouses have been carved up into smaller units, shrinking the supply of larger homes and sending prices soaring just as older millennials began seeking them out. Several years ago, in part to preserve larger homes for millennials trying to remain in D.C., the city began limiting when rowhouses could be divided into more than three units. We re starting to research where and how we can encourage more of the missing middle, said Art Rodgers, senior housing planner for the D.C. Office of Planning. I think urban areas in general have to make tough choices between maximizing land capacity and maintaining this housing supply. Fred Selden, planning director for Fairfax County in the Northern Virginia suburbs, said he hasn t seen an exodus of millennials from the county s more urban areas. But he senses the uncertainty in his profession. You read the literature, and it s all over the place, Selden said. We re trying to figure out what will drive this younger generation. Will they follow the same patterns of their predecessors, or will they do something different? Cities from Des Moines to Atlanta to Nashville are turning to the missing middle as a way to try to hold on to millennials as they age. Rather than requiring or subsidizing it as they typically do to produce more low-income housing, local governments are trying to encourage developers to build more missing middle housing by removing barriers in zoning laws and building codes. Some cities have rezoned their single-family neighborhoods to allow duplexes, triplexes and other multiunit structures that look like single-family homes from the outside, particularly in areas near transit lines. To allow more homes per lot, others are considering relaxing requirements on yard sizes and setbacks, the distance required between properties. Some are beginning to allow bungalows clustered around courtyards by changing long-standing requirements that front entrances be on a street. Page 55 of /4/2018

56 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post Page 3 of 6 [Millennials] said We don t want big yards, but we don t want to be in a big apartment building. We want Agenda a duplex Item or #5.5.B a triplex or townhouse, said Lee Jones, a city planner in Nashville, which has made similar changes. They want something close to work and coffee shops, but they don t want to take care of a yard. A big question is what sales prices will be considered affordable by for-profit builders, particularly in areas where land values have skyrocketed. Another potential hurdle: opposition from residents who say their neighborhoods and schools can t absorb the additional traffic, parking and children that higher-density housing brings. Of course, planners say, providing more missing middle housing in walkable neighborhoods near transit serves home buyers of all ages, including the other demographic giant of empty-nest baby boomers looking to downsize. M. Leanne Lachman, a real estate consultant who conducted a 2015 study of Millennials Inside the Beltway for ULI Washington, said some of the angst is overblown. Only about one-third of millennials live in cities, she said, compared to the two-thirds in suburbs and rural areas. For those who leave, she said, there are plenty of younger ones coming after them to keep urban areas feeling vital and vibrant. You always need more affordable housing in metropolitan areas, Lachman said. But I don t think it s required specifically for millennials. Even so, some planners say millennials sheer numbers they recently surpassed baby boomers as the largest living American generation will force developers to provide more of the missing middle. It s a huge wave, said Gil Kelley, planning director for Vancouver, B.C. They re demanding a place in the cities and housing that s affordable to them. Vancouver, which ranks among the most expensive cities in North America, has begun to allow more duplexes and stacked townhouses with two units. I think it s very significant that we re understanding people want to live in the core of urban areas again, Kelley said. We re reversing a 60- to 70-year trend of people moving out to suburbs... This is not just a fad for a decade. This is a multi-decade shift. Experts say it s too early to know how many urban millennials will try to stay versus follow the well-worn path to the suburbs once they have school-age children. The ULI Washington study found nearly two-thirds of those 30 and older said they planned to continue living inside the Beltway in the next three years. But nearly half of that age group also didn t have children and didn t expect to in that time. The survey also found 58 percent of millennial renters believed they would need to move outside the Beltway to buy a home. Page 56 of /4/2018

57 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post Page 4 of 6 Developers say they are aware that, unlike their parents and grandparents, many millennials don t want Agenda to move Item to the #5.5.B suburbs and drive til you qualify. They say the fact that many have shared group houses or lived in micro-units and other small apartments as young singles shows they re willing to trade space to live near transit and in walking distance to restaurants, shopping, parks and other amenities. Some developers are planning townhouse projects that will squeeze as many as twice the number of homes onto the same tracts of land as traditional developments, often by shrinking bedrooms, tucking parking underneath and providing shared patios rather than private yards. Doubling the number of homes, they say, can cut prices in half. Planners in some urbanized suburbs say they, too, are exploring ways to provide more missing middle housing in walkable areas near transit not only to hold on to millennials but to ensure more of those heading their way don t add to traffic congestion. Gwen Wright, planning director for Montgomery County, said more homes in the missing middle would serve as a transition needed between the high-rises of growing downtowns like Bethesda and surrounding neighborhoods of single- family houses. Home buyers of all ages need more options in a county where a starter home can command up to $900,000, she said. I think we can provide what millennials are looking for being close to transit-oriented areas but having the same benefits of a single-family house, even if not in a traditional sense with the yard and picket fence, Wright said. My sense is millennials are looking for more than that half-acre. They re looking for community and walkability. They ve gotten used to those in cities. 238 Comments Katherine Shaver is a transportation and development reporter focusing on urban/suburban planning issues and construction of Maryland's light-rail Purple Line. Since joining The Washington Post in 1997, she also has covered crime, courts, education and local government. Sign in to join the conversation Read These Comments: Subscribe to our weekly newsletter dedicated to the best conversations and comments on The Washington Post. Sign me up Page 57 of /4/2018

58 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post Page 5 of 6 Agenda Item #5.5.B Comments My profile Comments are now closed All comments sections automatically close 14 days after the story has published. For more details, please see our discussion guidelines. All Comments (238) Viewing Options mallen 3 months ago There is a practical limit to how distant a suburb can be. As you reach that limit, a city can no longer effectively expand geographically and must get more dense. This happens in slow motion. Like Link Report tiredlikeh 3 months ago A little secret. They don't leave because there is nowhere to live. They leave because the cities tax them to death and uses the money to house (and feed, and clothe) criminals nearby, who's children cause all public schools in the cities to be complete sht and street unsafe for children of normal people. Projects and rent control have OTHER COSTS. Like 1 Link Report maktoo 3 months ago (Edited) Hooray! I am slightly older than the millennials, but would LOVE the opportunity to choose from a variety of courtyard or bungalow apartments! I loathe high rises, and cannot afford a single family house. I'm hoping this becomes the next trend, and that the horrendous "luxury building" trend is dying: only wealthy, downsizing retirees or highly subsidized college graduates can swing those (by tripling up). Like 2 Link Report conkly 3 months ago Nothing will change until these housing options become affordable. The fact that the cheapest options require at least 2 roommates is ridiculous. Anyone, not just millennials, should not have to work multiple jobs and have roommates just to afford a basic and small apartment. These housing options do not address the wage and rent Page rate 58 issue. of 63 More likely they'll be built in a chic and 4/4/2018

59 Cities turn to missing middle housing to keep older millennials from leaving - The Washington Post Page 6 of 6 Agenda Item #5.5.B Page 59 of /4/2018

60 Agenda Item #5.5.B Short-Term Vacation Rentals Impact Neighborhoods By Julianne Couch Posted: Wednesday, July 18, :25 pm Placing a rarely used bedroom or house in the short-term rental market through a service like AirBnB can be a good way for a homeowner to bring in extra cash. It can also help communities that are short on hotel space make room for more visitors, which benefits the local economy. But too much of a good thing can be, well, too much, resulting in some painful unintended consequences. Sometimes the tipping point is the entrance of commercial investors into the scenario. Harder to Find That's why community leaders in cities Some cities are experiencing rental large and small, from Boston to Miami housing shortages as commercial Beach, from the Rocky Mountains to the investors begin buying up properties Pacific Northwest, are figuring out how to to rent short term through online keep commercial investors from brokers like AirBnB. As a result, dominating the short-term rental market. many folks who would normally have So far, they are passing regulations, and stable, affordable long-term rental considering ways to enforce them. But they options are being priced out of the must use finesse as they protect the rights increasingly expensive rental of local property owners while managing market. commercial investors and the growing online rental market platforms, such as AirBnB. Colleen Fitzpatrick of the Fenway Community Development Corporation in Boston has seen her city negotiate the unintended results of a burgeoning short-term rental market. She says that around 2013, her community noticed investors buying up properties that had been rental housing and using them for very brief overnight stays, basically turning them into hotels. People were coming and going from housing units that had previously been occupied long term. In other words, people used to know who their neighbors were, but increasingly, the "neighbors" were only there for a few nights. It also meant that folks who would normally have stable, affordable long-term rental options were being priced out of the increasingly expensive rental market. Residents approached the city with concerns about this turnover, and what it meant for neighborhood stability. Fitzpatrick says the city's Inspectional Services department sent out a letter to rental property owners that they were looking into Page 60 of 63