Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLOG ITEM 120-126 • • Colleen Zmolek From: Kristen Larson <kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2014 5:01 PM To: Colleen Zmolek Cc: Ken Lyons Subject: Response to 11/6 information request Attachments: BR0266_Response to 110614 County Information Request.pdf Dear Colleen, Thanks so much for your time this past week. Please extend our thanks to Stacie as well. On behalf of applicant AT&T, I've attached a response to the information request received from the County on 11/6/14. I believe the information attached addresses all points raised during our discussion, but if not, please let us know. Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information. Have a good start to the week! Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St.#75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com LOG ITEM Page_ NOV 16 2014 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 • • eyk f NOV 1670:711 V = RtPLLC JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT November 17,2014 Ms. Colleen Zmolek Associate Planner Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: County Project Permit Application Supplemental Information Request CASE#: MLA13-00116/ZON13-00039 SITE ADDRESS: 9335 Coyle Road Dear Ms. Zmolek: Enclosed, on behalf of Applicant New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC ( AT&T, or "Applicant"),please find a response to the County's November 6,2014 supplemental information request. 1) Submit a paint chip for the color the proposed cell tower will be painted. The paint chip must meet the requirements in JCC 18.42.090(1)(a). RESPONSE: The Applicant will submit at least one paint chip meeting JCC 18.42.090(1)(a) requirements by building permit submittal(non-reflective color that blends with the surroundings: earth tones and muted grays, blues, or greens in broken patterns). 2) Provide documentation that the FAA does not require lighting on the proposed cell tower to meet the requirements in JCC 18.42.090(1)(c). RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees to and will be bound by a condition of permit approval that the proposed wireless facility shall not be lighted. 3) Provide documentation that the equipment enclosure is the smallest size practicable to meet the requirements in JCC 18.42.090(1)(f)(i). RESPONSE: JCC 18.42.090(1)(f)(i) requires that ground-mounted equipment enclosures shall be the smallest size practicable. The proposed 11'5"x 26'ground mounted equipment shelter is the smallest size practicable to house all the AT&T equipment necessary to operate the proposed wireless facility. SEATFLE LOS ANGELES DENVER PORTLAND BEND 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com LOG ITEM t 425.628.2665 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 www.wirelesscounsel.com f 206.219.6717 Page of • — FE:=7 � 7 [ November 16, 2014 NOV 1 6 2014� Page 2 L JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4) Identify the lighting, if proposed, to be placed on the equipment enclosure and provide documentation showing how it meets JCC 18.42.090(1)(j). RESPONSE: The Applicant does not propose any lighting to be placed on the equipment enclosure at this time. The Applicant agrees to and will abide by a condition of approval that any lighting placed on the equipment enclosure, if proposed, shall meet JCC 18.42.090(1)0) requirements. 5) Provide information on the signage to be placed on the enclosure showing how it is meeting JCC 18.42.090(1)(k). RESPONSE: AT&T signage would be mounted on a proposed 12'wide chain link double swing gate with locking mechanism. The proposed swing gate would be located on the south side of the proposed equipment enclosure, and would be constructed as part of the proposed 6'fence that would surround the equipment closure. No signs, symbols,flags, banners, or other devices would be attached to or painted or inscribed upon any tower or antenna. The Applicant will verb by building permit that a telephone number and person to call for information or in the event of an emergency shall be posted at a site. The Applicant agrees to and would abide by a condition of approval requiring such verification by building permit. 6) Provide information documenting how the roof mounted antenna on A-3 of the site plan meets the requirements in JCC 18.42.090(1)(m). RESPONSE: GPS/E-911 Downlink Antennas would be mounted on the east side of the proposed equipment shelter roof which would be located within the fenced lease area. The antennas would be approximately 1'tall. The antennas are receive-only, and broadcast no signal. The antennas are required in the proposed configuration to triangulate the location, expressed in GPS coordinates, of emergency 911 calls placed on the mobile communications network. The antennas would appear very minimal in size compared to the proposed fence around the lease area and proposed wireless communication antennas, and would blend in color and appearance with the proposed equipment shelter within the fenced lease area. JCC 18.42.090(1)(m)(i) requires that "roof-mounted antennas and/or antenna arrays located on alternative structures shall be concealed when viewed from ground level adjacent to the structure unless this is not technically feasible, in which case the antennas or antenna arrays shall be camouflaged to the extent practicable. " Because the antennas would be very minimal in size and would be placed on the roof of the equipment shelter, the antennas would be either invisible or very minimal in size when viewed from ground level adjacent to the structure. Moreover, the intent of the code section to minimize visual impacts when viewed from the ground is met because there would be no public access to the fenced ground lease area. The fenced ground lease area would only be accessible to authorized AT&T personnel, and there would be a buffer at least three feet wide between the equipment shelter and LOG ITEM # (DO Pages- of 3 . EC [1 VC NOV 1 6 'O!4 November 16, 2014 --� Page 3 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT fence. Existing mature trees would surround the fenced lease area on the subject property. Thus, no views from ground level adjacent to the equipment shelter would be available to the public. 7) Provide AT&T Telecommunications provider FCC Registration Number(FRN). RESPONSE: The following FCC Registration Numbers apply to the proposed wireless facility, according to all the frequencies that would be broadcast from the facility: • Call Sign WPWU989:FRN 0014980726 • Call Sign WPWV527:FRN 0016982233 • Call Sign WQJU645:FRN 0014980726 • Call Sign KNLF247:FRN 0003291192 • Call Sign KNLG843:FRN 0003291192 • Call Sign KNLG844:FRN 0003291192 • Call Sign KNKN210:FRN 0003291192 We deeply appreciate County staff's time and effort in reviewing the application. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC LOG ITEM # Ian Page 3 ®f....3.._ S • Colleen Zmolek To: Kristen Larson Subject: RE: Response to 11/6 information request Kristen, Thank you for touching base. I will be out of the office the week of Thanksgiving and return on Monday, December 1. My plan is two start the final draft of the staff report at that time. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving. Colleen Zmolek Associate Planner, Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4462 czmolekco.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County DCD Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 1.2..iG RCW. Our office is open to the public 9:Oo a.m.-4:30 p.m. Monday to Thursday,closed Fridays. From: Kristen Larson [mailto:kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com] Sent:Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:26 AM To: Colleen Zmolek Cc: Ken Lyons Subject: Re: Response to 11/6 information request Good morning Colleen, Confirming that in addition to the list of items received 11/6/14,we are still working on and intend to submit a response to the most recent public comment received by the County, copies of which we received when we met that day. We will have that additional information to you as soon as possible. Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St.#75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com LOG ITEM From: Kristen Larson<kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Date: Sunday, November 16, 2014 at 5:01 PM Page i o 1 To: Colleen Zmolek<CZmolek @co.le erson.wa.us> III Cc: Ken Lyons<ken.lyons @wirelesscounsel.com> Subject: Response to 11/6 information request Dear Colleen, Thanks so much for your time this past week. Please extend our thanks to Stacie as well. On behalf of applicant AT&T, I've attached a response to the information request received from the County on 11/6/14. I believe the information attached addresses all points raised during our discussion, but if not, please let us know. Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information. Have a good start to the week! Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St.#75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com LOG ITEM 2 • • > m -I n X --h. ,..,1.1"' rl• (D(A i-D— .64.• 3 . . 3 ..,. -c, ... r...) ... oat Zlor" (. vi • • ..., ' 1-i We U'l . 0 . 4 -e, n - fD ri. a a, 0 ri- mil < (D OA** f/ , D . M 1%1 ICI CD 0 0 c 0....te Rd Z i N ...,. , 1 , 1.1 0 CD -I -. Di tei (D IIIPP.' • /1101 • — ,,,,,_- — -4., ,B. - rt. ihr m )1' •1 Z r) -, rt, c ■■ e+ 0 (ID 74 n 5 2 „no n S) 0 Citmr Creei C1Q r7+ (1) ° '-+ DJ --1 rD clo PP 4' r- M 0 -4 el riv --I - - ;1-------------1 M01- r+M r n fis FR = 0 C) (( ( (.I ,._..,... 6 D t <1 90 LOG ITEM 4... FA r+ rn tt....._ .1,Q. ,_...-- p , of ...,...„. i S • —1 • TE.'..? 41"135.4.. ' .,44. . ‘V.V..-)3:-- * = I. ""vf:,. '''v4 v. 4R' MM rh ENS I 0 , tl svv, „C:Vt, 4 ' ' P' III‘ 3" ONI 3. - - ... . ., . ..., .... , _. . ,.... r '. $ . , > + r•P •• = 0 ,. of, f* .444 . . .0 3 111, 3 %I. DJ 0 ,,,...., ...4 I ,-, ........„,„, -,..,,„,...,............, .1. :1'. tn 4,1„ --.49010• •as.- 10 • 046 t * fD .-.4.,,,,,,, • 0 • M su- . .:-...•,.,,. if3 -- 00, -1* NI 0 0 I 3 , .... .4 ..... .... .,-.. N • oyie Rd ... ,., le, Z. 0 „.. .„. A ._.,,,..,. ji.***.. -1'7 •••• 4,, ., ., , , . . . f ...,. .....4„ ....,;..ii, , up ,.,.. ... :...„, .. . .. CD I › - , m > 1:3 2 n rim rD -o *. CD 41 - R .,. ,e** ol!LA' . ..., -, o D 0 . tin ai ul 13 c..,cf..„* — ,... MI 2 — 1:, z 0.. (t) - 1.1) 121 at CD , rt. CD.7... ,--- (1) — - . - *,.., 0 _. ON gt o a) -4 - ffl ...1 ,..., c., ---' LOG ITEM .4-1. ...a. , .7--- ______iTT,1, 47 ----:--------------1 1'4 vn , ..(..04 :1____Ill • 0 c't ni . „ .,.. ,.. . .., 1 ...,„, 3 ........ „ . . „ . ell ... ., _, _. . . . - - - .4,„ 7 fp* • - -4 ',4' . F.+ goRk I-L l i 1,(01:3)n<° ' a ic":7 •- ‘' . .. ,.',...' - -I . 0 I ' . . ,. r., Lii Z ..,,. * CD ,..„ ,., . . „.. xx... • . re ..... SD —I m ... ... . . . . ... ri) : , . . . ... .., C ! ... „,.. .....:',' ,. ....,.. .„. ...... -ct 0., .-' .. ....• - cri!e Rd NJ w 0 ' ■,..S ■,., "LS.O.I'lliP I ..,... , . M.t ...ry...y ■ry■ . cc.,404.2 . ,.,,,,„......,„:„..„„.i... n 4 Z 0 't * al 0 'I CD ..,.. ..,..„. Not CU .._ . 112 CD:,...,- ... ....„.. . . .....,. . . . rl• m r. /3 2 n m C CD -&) --1 ro ..! 5 0 ,(:), n = rg < r, z :spt arD (Do -I (I) Z V) T 0% g,) ep III v) CD 74: ›.‘7,7, (D Crcicu - (1)-----77.7 .------- 1 -, -----) . rmji ,. ) 4,- r— 2 Li . 4+2t#4 0 ,-+ ^0 • ''''''- E. 6. '-4:' lq ---------34"--- Fg . . , D rD "taw , — – - ' .• cu _., , — — , ( (0 ( 0 , c.) .--) C) c?_ L.= ED ■—t. ,D 90 , !. ---- -,---- -1-- - --) .._,../ i. ..____ !!"•". • „fei. 1(0 • 0 . 1,3' rn 4 x 2 _I I Z 1 3 . 1 2 Cr . ., ..... - ...... M tut' IN, l0 ',. •• ,., Ai, A .,c; " r .v . 4 - I'm - . 0-40 ii, ' I-di 011% I-L I I C-1 A 40Eta■ k r _ ge". ° 0 . -' 0 I 0 : U) ., . *h..) ',. PI Z—hp IP n * CD f=p- __-.. ... = * ,-......, > • . re co ...1 , = CD • = M a; -C3 0...t. ....., p., - C 0.14.Rd n I ° 3 . ,... . 0,.. • ..-ti I M m Nrl• • - .2 -46111Pir .„...., ,... ,,....... 5P CD 0 -.1 13) ,., , r . LC (D ,,,,, . .. .. ' •t. t fe. ': ''■ 4 "1: ,_ ARO Igli'V fl. m 1> 13 2 n . ... R X ••••. tl IV C .... t. 4 , ......_ . ...„ _ , -..sl.g.i:a v. ..... 3 1 PON 3' 2 n D ....,.. ',. ..,,,,a,, arl a, ro •-+ M ci r Cs 0 erp — -4,„ 0_ < n 3> Z rD - a, rim P . > OP (D ....1 (T) 90 .. . . •l -1 r- Cu -1 0 ,..... ._.-D ..)----\\\ 0 ,•,., Lr' CU 0 74. --7-------- a r- - tD MC z 0 -2 1 ,-, - ..-) 0 - .,--,--, ,,_--,-, ..._ ... 0 D cD _,-, - -> r■-■ --,J 5-' .. . ..„ .. .. , :,... ----, 0)40. c-, , ... . ‘.;90 1.- 0 h•-'- -..- 1 27- ------1:(9. --' .,.---------2---------- #...-- Pagi'443- • 0 (t' =e, X n 1111W o 3 ... .. ,.,., Z -----* I . ,. . .. 3„,,,, ,.., . .. m rt .?.. .,..„- ,,...'' • 0 • - 3 4- '-, - . .. — Lr+ (1) 916, 0.4 ell■ * K.) 0 . r- Jill 0 - _ - o ' ', 0 .0.01,„ ' - L F)I 1 o o (n . • 51, Z n..) * M 7 * o < CD 6 . = r• M ■I —, co - - vs' 3 1-11 ', (D ta) —I \I: -c 0 ... .. ( el% ,e..=. i-i 'I' r 0 Z Coyle Rfi , 1 . ' -- -I, Ial (I) Net ..... Ts o ,,, . .. .. .. .. .. ... % .... ... ___ ... ......i.. ...A- ,..‹- ail__-, .„ i r, 1 ' ' '`. U2 ,. . M -- . +.0 ,,--, _ 14r, . - • r• - * i!.) . 7 ' '' '4. . . .„ t*, - „., ....„ 0 . k mi .4 •ri , 'AlitismHio , m 1> 13 Z ,..r1 . , .... -, ,.„.. 0 ro -0 .-+ -, . . , ' ,r, — ---, 0 n D az, 0 0 , 1 i 04%, cijor olio ad Mk. n -,.- ,....,.., rctii ,:, n oil,... _i m z cli, '.- 90 v., 2) op CD rim vl .r.D+ >•-*r- 91)1 -.1 -, ro 0 en 90 E__M--_--ylli.JEF 0 -4: -:"-----: D 0 cp -,-, ,,7,1; ,, cu , 'Ffi .--, -, — ...... (...) _,--, — ,--- ,-, ( 0 _ - .,...,. cD Mr -D e-t. LOG ITEM / t .P 10- 2t6 .........____ ■ • a • • • 70 n � �; Ii a, rnn � -Q �' a' cn � rt a, n C D =m � o x D < x O Ul rt r1 r3 ri 0 D O rt 0) < -I cn O O Ca, L' v 0- < O D O O A ( a N O •< o ('D D O Cu i / C -1 rri — 0 6 r-t-r cr 6 Eli rt * 0 (D 0 0 0 N rt 4 a rt _ • a a, cu z 0 (n (D• N rn CD 0 (oD N a O O (D rt n M (D ,-1-r,-r CD 7 a 00 < C r-r -1 a1 * . n v) Ort (•D CU fl, a, rn O --n cn a p Y/ . a, 0- CD Di X 0 rt r- ,, o al Co CDD rt (<D , J a, O rt N C gm. r*. o r-r r-r n = � �, m _ � O z r1 r1 - O n CD CD cn (D a, O fD (D O fl- n . = 6 La (p r-r m- in n Cu D 0 n (D a, D * X n O O _ r r* fD rn X 00 CD-41< O O < ,rt O rt rt a- cn p rt O CD CD 5 D 0 C CD O. rn = O rt. Milt • r-r -z uo n (D CD Cu CD l0 CD lfl C _. p a rt D �- �` co Cs 0. ° Z 0 D a r n D rs , n D --1 n a. • ., O O_ Q -.• m (D * I I-- IA 0 * r rt MN II o (D r y Z 0 n n w Di N j rim _. - 0 T. V V N O• O c CO @ lc y � feu quo Rd' NJ o-4 NC�� C t z c r . % Racy Ay" ''� '� C7 -t--. 0 ni m LOG ITEM laa 1 ( % S 0 0 ni (1) • -, .., < ...r. .. ',,,-„...) -,1/47•,,t n —I _ (0 _JO. .6... , - - Z _______> (D 0" . - .. .. . -..4. rP , ,....,.. ., ...... , '14(4. , ... CD .. .-- -,„‘. 4 . ., . 4.7 • „0,* — , CO (A co ,, 44, „.• cn 111.. * ' • > I c:# , vo *' -TI - KJ M Z x m . . ... .....;,,...,,.. CD * . , . ....... ri . ... .._.- rt (1) M al %ji . , C. 0 r-t 4.? ;47 c cry le Rd CD 16 g X I X > N ' 4 —4:;:,..t•' coyte,,,,. = oak ' ' '3/411111114e' • 0 = = < . ' su (D ..7 o O r - ..,, fr.,\ UYI 'el Oft i V . . , • , 41 ,,-.4 104* 1 tj) '' (4%;'::''''' '.'' .'''44.24 ''''''s 41. Ifwitev.::::ar." lo .:.A.V..' 7(1 7,3,i) CD 2 CD (D ,r? . , , op I'D 0 .. ... ..., ,.. ,› r., --1 (r) 04 Trl .1[11 70: ..111 M 19 M on 0 _ 111 5' r- •,---:: c., = 0 - • 5) i t , @ "-- c--) c) c'-'1 .'7: : -4 (1/4(4•1 - - ,. = c) -,3 --„ LOG ITEM . . , „... .....,.. . • • Crn A _. .� M n a• ; ' ri• 0 : -t rn tz ... .. . rn O rn rn —. co, rl. X —. CD = alc O. r mil o rn Golds Rd = V 0 0 C oyie RC} Go IN 2 = O a N ry0r in DJ a a c't:* )fil in a` �. x C rD C9ear(tee« Rd,� O tsi .z+ D a. f'1 '{ Z 0 { d r al p _ ? �_ 1r �`� s 1-71 � �/ 1 cu Fi CD z n CD F. n RED L - • • D x 0- x = 0 0 0- CD as o CD ate -- n 3 < (D 3 - -° CO CD C 2: v• 3 < (D 0 _0 cn �' v r' < (D -• O (D C tx) (D • O `i C CO D CO m ,< - o v `< Do C7 �'. D � C7 _.2. cQ ni 5 � ._ �' _„. _. .--gym o In 0 90 0 ,° co 0 a v (D x o ,o � . _ (DD) wm m - p333 ^ w - o cn *, 0 �7 CQ cc)—. CD v (D v CD (D -(TD- D ,-. 0. CD 3 O 0 - 0 D - V — C C O m CD v -, v = . r-. O v (D v CD cn w - 7 0 H - CD0 (DD 0 CD Q O ()D R. • 00 (,D Li I- 0- O D 0 �• `< o• 3 N o -, to O _- n CD O CO CD * O CD CD 0 CO (D O (D CD Q" v - ∎-• (D CD n 0 v (n N (D v Q M c CQ D v W ■ K O v O t< CD cn ( (. CD (D (n cn X milli 2 < C < v -0 C 0 D) 0 a) 0 = O CD a) A c N N D CD O D •- -, ,-, = o-i Q O CD C A' o al 17 0)ca v< CD CD C O , m- corn "f D Cn Q C 0 O ( C Cl) r« 0 — ■_ CI) p v O v CO Z to O C CD CI C (D a O 0 -., v CD Cu CD = Z- � 3 < RN. o w D .�+ = 5' � co - C 5 o v F,'(Q O o D m e CD C -I m Sa'7 7 v 0_ 0 � O N n CD O -0 O a) < O c CT CD 3 --,o m c)' r-• = c.0 0 v m a v (D ° � 0 v �, .CD� C c ri- 0 `° v v o _, mn o� ° D(D 6 p O a) — C CD 3 n m 7 w- C - OQ" Q ° cC � -- 00 N m C CD N ' S'D n v (D * 0 o O rD f°C CD (D D X _ 3 cn O v m-, _ v C�m - ? - o v Cr CD Cl)Q � 0 C�O Cl) CD O c n CD 0 ra Cl) Cl) -5 Q v _c- CD Q 2 73 3 o p u v � K °0 ° c n CD o m ° a N (D a = r o 3 - cm 4. Cl) 7r',- D CD < ,c 73 CT CD 0 m'C (1) 3 ° v c X D o D ■ Cn o O O 0 p 5- (. _• Cn C O < -o C an -- Q v v D) v co a o Q z <N n - - (D _, D CD v'3 ' co cQ O (D ° (D 5 v Q W v 2 O. CD C � < � ° � vC v a o CO �� Q N O 0_ O cn . Oi O Q 0 O N O C c D cQ cD Cl) fV an Cl) CD - Cl) v v D H C MI tl O v O cp ccDn '� v CZ cn COD - ! c% 36- O N W (,7 Cn CD 7 (D Q Q' (,7r � � O CD ,o m m -I n E Q � V ° m p D 0- C p - < 1 �v C CD � 0 1"--,,:, �c O: 3 CD CA t N Fr D Q O Q Fri D C CD CD --I C2 ( 0_ -• v CD v v c- Et.)-- c° D(D o n O cite (D -� CD Cl ,-+ m 3k. 44 • (-(( o 7J vo CD .1-1 70 /IN+ 9° 3C 0 CT r. N rig. cnn• a1 . ej Nrt w O O CU 3 LID 0 mt Ili 0 p7,u 3 y 4 o C G' _ C-- LOG ITEM • 2014 August 15, 2014 Page 10 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Electric power and telecom would be extended to the proposed facility within the easement. The facility would be surrounded by 6' fencing topped with barbed wire, with a locking gate accessible only by AT&T authorized personnel. e. Traffic and Noise Impacts The proposed WCF would be unmanned. The proposal would generate only approximately one vehicle trip per month on the surrounding road system, when a maintenance vehicle would visit the site for facility maintenance. JCC 18.42.090(1)(g) requires that any noise generated by the facility comply with Chapter 173-60 Washington Administrative Code(WAC)noise regulations. As proposed, the facility would comply with Chapter 173-60 WAC noise regulations. Compliance documentation can be submitted with the building permit application. Again,thank you for the opportunity to respond to the County's information request, to respond to public comment, and to provide information how the proposal meets County review criteria. Please do not hesitate to contact the Applicant's agent, Smart link, or me for further information. Respectfully submitted, Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC Attorneys for Applicant New Cingular Wireless PCS,LLC Encl: Colocation Notice, dated April 15, 2014, with U.S. Mail Certified Mail receipts Notice of Posting, dated October 16, 2013 Vicinity Map: Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation RF Justification and Propagation Maps FAA Summary Report, dated July 1, 2014 Photosimulations (Views 1 —5) Wetland Delineation Report, dated March 24, 2014 Search Ring Map LOG ITEM Paso 3 S of (o I' IIc I1 V 1J y n) 2014 i1 August 15, 2014 Pa e 9 JEFFERSON COUNTY g DEPT.OE COMMUFI!Ty DEVil OPMENT looking to the northeast from the north end of the Blueberry Hill Dr. cul-de-sac. View 4 illustrates how the proposed facility will look when looking to the northeast from the Coyle Rd./Blueberry Hill Dr. intersection. Thus,the Applicant has complied with the JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requirement. JCC 18.42.090(1)(a)requires WCFs, including towers and equipment enclosures, "shall be painted a non-reflective color that blends with the surroundings." In accord with the code requirement, the Applicant will paint the WCF, including the structure and equipment, a non-reflective color that blends with the surroundings. JCC 18.42.090(1)(c) states"tower lighting shall not be allowed except as required by the FAA." The FAA does not require tower lighting at this time. See attached FAA Summary Report, dated July 1,2014. The Applicant does not propose that the structure be lighted. c. Compliance with FCC Requirements for RF Emissions We appreciate and respect the opportunity to ask questions about RF emissions of the proposed WCF. But Section 332(c)(7) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not allow any local government to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of wireless facilities on the basis of the health effects of radiofrequency emissions to the extent that the facility complies with FCC regulations. As shown in the Applicant's NIER Report, dated August 16, 2013,which is on file with the County,the proposed installation is licensed by the FCC and would comply with FCC regulations. Consistent with the federal Ninth Circuit's decision, which governs in Washington State, any rationale based on potential health effects of RF emissions or declining property values based on concerns about those potential health effects is an improper basis for the County's permit decision under federal law. See AT& T Wireless Servs. Of Cal., LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D.Ca1.2003); MetroPCS, Inc. v. City& County of S.F. (9th Cir. 2005). Thus, the issue is preempted under federal law and any testimony or documents introduced relating to the environmental or health effects of the proposed site may not be considered. This topic has been studied extensively with nearly 25,000 articles published over the past 30 years. Based on this extensive and increasing body of evidence,the World Health Organization,American Cancer Society, and the FCC have all concluded that there is no evidence of any health consequences from exposure to wireless communication sites. Because of its regulatory responsibilities in this area the FCC often receives inquiries concerning the potential safety hazards of human exposure to RF energy, and provides additional information at: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/radio-frequency-safety. d. Security and Access The proposed WCF would be accessed from Coyle Road through an existing gravel access extending south through the Property. As part of the lease,the Applicant woulA ITF obtain a 20' access&utility easement over the area of the existing gravel access. 'JJJ^'� 2014 August 15, 2014 Page 8 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ring. The existing JeffCom911 structure is outside the search ring to the north and is not feasible for colocation, as illustrated above. Because the minimum height required to address the existing coverage gap and meet coverage objectives is 200',the proposed WCF would not be permitted outright in designated forestlands or industrial zones. Within the search ring,the Applicant also analyzed the feasibility of locating the WCF at 216 Blueberry Hill Drive or 356 Blueberry Hill Drive. Both of these options were determined not feasible due to the Blueberry Hill Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) applicable to each property that place restrictions on cellular antennas, and because a location on Rural Residential zoned property is not a preferred location under the County's priority-siting scheme. Of the property within the search ring, siting new wireless facilities more than 60' tall in a residential zoning district is one of the least- preferred options under the County code priority-siting scheme. As a higher priority under the siting scheme,new wireless facilities more than 60' tall are allowed in designated forest lands subject to administrative approval by the County Department of Community Development Director. JCC 18.10.010;JCC 18.40.040;JCC 18.42.080(2). Of the property within the search ring located in the County's Inholding Forest, Commercial Forest, and Rural Forest zoning districts,1 a landowner within the Inholding Forest zoning district, owner of the Property, was willing to offer property for lease to the Applicant. The Property also provides access to electric and telecomm infrastructure, which is necessary for wireless communication facility development. Thus,the Property was selected for a proposed wireless facility. The Applicant has complied with the priority-siting scheme set forth in the County code. b. Visual impacts JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requires that"for applications that propose construction of new wireless communications towers in rural residential... districts," an applicant must submit"photographic views from significant points in the `viewshed' showing the existing appearance and photo simulations depicting the appearance after the proposed facility is installed." Additional photo simulations, View 1 —View 5,have been developed to illustrate the appearance of the proposed facility when viewed from the Blueberry Hill neighborhood. The proposed facility would be located outside and northeast of the Blueberry Hill neighborhood. As depicted within the zoning drawings on file with the County, Blueberry Hill Lot#6 would be the closest Blueberry Hill lot to the proposed WCF. At that point,the proposed WCF would be located approximately 478' 5"north of the north boundary of this lot. This distance complies with JCC 18.42.090(1)(d) setback requirements for the Inholding Forest zoning district. See Zoning Drawings, currently on file with the County. Public comment identified the view from the north end of the Blueberry Hill Dr. cul-de-sac as a significant point in the `viewshed' of the area. View 3 illustrates how the proposed facility will look when 1 The Veeder property(Parcel No.601112002),a portion of which was suggested in public comment as a .� a� • IE--" DVI August 15, 2014 L' ? 2014 Page 7 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT oF.L COPJ'MUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT&T's systems. AT&T's radio frequencies do not penetrate mountains,hills,rocks or metal, and trees,brick and wood walls, and other structures diminish its radio frequencies. Therefore, AT&T's antennas must be installed above or close to the "clutter"in order to provide high quality communications services in the desired coverage areas. In addition, if the local code requires us to accommodate additional carriers on the structure,the structure must be even higher in order to allow the other carriers' antennas to clear the clutter as well. 3. Call Handoff. The antenna site must be located in an area where the radio broadcasts from this site will allow seamless call handoff with adjacent sites. "Call handoff'is a feature of a wireless communications system which allows an ongoing telephone conversation to continue uninterrupted as the user travels from the coverage area of one antenna site into the coverage area of an adjacent antenna site. This requires coverage overlap for a sufficient distance and/or period of time to support the mechanism of the handoff. 4. Quality of Service. Users of wireless communications services want to use their services where they live,work, commute and play, including when they are indoors. AT&T's coverage objectives include the ability to provide indoor coverage in areas where there are residences,businesses and indoor recreational facilities. 5. Radio Frequencies used by System. The designs of wireless communications systems will vary greatly based upon the radio frequencies that are used by the carrier. If the carrier uses radio frequencies that are in the 700 MHz range, the radio signals will travel further and will penetrate buildings better than the radio frequencies in the 850 MHz or 1900 MHz band. As a result, the wireless communications systems that use the lower radio frequencies will need fewer sites than the wireless communications systems that use the higher radio frequencies. 6. Land Use Classifications. AT&T's ability to construct a cell site on any particular property is affected by Washington state law and Jefferson County regulations, including zoning classifications, comprehensive plan designations, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. AT&T's search rings take these laws and regulations into consideration. AT&T's coverage propagation software systems use these and other factors (type of antenna; antenna tilt, etc.)to predict the coverage that will be provided by the proposed site. See attached RF justification and propagation maps. For property within and just outside the search ring in this case, JCC 18.42.080 establishes a priority-siting scheme for wireless communication facilities depending on zoning district. If there are existing wireless facilities or structures in designated forestlands, commercial and industrial zoning districts, or if a new wireless facility less than 60' tall is proposed in designated forestlands or certain industrial zones, such uses are permitted outright. Here, there are no existing wireless facilities within the search LOG ITEM DD- / ��7 - 2014 August 15, 2014 V it Lam` Page 6 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT radiofrequency("RF") engineer, and depicts the gap in 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage that exists within the applicant's network. As shown in Exhibit A,this gap exists even with the coverage provided by AT&T's other existing and planned WCFs in the vicinity. The Applicant has complied with the JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requirement. The need for service in this particular geographic area is determined by market demand, coverage requirements for a specific geographic area, and the need to provide continuous coverage from one site to another in a particular geographic region. AT&T is upgrading and expanding its wireless communications network throughout Washington, including the installation of the latest high band 4G LTE at the proposed site. Upon completion of this update,AT&T will operate a state-of-the-art digital network of wireless communications facilities throughout the proposed coverage area as part of its nationwide wireless communications network. LTE stands for"Long Term Evolution."This acronym refers to the ongoing process of improving wireless technology standards with speeds up to ten times faster than 3G. LTE technology is the next step in increasing broadband speeds to meet the demands of users and enable access to the variety of content accessed over mobile networks. Once the need for additional coverage in a particular area has been established,AT&T's RF engineers perform an RF engineering study to determine the approximate site location and antenna height that is required to provide service in the desired coverage area. AT&T's RF engineers identify an area that is called a"search ring"where a site may be located in order to provide service in the desired coverage area. See attached Search Ring Map. As the Search Ring Map for the proposed wireless facility depicts,the search ring is bounded by Coyle Road on the west and north, the U.S. Naval Reserve on the east, and commercial forestland on the south. The RF engineer takes the following objectives into consideration when identifying the search ring: 1. Coverage. The antenna site must be located in an area where the radio frequency broadcasts will provide adequate coverage within the significant gap in coverage. The RF engineer must take into consideration the coverage objectives for the site as well as the terrain in and around the area to be covered. Since radio frequencies travel in a straight line and diminish as they travel further away from the antennas, it is generally best to place an antenna site near the center of the desired coverage area. However, in certain cases, the search ring may be located away from the center of the desired coverage area due to the existing coverage, the surrounding terrain, or other features which might affect the radio frequency broadcasts like buildings or sources of electrical interference. 2. Clutter. AT&T's antennas must"clear the clutter"in the area. Trees,buildings, and other natural and man-made obstacles adversely affect the radio frequencies used in 3 ( -4(7 • fl, i , : 2014 August 15, 2014 i i b' Page 5 H ' JEFFERSON COUNTY t DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT content requirements, JCC 18.42.080(2) Type II land use review requirements, or JCC 18.42.090 design review standards, which constitute the review criteria for the proposed WCF. The Applicant has complied with JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requirements. IV. Wetland Report BGE Environmental, LLC completed a Wetland Delineation Report, dated March 24, 2014, on behalf of the Applicant for the Property. See enclosed copy,Wetland Delineation Report("Report"), BR0266/Bangor Canal, dated March 24, 2014. The Property is a triangular shaped parcel that is approximately 20.46 acres,measuring approximately 1652' along the longest axis and 988' along the shortest axis. The Report identified two Category II and Category III wetlands and a Type N stream located on the Property, and two wetlands located off the Property to the east. As the report concludes, neither the proposed access road nor the ground lease area would be located within the wetlands, stream, or required buffers on the subject parcel. Based on habitat score level and wetland category, Category II and III wetlands on the Property must be protected by a 110' buffer under the County critical areas code. As depicted in the zoning drawings on file with the County,the proposed access road and ground lease area would be located more than 150' from the edge of the nearest wetland and stream area. V. Public Comment In addition to the comment submitted by Mr. Gunnerson addressed above, other public comment has been submitted to the County on the proposal. Comments relevant to the County review criteria for the proposed WCF are addressed in turn: a. Proposed Site Selection Comments submitted to the County request information why the proposed site was selected and what alternate sites were considered. The Applicant has complied with County code requirements affecting site selection and alternate sites. JCC 18.42.070(3)requires an applicant to make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of colocation if a positive response to the colocation notice is received. As shown in the response above,the Applicant has complied with JCC 18.42.070(3) requirements for this analysis. JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requires that an applicant provide"information necessary to determine the intended service area of the facility which may include a map of the intended service area." The Applicant's coverage objectives are to improve outdoor, indoor, and in vehicle coverage along Blueberry Hill Drive, Coyle Road, Kens Way, Camp Harmony Road, Old Coyle Road, and Lemonds Road, along with extending coverage to the area in the vicinity of Bangor Trident Base and US Naval Reservation. Exhibit A within the attached radiofrequency propagation maps,produced by a qualified LOG ITEM Pane 3G of E.' V E 2.014 I, )) , August 15, 2014 Page 4 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT currently leases from the County within the County right-of-way includes an approximately 21' x 11' "expansion area"within the right-of-way that would provide space for AT&T's shelter and equipment. But AT&T typically requires a larger approximately 50' x 50' leased area to accommodate its equipment shelter and related equipment. See Zoning Drawings, currently on file with the County. Even if there were adequate site area to accommodate a 200' WCF and associated 50' x 50' lease area at the existing JeffCom911 structure site, it is uncertain whether such a WCF and lease area would comply with Chapter 13.60 JCC and Chapter 13.56 JCC development standards for construction in the right-of-way, as no permit application for such construction has been filed with the County for review. Any required landscape buffer,maintenance vehicle access from Coyle Road, or emergency vehicle access from Coyle Road would require additional area beyond the designated"expansion area"within County right-of- way. Given the approximate 20' width between the edge of the Coyle Road pavement and adjacent private property line, it is uncertain whether enough space exists to accommodate shelter, related equipment, access, and any required buffer. The Applicant would need to obtain the necessary permits and necessary private landowner permission for any aspect of a proposed WCF that would extend onto adjacent private property. d. Evidence that adequate access does or does not exist at the potential colocation site; The designated 11' x 21' "expansion area"noted in the February 18, 2014 Gunnerson letter does not include access. While there may be public right-of-way access from Coyle Road, it is unknown whether this existing access would satisfy County requirements for necessary sight distance or emergency vehicle turn-around space. e. Nonproprietary technical information to evaluate the feasibility of colocation. JCC 18.42.070 recognizes that"colocation of antennas by providers is not always feasible for technical or business reasons." To ensure a minimum 200' height would be available at the JeffCom911 site, the existing 90' structure at the site would need to be removed and replaced with a new WCF at least 200' tall financed exclusively by the Applicant but seemingly owned by JeffCom911. If a new 200' structure needs to be constructed in any case, it is not commercially feasible for the Applicant to invest the funds necessary to construct the tower but not retain full ownership and control of the tower and associated equipment. In addition, any 200' structure at the location within the County right-of-way would be highly visible to those travelling along Coyle Road. III. Photo Simulations Please see enclosed additional photo simulations, View 1 —View 5. These photo simulations address JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requirements for photographic views. No balloon test requirements are set forth within JCC 18.42.040 application submittt 0al-% ITEM ca • • r 2014 �4 August 15, 2014 �� � i ; 9 201 Page 3 JEFFERSON COUNTY L C_ �PT_OF COP4MUNITY DEVELOPMENT I the JeffCom911 structure is not available for colocation. JCC 18.42.030(2)(f) defines "colocation"as "the placement of two or more antenna systems or platforms by separate FCC license holders on a support structure or alternative support structure." In this case, as determined by a qualified RF engineer,the Applicant requires a 200' minimum height in the vicinity to meet AT&T's coverage objectives and address its existing low band 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage gap. The structure is only 90' tall, and thus no"placement of two or more antenna systems"is possible on the structure that would address AT&T's existing coverage gap and meet its coverage objectives. Even if colocation were possible on the JeffCom911 structure, the necessary service cannot be provided by colocation at the potential colocation site. As depicted in the attached narrative and RF propagation maps,produced by a qualified RF engineer, the existing 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage gap and AT&T's coverage objectives would not be addressed by antennas at a 200' height at the location of the JeffCom911 structure. A comparison of Exhibit B and Exhibit C of the attached radiofrequency propagation maps shows an inferior amount of acceptable coverage resulting from a 200' tall installation broadcasting a 4G LTE 700 MHz signal at the JeffCom911 site than from a 200' facility at the proposed site. As shown within Exhibit C, coverage from a 200' installation at the JeffCom911 site would not reach the area along Coyle Road south of approximately Kens Way, including Coyle Road and Camp Harmony Road. In addition, the existing JeffCom911 structure is outside the Applicant's search ring, or area where a site may be located in order to provide service in the desired coverage area, as illustrated in the response to public comment below. b. Evidence that the lessor of the potential colocation site either agrees or disagrees to colocation on their property; A letter from Bryon Gunnerson, Gunnerson Consulting and Communication Site Services LLC ("GCCSS")to the County, dated February 18, 2014, states that"JeffCom911 is open and willing to allow AT&T to modify or add height to the JeffCom911 Coyle Road Tower site in order to meet AT&T's objectives for its operations." Because a 200' minimum height is necessary to address AT&T's existing coverage gap and meet its coverage objectives,AT&T could not collocate on the existing 90' JeffCom911 structure. Instead, a new 200' structure would be needed within the County right-of-way. c. Evidence that adequate site area exists or does not exist at the potential colocation site to accommodate needed equipment and meet all of the site development standards; AT&T could not collocate on the existing 90' JeffCom911 structure. Instead, a new 200' structure would be needed within the County right-of-way to address the existing gap in AT&T's network and to meet its coverage objectives. In addition to a new structure, AT&T would also require ground space to locate its equipment shelter and related equipment. The February 18, 2014 Gunnerson letter states the space JeffCom911 LOG ITEM # I Pa ea of4 .. NNW • • iJ August 15, 2014 9 2014 Page 2 L JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT "Property"). Since then,the Applicant has executed a lease with the owner of the Property, and has advised JeffCom911 that colocation opportunities would be available on the proposed structure at commercially reasonable rates. The Applicant has not received any favorable response to its offer from JeffCom911 to date. II. Colocation Procedure (JCC 18.42.060; JCC 18.42.070) After the Applicant filed the application with the County proposing a new structure at 9395 Coyle Rd., the County requested that the Applicant complete the JCC 18.42.070 colocation procedure. The Applicant has complied with the County's request. The Applicant participated in a pre-application conference with the County. See Pre- Submittal Conference Application Notes, currently on file with the County. The Applicant also mailed a colocation notice to all other wireless providers licensed to provide service within Jefferson County in accord with JCC 18.42.070(2). See enclosed Colocation Notice, dated April 15, 2014,with attached U.S. Mail Certified Mail receipts. JCC 18.42.070(3)requires an applicant to make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of colocation if a positive response to the colocation notice is received. A letter from Bryon Gunnerson, Gunnerson Consulting and Communication Site Services LLC("GCCSS")to the County, dated February 18,2014, states that"JeffCom911 is open and willing to allow AT&T to modify or add height to the JeffCom911 Coyle Road Tower site in order to meet AT&T's objectives for its operations." In compliance with JCC 18.42.070(3),the Applicant has made a good faith effort to investigate the feasibility of colocation on the JeffCom911 structure by completing the County's requirements under JCC 18.42.070(3)(a)—(e), as shown in the following response: a. A statement from a qualified engineer indicating whether the necessary service can or cannot be provided by colocation at the potential colocation site; JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requires that the Applicant submit"information necessary to determine the intended service area of the facility which may include a map of the intended service area." The Applicant's coverage objectives are to improve outdoor, indoor, and in vehicle coverage along Blueberry Hill Drive, Coyle Road,Kens Way, Camp Harmony Road, Old Coyle Road, and Lemonds Road, along with extending coverage to the area in the vicinity of Bangor Trident Base and US Naval Reservation. Exhibit A within the attached radiofrequency justification and propagation maps, produced by a qualified radiofrequency("RF") engineer, depicts the gap in 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage that exists within the applicant's network. As shown in Exhibit A, this gap exists even with the coverage provided by AT&T's other existing and planned WCFs in the vicinity. Though JeffCom911 may have obtained clear ownership to the structure in the Jefferson County right-of-way adjacent to 8630 Coyle Rd. since the Applicant filed the apptfeje,ITEM t �} • E 413 ) 2014 _2) BUSCH _,1WF1 P L JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT August 13, 2014 Ms. Colleen Zmolek, Associate Planner Development Review Division Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 SUBMITTED VIA EMAIL To: czmolek(a,co jefferson.wa.us Re: Site Address: 9395 Coyle Rd., Quilcene, WA CASE#: MLA13-00116 AT&T BR0266 Bangor Canal Dear Ms. Zmolek: On behalf of New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC ("AT&T"),thank you for the opportunity to respond to the County's November 27, 2013 request for information on the above- referenced application,to respond to public comment subsequently received by the County, and to address how the application meets County Type II administrative conditional use permit review criteria. We understand that you are the County planner recently assigned to review the application, and appreciate the opportunity to work with you. The following response addresses the County's request and public comments. I. JeffCom911 Existing Structure (Coyle Rd.) An existing JeffCom911 structure is located in Jefferson County right-of-way adjacent to 8630 Coyle Rd., Quilcene, WA(Parcel No. 601023007). The structure is approximately 90' tall,with two Omni antennas extending to 100'. In its November 27, 2013 information request,the County advised the Applicant to contact Karl Hatton, JeffCom911 Director, about the possibility of collocating on the structure. The Applicant initially contacted Mr. Hatton on January 9, 2014. At the time the Applicant filed the application with the County, the structure was unavailable for colocation because, among other reasons, JeffCom911 could not show clear ownership and rights to the structure. As a result, and because colocation analysis was not required under JCC 18.42.060 and .070,the Applicant filed the application with the County proposing a new structure at 9395 Coyle Rd., Quilcene,WA(Parcel No. 601101003) (the SEATTLE LOS ANGELES DENVER PORTLAND BEND 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com t 425A2844,5_M Seattle,WA 98104-2818 www.wirelesscounsel.com f 206.21 tr AS • , \1 1 r�1 2014 1 August 15, 2014 I I I I J, Page 10 L J JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i Electric power and telecom would be extended to the proposed facility within the easement. The facility would be surrounded by 6' fencing topped with barbed wire, with a locking gate accessible only by AT&T authorized personnel. e. Traffic and Noise Impacts The proposed WCF would be unmanned. The proposal would generate only approximately one vehicle trip per month on the surrounding road system,when a maintenance vehicle would visit the site for facility maintenance. JCC 18.42.090(1)(g) requires that any noise generated by the facility comply with Chapter 173-60 Washington Administrative Code (WAC)noise regulations. As proposed,the facility would comply with Chapter 173-60 WAC noise regulations. Compliance documentation can be submitted with the building permit application. Again,thank you for the opportunity to respond to the County's information request, to respond to public comment, and to provide information how the proposal meets County review criteria. Please do not hesitate to contact the Applicant's agent, Smartlink, or me for further information. Respectfully submitted, Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC Attorneys for Applicant New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC Encl: Colocation Notice, dated April 15,2014,with U.S. Mail Certified Mail receipts Notice of Posting, dated October 16, 2013 Vicinity Map: Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation RF Justification and Propagation Maps FAA Summary Report, dated July 1, 2014 Photosimulations (Views 1 —5) Wetland Delineation Report, dated March 24,2014 Search Ring Map LOG ITEM #_12a___ -� page.c:25_ __,, 40 III • \', „ ,______, .._._._. , August 15,2014 ''iii j ; 2014 Pa e9 1 i1 11" �� g JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT looking to the northeast from the north end of the Blueberry Hill Dr. cul-de-sac. View 4 illustrates how the proposed facility will look when looking to the northeast from the Coyle Rd./Blueberry Hill Dr. intersection. Thus, the Applicant has complied with the JCC 18.42.040(l)(j)requirement. JCC 18.42.090(1)(a)requires WCFs, including towers and equipment enclosures, "shall be painted a non-reflective color that blends with the surroundings." In accord with the code requirement, the Applicant will paint the WCF, including the structure and equipment, a non-reflective color that blends with the surroundings. JCC 18.42.090(1)(c) states"tower lighting shall not be allowed except as required by the FAA." The FAA does not require tower lighting at this time. See attached FAA Summary Report, dated July 1, 2014. The Applicant does not propose that the structure be lighted. c. Compliance with FCC Requirements for RF Emissions We appreciate and respect the opportunity to ask questions about RF emissions of the proposed WCF. But Section 332(c)(7) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not allow any local government to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of wireless facilities on the basis of the health effects of radiofrequency emissions to the extent that the facility complies with FCC regulations. As shown in the Applicant's NIER Report, dated August 16, 2013, which is on file with the County,the proposed installation is licensed by the FCC and would comply with FCC regulations. Consistent with the federal Ninth Circuit's decision,which governs in Washington State, any rationale based on potential health effects of RF emissions or declining property values based on concerns about those potential health effects is an improper basis for the County's permit decision under federal law. See AT& T Wireless Servs. Of Cal., LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D.Ca1.2003); MetroPCS, Inc. v. City& County of S.F. (9th Cir. 2005). Thus, the issue is preempted under federal law and any testimony or documents introduced relating to the environmental or health effects of the proposed site may not be considered. This topic has been studied extensively with nearly 25,000 articles published over the past 30 years. Based on this extensive and increasing body of evidence,the World Health Organization, American Cancer Society, and the FCC have all concluded that there is no evidence of any health consequences from exposure to wireless communication sites. Because of its regulatory responsibilities in this area the FCC often receives inquiries concerning the potential safety hazards of human exposure to RF energy, and provides additional information at: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/radio-frequency-safety. d. Security and Access The proposed WCF would be accessed from Coyle Road through an existing gravel access extending south through the Property. As part of the lease, the Applicant would obtain a 20' access&utility easement over the area of the existing gravel access. LOG ITEM # tag. Pa e c • • 0 LE 11 V 1 ��, August 15, 2014 Page8 I i) 1 E_ 9 2014 ii �' JJ ; JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ring. The existing JeffCom911 structure is outside the search ring to the north and is not feasible for colocation, as illustrated above. Because the minimum height required to address the existing coverage gap and meet coverage objectives is 200',the proposed WCF would not be permitted outright in designated forestlands or industrial zones. Within the search ring,the Applicant also analyzed the feasibility of locating the WCF at 216 Blueberry Hill Drive or 356 Blueberry Hill Drive. Both of these options were determined not feasible due to the Blueberry Hill Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs)applicable to each property that place restrictions on cellular antennas, and because a location on Rural Residential zoned property is not a preferred location under the County's priority-siting scheme. Of the property within the search ring, siting new wireless facilities more than 60' tall in a residential zoning district is one of the least- preferred options under the County code priority-siting scheme. As a higher priority under the siting scheme, new wireless facilities more than 60' tall are allowed in designated forest lands subject to administrative approval by the County Department of Community Development Director. JCC 18.10.010;JCC 18.40.040;JCC 18.42.080(2). Of the property within the search ring located in the County's Inholding Forest, Commercial Forest, and Rural Forest zoning districts,1 a landowner within the Inholding Forest zoning district, owner of the Property, was willing to offer property for lease to the Applicant. The Property also provides access to electric and telecomm infrastructure, which is necessary for wireless communication facility development. Thus, the Property was selected for a proposed wireless facility. The Applicant has complied with the priority-siting scheme set forth in the County code. b. Visual impacts JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requires that"for applications that propose construction of new wireless communications towers in rural residential... districts,"an applicant must submit"photographic views from significant points in the `viewshed' showing the existing appearance and photo simulations depicting the appearance after the proposed facility is installed." Additional photo simulations, View 1 —View 5, have been developed to illustrate the appearance of the proposed facility when viewed from the Blueberry Hill neighborhood. The proposed facility would be located outside and northeast of the Blueberry Hill neighborhood. As depicted within the zoning drawings on file with the County, Blueberry Hill Lot#6 would be the closest Blueberry Hill lot to the proposed WCF. At that point, the proposed WCF would be located approximately 478' 5"north of the north boundary of this lot. This distance complies with JCC 18.42.090(1)(d) setback requirements for the Inholding Forest zoning district. See Zoning Drawings, currently on file with the County. Public comment identified the view from the north end of the Blueberry Hill Dr. cul-de-sac as a significant point in the `viewshed' of the area. View 3 illustrates how the proposed facility will look when 1 The Veeder property(Parcel No. 601112002),a portion of which was suggested in public comment as a LOG ITEM I 2- eQ 3 .4, • I0 2014 15, 2014 D\Page 7 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT&T's systems. AT&T's radio frequencies do not penetrate mountains, hills, rocks or metal, and trees,brick and wood walls, and other structures diminish its radio frequencies. Therefore,AT&T's antennas must be installed above or close to the "clutter"in order to provide high quality communications services in the desired coverage areas. In addition, if the local code requires us to accommodate additional carriers on the structure, the structure must be even higher in order to allow the other carriers' antennas to clear the clutter as well. 3. Call Handoff. The antenna site must be located in an area where the radio broadcasts from this site will allow seamless call handoff with adjacent sites. "Call handoff' is a feature of a wireless communications system which allows an ongoing telephone conversation to continue uninterrupted as the user travels from the coverage area of one antenna site into the coverage area of an adjacent antenna site. This requires coverage overlap for a sufficient distance and/or period of time to support the mechanism of the handoff. 4. Quality of Service. Users of wireless communications services want to use their services where they live,work, commute and play, including when they are indoors. AT&T's coverage objectives include the ability to provide indoor coverage in areas where there are residences,businesses and indoor recreational facilities. 5. Radio Frequencies used by System. The designs of wireless communications systems will vary greatly based upon the radio frequencies that are used by the carrier. If the carrier uses radio frequencies that are in the 700 MHz range, the radio signals will travel further and will penetrate buildings better than the radio frequencies in the 850 MHz or 1900 MHz band. As a result,the wireless communications systems that use the lower radio frequencies will need fewer sites than the wireless communications systems that use the higher radio frequencies. 6. Land Use Classifications. AT&T's ability to construct a cell site on any particular property is affected by Washington state law and Jefferson County regulations, including zoning classifications, comprehensive plan designations, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. AT&T's search rings take these laws and regulations into consideration. AT&T's coverage propagation software systems use these and other factors(type of antenna; antenna tilt, etc.)to predict the coverage that will be provided by the proposed site. See attached RF justification and propagation maps. For property within and just outside the search ring in this case, JCC 18.42.080 establishes a priority-siting scheme for wireless communication facilities depending on zoning district. If there are existing wireless facilities or structures in designated forestlands, commercial and industrial zoning districts, or if a new wireless facility less than 60' tall is proposed in designated forestlands or certain industrial zones, such uses are permitted outright. Here,there are no existing wireless facilities within the searcLQG ITEM \ 92014 August 15, 2014 h Page 6 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT radiofrequency ("RF") engineer, and depicts the gap in 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage that exists within the applicant's network. As shown in Exhibit A, this gap exists even with the coverage provided by AT&T's other existing and planned WCFs in the vicinity. The Applicant has complied with the JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requirement. The need for service in this particular geographic area is determined by market demand, coverage requirements for a specific geographic area, and the need to provide continuous coverage from one site to another in a particular geographic region. AT&T is upgrading and expanding its wireless communications network throughout Washington, including the installation of the latest high band 4G LTE at the proposed site. Upon completion of this update, AT&T will operate a state-of-the-art digital network of wireless communications facilities throughout the proposed coverage area as part of its nationwide wireless communications network. LTE stands for"Long Term Evolution."This acronym refers to the ongoing process of improving wireless technology standards with speeds up to ten times faster than 3G. LTE technology is the next step in increasing broadband speeds to meet the demands of users and enable access to the variety of content accessed over mobile networks. Once the need for additional coverage in a particular area has been established,AT&T's RF engineers perform an RF engineering study to determine the approximate site location and antenna height that is required to provide service in the desired coverage area. AT&T's RF engineers identify an area that is called a"search ring"where a site may be located in order to provide service in the desired coverage area. See attached Search Ring Map. As the Search Ring Map for the proposed wireless facility depicts, the search ring is bounded by Coyle Road on the west and north,the U.S. Naval Reserve on the east, and commercial forestland on the south. The RF engineer takes the following objectives into consideration when identifying the search ring: 1. Coverage. The antenna site must be located in an area where the radio frequency broadcasts will provide adequate coverage within the significant gap in coverage. The RF engineer must take into consideration the coverage objectives for the site as well as the terrain in and around the area to be covered. Since radio frequencies travel in a straight line and diminish as they travel further away from the antennas, it is generally best to place an antenna site near the center of the desired coverage area. However, in certain cases, the search ring may be located away from the center of the desired coverage area due to the existing coverage, the surrounding terrain, or other features which might affect the radio frequency broadcasts like buildings or sources of electrical interference. 2. Clutter. AT&T's antennas must"clear the clutter" in the area. Trees,buildings, and other natural and man-made obstacles adversely affect the radio frequencies used in LOG ITEM # dap Page-1 of . • ., 9 2014 August 15, 2014 Page 5 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT content requirements, JCC 18.42.080(2)Type II land use review requirements, or JCC 18.42.090 design review standards, which constitute the review criteria for the proposed WCF. The Applicant has complied with JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requirements. IV. Wetland Report BGE Environmental, LLC completed a Wetland Delineation Report, dated March 24, 2014, on behalf of the Applicant for the Property. See enclosed copy,Wetland Delineation Report("Report"), BR0266/Bangor Canal, dated March 24, 2014. The Property is a triangular shaped parcel that is approximately 20.46 acres,measuring approximately 1652' along the longest axis and 988' along the shortest axis. The Report identified two Category II and Category III wetlands and a Type N stream located on the Property, and two wetlands located off the Property to the east. As the report concludes, neither the proposed access road nor the ground lease area would be located within the wetlands, stream, or required buffers on the subject parcel. Based on habitat score level and wetland category, Category II and III wetlands on the Property must be protected by a 110' buffer under the County critical areas code. As depicted in the zoning drawings on file with the County,the proposed access road and ground lease area would be located more than 150' from the edge of the nearest wetland and stream area. V. Public Comment In addition to the comment submitted by Mr. Gunnerson addressed above, other public comment has been submitted to the County on the proposal. Comments relevant to the County review criteria for the proposed WCF are addressed in turn: a. Proposed Site Selection Comments submitted to the County request information why the proposed site was selected and what alternate sites were considered. The Applicant has complied with County code requirements affecting site selection and alternate sites. JCC 18.42.070(3)requires an applicant to make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of colocation if a positive response to the colocation notice is received. As shown in the response above, the Applicant has complied with JCC 18.42.070(3) requirements for this analysis. JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requires that an applicant provide"information necessary to determine the intended service area of the facility which may include a map of the intended service area." The Applicant's coverage objectives are to improve outdoor, indoor, and in vehicle coverage along Blueberry Hill Drive, Coyle Road, Kens Way, Camp Harmony Road, Old Coyle Road, and Lemonds Road, along with extending coverage to the area in the vicinity of Bangor Trident Base and US Naval Reservation. Exhibit A within the attached radiofrequency propagation maps,produced by a qualifie lOG ITEM # as Pageao of$h • • Colleen Zmolek From: Kristen Larson <kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 4:14 PM To: Colleen Zmolek Cc: Ken Lyons; Erin Lane; Kimberly Spongberg Subject: Re: CASE#MLA13-00116 information request- response to additional public comment Attachments: BR0266_Response to 110614 County Information Request_final.pdf; BRO266 Bangor Canal Zoning Drawings.pdf; County April Letter_Memo.pdf; BR0266 Bangor Canal August 15 2014 Response to County Information Request.pdf; Exhibit B Grant of Easement.pdf; BR0266 Bangor Canal_RF Justification 120514.pdf Dear Colleen, Thank you again for the chance to review additional public comment received by the County on the proposal at our November 6, 2014 meeting. In addition to the response provided on November 16, 2014, I've attached a response to additional public comment on behalf of AT&T. I believe the attached addresses all points raised in the public comment, but if not, please let us know so that we may supplement the response. The attached response includes a narrative dated December 9, 2014,with the following attachments: • April 20, 2013 Jefferson County Planning and Building Department letter,with attached May 3, 1993 Baker Construction, Inc. memorandum • RF Justification, with Exhibits A—E • Exhibit B, Grant of Easement,County Rec. No. 545503 (August 3, 2009) • Zoning Drawings, dated August 27, 2013 • Copy of Applicant's August 15, 2014 response to County information request Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information, and we appreciate your time and consideration of the attached. Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless LOG 1TENi 206-327-9049 Fax # 1 �'- kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com From: Kristen Larson <kristen.larson@wirelesscounsel.com> Date:Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 9:25 AM To: Colleen Zmolek<CZmolek @co.iefferson.wa.us> E Cc: Ken Lyons<ken.lyons@wirelesscounsel.com> Subject: Re: Response to 11/6 information request DEC 9 2014 Good morning Colleen, JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENt 1 • • Confirming that in addition to the list of items received 11/6/14,we are still working on and intend to submit a response to the most recent public comment received by the County, copies of which we received when we met that day. We will have that additional information to you as soon as possible. Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com From: Kristen Larson<kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Date: Sunday, November 16, 2014 at 5:01 PM To: Colleen Zmolek<CZmolek @colefferson.wa.us> Cc: Ken Lyons<ken.lyons @wirelesscounsel.com> Subject: Response to 11/6 information request Dear Colleen, Thanks so much for your time this past week. Please extend our thanks to Stacie as well. On behalf of applicant AT&T, I've attached a response to the information request received from the County on 11/6/14. I believe the information attached addresses all points raised during our discussion, but if not, please let us know. Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information. Have a good start to the week! Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com LOG ITEM [ V 1 \\O 2014 9- of DEC JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVROPMENT_._--- 2 c E Q M C DEC BUSCH LAW F I R M PLLC JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 9,2014 Ms. Colleen Zmolek Associate Planner Jefferson County Depaitiuent of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: County Project Permit Application Supplemental Information Request CASE#: MLA13-00116/ZON13-00039 SITE ADDRESS: 9335 Coyle Road Dear Ms. Zmolek: Enclosed, on behalf of Applicant New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC ("AT&T,"or "Applicant"),please find a response to the County's additional information request concerning comment received on the proposal. I. The JeffCom911 installation(Coyle Rd.) is a nonconforming use that cannot be replaced in compliance with County code to provide necessary coverage. The JeffCom911 installation is a nonconforming use. A nonconforming use of land is a use that currently exists and was lawfully established prior to the enactment of Jefferson County Code("JCC") 18.20.260. JCC 18.20.260. The County approved the existing 100' tower in 1993, according to an April 20, 1993 letter from the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and attached May 3, 1993 memorandum from Baker Construction, Inc. But JCC 18.20.260 was adopted by ordinance in 2006. Thus the use exists,was lawfully established prior to 2006, and is a nonconforming use. Coverage maps submitted with the application show that coverage from the JeffCom911 tower at its existing height or at a 200' height would not fill the existing significant gap in coverage. See Exhibit C,RF Justification, attached. A replacement tower at a 200' height would also not comply with County code governing nonconforming uses. Under JCC 18.20.260(1)(c), any installation more than 110' at this site must obtain a Type II C(d) discretionary conditional use permit and meet the following additional four criteria set forth in JCC 18.20.260(1)(c)(i)—(iv): (i)The proposed area for expansion is contiguous to the nonconforming use. ITEM SEATTLE LOS ANGELES DENVER PORT'"■;,[ e BEND " 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com t 425.628.2665 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 www.wirelesscounsel.com f 206.219.6717 ID ` oEu v E 1) ._ 1 „;r 14 ,_ 9 20 December 9, 2014 lL Page 2 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (ii)The area for expansion of the use complies with all applicable bulk and dimensional standards,performance provisions,and environmental and shoreline(WAC 173-27-080) regulations; (iii)The area for expansion shall not increase the land area devoted to the nonconforming use by more than 100 percent of that use at the effective date of the nonconformance; and (iv)The expansion shall not be granted if it would result in a significant increase in the intensity of the use of the nonconformity(e.g.hours of operation,traffic). An additional Type II C(d) discretionary process would be duplicative and futile because a replacement wireless communication facility("WCF") at the JeffCom911 site would not meet JCC 18.20.260(1)(c)(ii), (iii), or(iv). a. A replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site would not meet JCC 18.20.260(c)(ii). JCC 18.20.260(c)(ii)requires compliance with all applicable bulk and dimensional standards and performance provisions,which include required setbacks. A 20' setback from the Coyle Road right-of-way applies in the Rural Residential 1:20 zoning district, where the JeffCom911 tower and equipment is located.' JCC 18.20.130. The existing JeffCom911 tower and concrete footprint is located within the 20' setback. See Exhibit B, Grant of Easement, County Rec.No. 545503 (August 3, 2009), attached. Given the JCC 18.20.260(c)(i)requirement that any expansion must be contiguous to the nonconforming use, any replacement tower and equipment would also have to be located in the setback. But locating a replacement tower and equipment within the setback would not comply with JCC 18.20.260(c)(ii). JCC 18.42.090(1)(d)requires that all equipment shelters shall comply with the setbacks of the applicable zone, which in this case is 20' from the Coyle Road right of way. But given the location of the existing equipment building and tower concrete pedestal depicted within attached Exhibit B, Grant of Easement,there is insufficient room within the existing ROW and easement on the JeffCom911 site for placement of the AT&T's proposed 11'5"x 26' equipment shelter. See Zoning Drawings, dated August 27, 2013, attached. Together,the fenced area and easement measures approximately 22' wide and 62' long. The concrete pedestal of the existing JeffCom911 tower occupies the south portion of the right of way and easement at approximately 15' x 16'. The existing JeffCom911 communications building occupies the north portion at approximately 8' x 8'. If the AT&T equipment shelter were placed here among the concrete pad for a tower and the JeffCom911 communications building, 1 The JeffCom911 tower and associated equipment is located on Parcel No.601023007,which is located within the County's Rural Residential 1:20 zoning district,and within the right-of-way adjacent to Parcel No.601023007. See Exhibit B,Grant of Easement,County Rec.No.545503 (Auguste C r nn AA Road is a minor collector road under JCC 18.30.050(11),so a 20'setback is required 8 2 GC.M. 1 �a Page ..,..® . . • Iv December 9,2014 F\ 0 4_(' 9 2014 Page 3 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COM" UNITY DEVELOPMENT the two remaining possible orientations available for the equipment shelter would encroach west beyond the easement boundary onto private property, and even further into the required 20' setback. b. A replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site would not meet JCC 18.20.260(c)(iii). JCC 18.20.260(c)(iii) caps the area for expansion at 100 percent of the use at the effective date of the nonconformance. The JeffCom911 tower communications building currently occupies approximately 64 ft2, and the concrete base of the JeffCom911 tower occupies approximately 225 ft2. At 11'5"x 26' (299 ft2)the AT&T equipment shelter would occupy more than 100 percent of the land area currently occupied by JeffCom911 tower communications building and concrete base combined. The base of a replacement WCF at 200' would occupy an additional approximately 17' x 17' area(289 ft ).2 Landscaping required under JCC 18.42.090(1)(h)to screen a replacement tower and equipment would further increase the land area required for the resulting new use. Accordingly,the AT&T equipment shelter simply cannot be constructed with a replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site without expanding area used for the resulting new use by more than 100 percent of the use at the effective date of the nonconformance. c. A replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site would not meet JCC 18.20.260(c)(iv). JCC 18.20.260(c)(iv)does not allow a significant increase in intensity of the use of the nonconformity. At an existing height of 100 feet,the JeffCom911 tower cannot be replaced with a WCF many more feet in height without significantly increasing the visual impacts on the community.3 The fact that the County otherwise subjects WCF towers at least 60' high in residential zoning districts to Type III conditional use review underscores the increased impact of these type of facilities over those located in designated forest lands,where AT&T's proposed WCF would be located. See JCC 18.42.080(2) and(3). The placement of equipment and required landscaping associated with the replacement tower outside the existing easement area would also significantly impact private property beyond the current intensity of the use. There is not sufficient land area within the easement to locate a replacement WCF tower, associated equipment, and required landscaping. Expansion of the easement area without permission of the property owner is not possible and would be certainly prohibited by JCC 18.40.530(1)(c), as materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity, and by JCC 18.40.530(1)(e), 2 See Exhibit B,Grant of Easement,County Rec.No.545503(August 3,2009),attached;see also Zoning Drawings,dated August 27,2013,attached. 3 JCC 18.42.060 recognizes that"[w]ireless facilities that require construction of new towers may have greater impacts than facilities that collocate antennas on existing towers or alternative structures,"and that "[w]ireless facilities that are mounted on new towers that are greater than 60 feet in height may have LOG n greater impacts than facilities that are mounted on support structures 60 feet or less in height." LOG ITEM # I Page 5' of-46 • Cc 1F:', (C LPR 1 E-Y 9 2014 December 9, 2014 JEFFERSON COUNTY Page 4 DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT because the location and size of the equipment shelter and screening vegetation would unreasonably interfere with allowable development or use of adjacent private property. II. A replacement WCF at the JeffCom911 site would not comply with JCC 18.42.090(1)(d) setback standards. While all facilities existing on July 12, 1999 are allowed to continue as presently exist and will be considered nonconforming where they do not comply with Ch. 18.42 JCC, any physical change or alteration to the appearance, size, or operation of the facility must comply with Ch. 18.42 JCC. JCC 18.42.110. JCC 18.42.060(2)requires that equipment be installed"at or near the base" of the WCF, and that the equipment shelter and related equipment shall comply with equipment standards of the applicable zone and JCC 18.42.090, including setbacks,height limits,bulk, landscaping, and screening. As shown, the equipment shelter would not comply with the applicable setback from Coyle Road. Moreover,there would not be sufficient space within the existing easement over adjacent private property for landscaping required by County code. III. A replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site and at the American Tower Company monopole site cannot be utilized without doubling the impacts on the community. A replacement tower at the JeffCom911 site would not comply with County code and would result in a significant increase in the intensity of the use over the existing nonconforming use, including visual impacts and the size and scale of structures and landscaping. Unlike AT&T's proposed WCF,which would be screened by existing trees, a 200' replacement WCF tower at the JeffCom911 site would be directly visible at some distance to vehicles and pedestrians along Coyle Road. A replacement tower, equipment shelter, and landscaping at the JeffCom911 site would also occupy more than 100 percent of the land area occupied by the current use. The suggestion within the Gunnerson letters that a combination of replacement towers at the JeffCom911 tower site and at an ATC tower site at 11296 Coyle Road should be used to provide coverage would mean a doubling of impacts on the community. Constructing two replacement WCF towers along Coyle Road results in double the impacts on the community than impacts from a single WCF that does provide coverage addressing the existing coverage gap. Exhibit A,RF Justification, depicts the existing significant LTE 700 MHz coverage gap.4 A comparison between Exhibit B,RF Justification, and 4 AT&T RF engineers determined the gap in AT&T's network as a result of analyzing a combination of customer complaints,service requests,and RF engineering design analysis,and designed the proposed WCF to provide LTE 700 MHz coverage at acceptable signal strength for voice and data coverage outdoors,in buildings,and in vehicles. The proposed WCF will also address capacity within the AT&T network,reducing the number of dropped calls and otherwise addressing AT&T customer reported service issues in the area. ,µ LOG !TF.M #1' Page 6 0 _ DEC 9 2014 December 9, 2014 Page 5 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Exhibits C, D, and E,RE Justification, shows that the single WCF proposed by AT&T best addresses the existing gap and coverage objectives, at half the impacts, when compared to two new WCF towers up to 200'. Necessary coverage cannot be obtained from the ATC tower at 11296 Coyle Road suggested by the Gunnerson letters, even if replaced by a taller tower,because it is approximately 1.9 miles south of AT&T's proposed WCF location and is too far away to fill the coverage gap.5 See Exhibit D and Exhibit E,RE Justification, attached. A replacement WCF tower at 200' at the JeffCom911 site would also fail to provide coverage necessary to fill the existing coverage gap. See Exhibit C,RE Justification, attached. IV. Response to Additional Public Comment Public comment received by the County in October and November 2014 references concerns about health effects,property values, visual impacts, and alternative site and colocation analysis. We appreciate and respect the opportunity to ask questions about RF emissions of the proposed WCF. But Section 332(c)(7) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not allow a local government to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of wireless facilities on the basis of the health effects of RF emissions to the extent that the facility complies with FCC regulations. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv). As shown in the Applicant's NIER Report, dated August 16, 2013 and on file with the County, the proposed facility would comply with FCC regulations. Consistent with the federal Ninth Circuit's decision, which governs in Washington State, any rationale based on concerns about potential health effects of RF emissions or declining property values based on concerns about those potential effects is an improper basis for the County's permit decision under federal law. See AT&T Wireless Servs. Of Cal, LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2003); MetroPCS, Inc. v. City& County of S.F., 400 F.3d 715, 733 (9th Cir. 2005). Moreover, concerns about property values are not a criterion for review of the conditional use permit application under County code, so a conditional use permit decision based on such concerns is an improper basis for the decision. Concerns about property values s Aerial GoogleEarth photograph depict antennas installed at the top of the existing ATC tower at 11296 Coyle Road. Thus,any additional antennas would need to be mounted below or above the existing antennas. Interestingly,though the September 13,2014 Gunnerson email states the ATC installation is permitted for 200',this statement is not supported by the County's online permit record for Case No. BLD99-00468 approving a building permit for a 150'monopole with 3 attached whip antennas. There is no indication of a later permitted or approved modification. Moreover,AT&T has not obtained access to the ATC tower,and the Gunnerson letters offer no evidence that Mr.Gunnerson is authorized to grant access to the tower. Even if the ATC tower could be replaced at a greater height,a WCF tower more than 150' at this location would likely have increased visibility to the Rural Residential 1:5 parcels locajec_^ ITEM directly south,east,and southeast of the ATC tower site. L�J V Page ofd • J C J _ [\ J DEC 9 2014 December 9, 2014 � Page 6 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT within public comment received by the County are not supported by studies, analyses, or other expert facts. A decision based on community displeasure and not on findings backed by policies and standards, as the law requires, is an improper decision. Marantha Mining, Inc., et al., v. Pierce County, et al., 59 Wn.App. 795, 805 (1990). The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 also disallows a jurisdiction's prohibition or effective prohibition of wireless service. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II). There is an "effective prohibition of service"where a wireless provider shows (1)there is an effective absence of coverage in the area surrounding the proposed facility and(2)there is a lack of reasonable alternative sites to provide coverage. See T—Mobile Northeast LLC v. Fairfax Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 672 F.3d 259, 268 (4th Cir.2012) (internal citation omitted); T-Mobile v. Anacortes, 572 F 3d 987, 995 (9th Cir 2009). A significant gap exists when a provider is prevented from filling a significant gap in its own coverage. MetroPCS, at 733 (emphasis added). Because AT&T has shown a significant gap in its own coverage, any argument that coverage is otherwise available in the area through wireless providers other than AT&T is not a proper basis for the conditional use permit decision. See Exhibit A,RF Justification. Visual impacts were squarely addressed in the Applicant's August 15, 2014 response to the County information request and information submitted by the Applicant to the County, in compliance with JCC 18.42.040(1)(j). As shown in photo simulations on file with the County, existing trees will substantially screen the proposed WCF. Alternative site and colocation analysis was also squarely addressed in the August 15, 2014 response and information submitted by the Applicant to the County, in compliance with JCC 18.42.040(1)(i),JCC 18.42.060, JCC 18.42.070(3), and JCC 18.42.080. The application complies with the JCC 18.42.070(3) colocation procedure, and the August 15, 2014 response and accompanying information submitted by the Applicant provides a detailed alternative site analysis, in compliance with 18.42.040(1)(i), JCC 18.42.060, and JCC 18.42.080. Additional information about the viability of the existing JeffCom911 tower site and ATC tower site is included in this response. As shown,the application complies with applicable County code review criteria. We deeply appreciate County staff's time and effort in reviewing the application. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC LOG ITEM pace . off ._.. e11,2! IR ; o x EMBEINee► — •peJengea'ppmJnoA °° I: � g 0 UI4,IE:LUi i r 1 mw3 vel� ?: V a m 0 ` ° N - N a ,- o 1 6. lhl ' v = neeeoe sg6 8 o Z g NO rg w O l 0 Q ° FOO 0 s% 0 N EWwa w y8 6 = LL Z It J € - o I °= o so s w tjw ,E ww° Qa �t,,,?.o„ w„ s Z a 2 °�g6o f m2 Z Z o 5o w w &-a U-� a_16-LL',-.g LL O H IR .gaNR°wEp ii: °a 3O ~ Ww0m�W 0-Z u'0iuxigj ■ • o;�; 0 — zee& ap ^ r. n1,'L+ 'PEXIGpea'ppommo,� is, ," �€ 2!I 0 � �� ;i f �♦ luillJ�ws role ✓` ( �� e m' 44 J � of 1 `/ Pin m u T1 @ 4FF. tea... m J ■ , oo a_.., l S 7 S 2 p _�eEBq 2a ' wil call: Ell; ihi air@ el yy 3e Ea �;. ? E���SE eS 9a sl h E d r>o [nu r_f—r- W i Q F bk XX �,7 a A i Z .' ' Q w 4 dY°' u-YI ;o Flo a ., 4 �a' 1x s� „7-1 :, � a .: ,5 .2 §%,..,..„ ,. '< R� �A —��---1--i" '' i1. I t E� ,1 V eb e� �"iii ''l 111 f- ! 1p .;5 '' e+} X511 R c p 40 i aa§p` I ll- ! i g I S ,00'05 Sa?ULION a Pt i LIP � 8 i` P- 1 1 r kg pp° a SAS a tgAT _ 4grq i i i a41xrt a ,],, '7111 § -" $� ' i" ll _ .00'os zro<cloN 4 S.Q E q - 4∎,'N' '-' - 'JYR Aa g tai 4 y i y¢�p P t° i F yy} 'Iiia¢a '0° !; 3 yep k' y� ; 3$S 3 R ELY �i i i' Bi Z�. k -ate $ [p6 d 8f 0 U 6 y wk r'e i LL 3 � . i -.5e, _ _sad- t\ 7,,,'1.-:)° I l I - -o , ,,R Cii' _,/ ' / w 1 -/ :,, , --- vi i sa t Y 1 8 a S L oQ EE W I 11 II igG S cp W 6 0 p JCL ` _ v `F, -73 cn Z �. fil\p\-'''---T----' 1 r\ I.i O _ 1} J u- , l_- LOG ITEM #—j -- page page to — — ElE1000111111111 iii ll i " I . pa.ppomosoA ,,i' .r,t 2 1 )L1114Je paien WS l'ele 0 . g RI gi', ., " IV rn•e, c' 40 i** 6°442 f'' 6 000001111 IQ 'L7 g nomemmil ull..1 2 g 0 0 si u. 1- z 0 w r, 0 2 4 0 e ,I,Ifl f 2704 ...la V In U163,0.LV — — \ \ _ ., . ....... *- 4' !\ ‘'l k. V-.'T'si,\A.''.,.,`--7'-"r'--''—"7/" -.-,v 1'•r-\'''''''a.i,-'3■;''4'-..':(j''\\\;‘,.'.\-- a \\ R A! A ( ' / I 1 )avaLs tomoi /I :,- ..-- ' I '4 ; ' \,,,05,0, .'1'•!•,,. \ Ca. 1 I Vt• '' • • I ...- •,• cT, r I s''4. ;- •\ I ' r , \ ,.Li, t, r g 5 — 1 r. \ 1., , i , \ . \\ :i \ ;:i ,,,,,!..; : ' 0 ,Is a% S 1 ,4 \ N tr, e';',_' ',75 V, 1 I ... t'S \ Voi \ V 8 2 2 I 1 _ ' 11 i 2° I 6 . \ . 1 I g.:= 2 tp I \ I \ A \ . , I 4 4..% . -...1 7 .. , \ i 1 •d) r! \ \ \\\ • I \ I I I . I \ I I I I _ _. . g I U U.I --, 0 IY 0 8 1^3.' , ''',' C.L • . P 2 ■ \ $ ■ cci• d i'' 6 I:i, g 2 iIi, C3 ' I 4/to -= r.... C:$ C■I c.a cc) .... ir L*1 Lo , ,....._ ,, .,,...,,..____,..,..... — ----1- - .„... .,...., cl , , • — --, ;� rc �UI' @WS peJenhIap'ppon\Jnok "_ .'€ • g N.t.�I )1 . tl m e o 'w w o r�� R1 E m" 8� w Q �I = ooh nelloym LT, i € s o 8 g e g x 3 a Y Y g 0 li W § 4 g 5 <S i 4 0 `a g q 2 s b 0 a i § W€5i iw 8 d o : g I 3 8 sE L sW E: "° F g d; g 2 2 0 a a s g m 1 2 g a r x 1;< po ! :! r & 0E ct 8 8 86 8 8 t?, 8 '- 8 28 8 8 8 8. 8 8 8 8 8 g 8 8 8�8z 8 88 8 8� z£6 ,68 zu6 p 2 g2 g 2 g g g g g g $ 8 2 g2 g g s g g 8 S g� g g<g8 g< 14;5 tat °000000000® 0000 O ®009®®®0®® ®00 h_ „ - .... 7..._ A n A WdOH 3NLL -_ � __—� /, -----_ _,-584 F " U §g G W �_�_, o z 31tl0'JNIMS *------'n-------..-____ � � m 0 �_— rc nn��,. �''�_,�'—_- _— .P.ZL 03SOdOild Q On bn�— '"�— • OZ ------- _ �y - -; o: . . O • 0 o i. S L J 1 0 O7�� w o ■ AI n V 1 M3113NS I , 11,131.1.111103 1 0© .S'.LL 03SOdOtld '''' z ' L W J L J — C- . J c— ONIONVNara IL g ' tl3Ntl 3Stl3'103�N3d.QU$181tl 03SOdONd , \ a a " - W C LOG IT Olt Page a oft _____ S ammo i.puominoA t...../.. 3W L2'1 Da • i 1,,,,4 d 0 i I c.c1 )1U111Jews vw""" .,•% . . Lg 1 1 FAN % 2 d , ! 6 EoPi 0 0!- i z - E R LI i g 3ff 0 0 1 ' 4 - ' 1111111 11 p k'l i: MI s `, 4 811! El a Es u.I.9. hi,6 . . U 0 le.iL,0 al4 0 U • 1 -e- 1 2 t gE !th ---- 9 .oy ; .; i j . . ,-------- ,t , , , -- urn i_Li----": - ----' io , • .4.• .u... _ __ ___ _ __ ..____ — ilimik IL g „A . iti, i.. • 0;1 I • V, §, 1 P 4. I. 4. E_■11 E' ), F.- .---- — Z . 0_ Pi_ E_ . ..,..t. _, 0 :, ,- 0 . c=, , 0 7, -II . ,,, . rz.• 7 CC L..1 ›, b 0 1.,.. CD b.0 C...) --" u_ IL 11 CD III -- irl.. 0 7-1 LA-1( Z 11 , (-- ----__ _ Pa—ge,_13 460 �� o�� J Dec. 13 2006 01:21P11 P3 III .A. 4 ~. J y 1N : . JEFFERSON 3[1NTY P' { t �`, y - , t € y PLANNING AND BUILD G DEPARTMENT y' R; V O. Box 1220 +f y'"t, ,4 11'._ � ' Port 1hwn4end, Washington 98Ah8 Manning l'utsN: ' fit L •' "` Y om_ _ Building{0)3gs-9147 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE FAX(206)985 4)357 Craig Ward, Director April 20, 1993 .--/�,`'3 24 , J c� Mel Mefford, Sheriff „Al), Jefferson County Sheriff's Department . 87 Elkins Road .o Port Hadlook, WA 98339 �. 'P� �' 1_u� Re: Coyle Peninsula radio relay tower. ' ' t '� Dear Mel: Y 4.:° '' ,���`\< . R }^ Craig Ward, Zoning found that it con forms to Administrator,trequirementsl your application and of section IX subsection 1(a)-(d) of the Administrative Rules, and section 12 of the Jefferso County Emergency Zoning Ordinance, No. 1-0106-91. A review of the relevant provisions of the indicates that replacement of the Count Emergency Zoning ordinance, Road with a new tower can be y's existing radio tower on Coyle Department. processed administratively by the Section 12, "Expansion, Alteration or that "the expansion, alteration, or Change in Use, "e (page 28) fisting conforming or nonconforming use is subject usp of any existing ordinance." Due to the ambi object to the provisions of one Zoning Administrator has 9uity inherent in this sweeping statements define and clarify this languageulQeted administrative rules to further In this regard, section IX of t ninon expansion the administrative rules states that a administratively by the Zoning Administrator pages 17 Administrative Rules) , cc r i may be approved �3 and 18 of the t o a rt en °u a 1i atio s ve O O N � J�r c»1 0-) r_ c1 0 I _ .O ITEM .- -. , • 0 j s _ 9 2C Lirl FROM :3ef r Co Fire No 2 FAX NO. :3607653960 Dec. 13 2006 01: JEF SON COUNTY DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMFY 4AY 03 '93 1E::13 B <E~< COkiThLCTION INC. BAKER CONSTRUCTION, INC. MIGEITAIO,1 P,O. Box 327 BREMERTON, WA 98310 LETTER (206) 377.3635 FAX (206) 377.4809 ,�r`7 J'y ,p.. Crc/..4.e ,� Date -3 /'17 fr' .?/ subject . 30.k 47 , C5' • —___" 5" ‘ 0 - J ____„_________ _ ....._,......._ _ r /'7� Per/Z /°4c., lC.°.�.7'.„<.„A 5 .fir-.✓rs4/ ,r- y X1,94.C. 7`10 w Z 45"5.1.5— .Z,',2 v v ! 4-i ,Y'r.o y,• S- ; _ G°�.r e E - 7 k c 1 iv4'.4sL,e"r Pe.••• -.✓_s' 3f .,C1.4 c c c. c.et-%.-. ..,/ ' l4./4/t /.v 6 “./..4?c 4- 1 C7,/f" l Py ' � o `7"ca �/Q �,�" /'C 2.F-‘,lc 1•1.441C E ..yam w,r� %701 P'Jrce'+✓",> /.3U,il1a / A*E"d?c,/.e.it ,4 I LOG [TEM I i i i Plmse reply . Rio reply neccnsrry �;iH�n ��� S � ,, fix; *rc .., I�V 1�� �i DEC 92014 BUSCH _r�WFI' PLLC JEFFERSON COUNTY 1 DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT August 13, 2014 Ms. Colleen Zmolek, Associate Planner Development Review Division Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend,WA 98368 SUBMITTED VIA EMAIL TD: czmolek @co Jefferson.wa.us Re: Site Address: 9395 Coyle Rd., Quilcene,WA CASE#: MLA13-00116 AT&T BR0266 Bangor Canal Dear Ms. Zmolek: On behalf of New Cingular Wireless PCS,LLC ("AT&T"),thank you for the opportunity to respond to the County's November 27,2013 request for information on the above- referenced application,to respond to public comment subsequently received by the County, and to address how the application meets County Type II administrative conditional use permit review criteria. We understand that you are the County planner recently assigned to review the application, and appreciate the opportunity to work with you. The following response addresses the County's request and public comments. I. JeffCom911 Existing Structure(Coyle Rd.) An existing JeffCom911 structure is located in Jefferson County right-of-way adjacent to 8630 Coyle Rd., Quilcene,WA(Parcel No. 601023007). The structure is approximately 90' tall,with two Omni antennas extending to 100'. In its November 27,2013 information request,the County advised the Applicant to contact Karl Hatton, JeffCom911 Director, about the possibility of collocating on the structure. The Applicant initially contacted Mr. Hatton on January 9, 2014. At the time the Applicant filed the application with the County,the structure was unavailable for colocation because, among other reasons,JeffCom911 could not show clear ownership and rights to the structure. As a result, and because colocation analysis was not required under JCC 18.42.060 and .070,the Applicant filed the application with the County proposing a new structure at 9395 Coyle Rd., Quilcene,WA(Parcel No. 601101003) (the SEATTLE LOS ANGELES DENVER PORTLAND BEND Kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com1 G STEM t 425.628.2665 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 f 206.219.6717 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 www.wirelesscounsel.com • j„� DEC 9 2014 August 15, 2014 i � ; Page 2 t� JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT "Property"). Since then,the Applicant has executed a lease with the owner of the Property, and has advised JeffCom911 that colocation opportunities would be available on the proposed structure at commercially reasonable rates. The Applicant has not received any favorable response to its offer from JeffCom911 to date. II. Colocation Procedure(JCC 18.42.060; JCC 18.42.070) After the Applicant filed the application with the County proposing a new structure at 9395 Coyle Rd.,the County requested that the Applicant complete the JCC 18.42.070 colocation procedure. The Applicant has complied with the County's request. The Applicant participated in a pre-application conference with the County. See Pre- Submittal Conference Application Notes, currently on file with the County. The Applicant also mailed a colocation notice to all other wireless providers licensed to provide service within Jefferson County in accord with JCC 18.42.070(2). See enclosed Colocation Notice, dated April 15,2014,with attached U.S.Mail Certified Mail receipts. JCC 18.42.070(3)requires an applicant to make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of colocation if a positive response to the colocation notice is received. A letter from Bryon Gunnerson, Gunnerson Consulting and Communication Site Services LLC ("GCCSS")to the County, dated February 18, 2014, states that"JeffCom911 is open and willing to allow AT&T to modify or add height to the JeffCom911 Coyle Road Tower site in order to meet AT&T's objectives for its operations." In compliance with JCC 18.42.070(3), the Applicant has made a good faith effort to investigate the feasibility of colocation on the JeffCom911 structure by completing the County's requirements under JCC 18.42.070(3)(a)—(e), as shown in the following response: a. A statement from a qualified engineer indicating whether the necessary service can or cannot be provided by colocation at the potential colocation site; JCC 18.42.040(1)(i)requires that the Applicant submit"information necessary to determine the intended service area of the facility which may include a map of the intended service area." The Applicant's coverage objectives are to improve outdoor, indoor, and in vehicle coverage along Blueberry Hill Drive, Coyle Road, Kens Way, Camp Harmony Road, Old Coyle Road, and Lemonds Road, along with extending coverage to the area in the vicinity of Bangor Trident Base and US Naval Reservation. Exhibit A within the attached radiofrequency justification and propagation maps, produced by a qualified radiofrequency ("RF") engineer, depicts the gap in 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage that exists within the applicant's network. As shown in Exhibit A,this gap exists even with the coverage provided by AT&T's other existing and planned WCFs in the vicinity. Though JeffCom911 may have obtained clear ownership to the structure in the Jefferson County right-of-way adjacent to 8630 Coyle Rd. since the Applicant filed the application,ITEM ►ate ( 'v----TAT iI v, � 9 2014 i August 15, 2014 JEFFERSON COUNTY Page 3 ^ °� OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT the JeffCom911 structure is not available for colocation. JCC 18.42.030(2)(f) defines "colocation"as"the placement of two or more antenna systems or platforms by separate FCC license holders on a support structure or alternative support structure." In this case, as determined by a qualified RF engineer,the Applicant requires a 200' minimum height in the vicinity to meet AT&T's coverage objectives and address its existing low band 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage gap. The structure is only 90' tall, and thus no"placement of two or more antenna systems"is possible on the structure that would address AT&T's existing coverage gap and meet its coverage objectives. Even if colocation were possible on the JeffCom911 structure,the necessary service cannot be provided by colocation at the potential colocation site. As depicted in the attached narrative and RF propagation maps,produced by a qualified RF engineer,the existing 4G LTE 700 MHz coverage gap and AT&T's coverage objectives would not be addressed by antennas at a 200' height at the location of the JeffCom911 structure. A comparison of Exhibit B and Exhibit C of the attached radiofrequency propagation maps shows an inferior amount of acceptable coverage resulting from a 200' tall installation broadcasting a 4G LTE 700 MHz signal at the JeffCom911 site than from a 200' facility at the proposed site. As shown within Exhibit C, coverage from a 200' installation at the JeffCom911 site would not reach the area along Coyle Road south of approximately Kens Way, including Coyle Road and Camp Harmony Road. In addition,the existing JeffCom911 structure is outside the Applicant's search ring, or area where a site may be located in order to provide service in the desired coverage area, as illustrated in the response to public comment below. b. Evidence that the lessor of the potential colocation site either agrees or disagrees to colocation on their property; A letter from Bryon Gunnerson, Gunnerson Consulting and Communication Site Services LLC ("GCCSS")to the County, dated February 18, 2014, states that"JeffCom911 is open and willing to allow AT&T to modify or add height to the JeffCom911 Coyle Road Tower site in order to meet AT&T's objectives for its operations." Because a 200' minimum height is necessary to address AT&T's existing coverage gap and meet its coverage objectives,AT&T could not collocate on the existing 90' JeffCom911 structure. Instead, a new 200' structure would be needed within the County right-of-way. c. Evidence that adequate site area exists or does not exist at the potential colocation site to accommodate needed equipment and meet all of the site development standards; AT&T could not collocate on the existing 90' JeffCom911 structure. Instead,a new 200' structure would be needed within the County right-of-way to address the existing gap in AT&T's network and to meet its coverage objectives. In addition to a new structure, AT&T would also require ground space to locate its equipment shelter and related equipment. The February 18, 2014 Gunnerson letter states the space JeffCom9LLl®G ITEM Pte • • EC EUVL. \ . h u rn` 9 2014 ,August 15, 2014 Page 4 NTY DEPT.OF COMMUNITY JEFFERSON COU DEVELOPMENT currently leases from the County within the County right-of-way includes an approximately 21' x 11' "expansion area"within the right-of-way that would provide space for AT&T's shelter and equipment. But AT&T typically requires a larger approximately 50' x 50' leased area to accommodate its equipment shelter and related equipment. See Zoning Drawings, currently on file with the County. Even if there were adequate site area to accommodate a 200' WCF and associated 50' x 50' lease area at the existing JeffCom911 structure site, it is uncertain whether such a WCF and lease area would comply with Chapter 13.60 JCC and Chapter 13.56 JCC development standards for construction in the right-of-way, as no permit application for such construction has been filed with the County for review. Any required landscape buffer,maintenance vehicle access from Coyle Road, or emergency vehicle access from Coyle Road would require additional area beyond the designated"expansion area"within County right-of- way. Given the approximate 20' width between the edge of the Coyle Road pavement and adjacent private property line, it is uncertain whether enough space exists to accommodate shelter,related equipment, access, and any required buffer. The Applicant would need to obtain the necessary permits and necessary private landowner permission for any aspect of a proposed WCF that would extend onto adjacent private property. d. Evidence that adequate access does or does not exist at the potential colocation site; The designated 11' x 21' "expansion area"noted in the February 18, 2014 Gunnerson letter does not include access. While there may be public right-of-way access from Coyle Road it is unknown whether this existing access would satisfy County requirements for , necessary sight distance or emergency vehicle turn-around space. e. Nonproprietary technical information to evaluate the feasibility of colocation. JCC 18.42.070 recognizes that"colocation of antennas by providers is not always feasible for technical or business reasons." To ensure a minimum 200' height would be available at the JeffCom911 site,the existing 90' structure at the site would need to be removed and replaced with a new WCF at least 200' tall financed exclusively by the Applicant but seemingly owned by JeffCom911. If a new 200' structure needs to be constructed in any case, it is not commercially feasible for the Applicant to invest the funds necessary to construct the tower but not retain full ownership and control of the tower and associated equipment. In addition, any 200' structure at the location within the County right-of-way would be highly visible to those travelling along Coyle Road. III. Photo Simulations Please see enclosed additional photo simulations,View 1 —View 5. These photo simulations address JCC 18.42.040(1)(j)requirements for photographic views. No balloon test requirements are set forth within JCC 18.42.040 application submittal and LOG ITEM # Ia a. Pase t9 of J • • Colleen Zmolek .� _ V m� From: Colleen Zmolek J Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 8:50 AM `'' To: Suzanne McDermott D K 3 0 2014 Subject: RE: A T&T CeII Tower MLA13-00116 _ o JEFFERSON COUNTY Hi Suzanne, DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I am currently working on the staff report and do not have a time frame for the decision on the cell tower application, MLA 13-00116. My goal is to have a decision by late January or early February. As a party of interest you will be notified of the decision. Happy Holidays. CoCCeen. Zmolek Associate Planner, Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4462 czmolekaco.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County DCD Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 12.56 RC\V' Our office is open to the public 9:00 a.m.-4:3o p.m. Monday to Thursday,closed Fridays. From:Zoe Ann Lamp Sent:Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:10 AM To: Suzanne McDermott Cc: Colleen Zmolek Subject: RE: A T&T Cell Tower Ms. McDermott, Several months ago I accepted a position in Public Works so I no longer review permit applications. Colleen Zmolek is the planner who has been assigned to this project. I have cc'd her on this email so she can respond to you. Sincerely, Zoe Ann Lamp, AICP Transportation Planner Jefferson County Department of Public Works 623 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Ph: 360.385.9162 Fax: 360.385.9234 Email: zlamp@co.jefferson.wa.us Web: www.co.lefferson.wa..us/publicworks From: Suzanne McDermott [mailto:zardof@msn.com] Sent:Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:05 AM LOG ITEM To: Zoe Ann Lamp ( �2 Subject: A T&T Cell Tower J 1 • • Dear Zoe Ann: Could you give us the current status or an update on when a decision may be made on their building permit application? Thank you. Ron & Suzanne McDermott 360-437-8036 zardof @msn.com E 3 0 2014 ti 1 � JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPT.OE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOG ITEM 2 • • Colleen Zmolek F, C HIVE E -\-q D From: Colleen Zmolek Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 8:50 AM DEC 3 0 2014 To: 'Kristen Larson' Subject: RE: CASE#MLA13-00116 information request- response tp a•• - -4----,f J FERSIN • N DEPT.OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Kristen, I have received the documents. I am working on the staff report. My goal is to have a decision by the end of January or early February. Thank you and Happy Holidays, Colleen. Zmolek Associate Planner, Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4462 czmolek c(Dco.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County DCD Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. All e-mail sent to this address vvi11 be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 1(C W. Our office is open to the public 9:oo a.m.-4:30 p.m. Monday to Thursday,closed Fridays. From: Kristen Larson [mailto:kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com] Sent:Tuesday, December 09, 2014 4:14 PM To: Colleen Zmolek Cc: Ken Lyons; Erin Lane; Kimberly Spongberg Subject: Re: CASE#MLA13-00116 information request- response to additional public comment Dear Colleen, Thank you again for the chance to review additional public comment received by the County on the proposal at our November 6, 2014 meeting. In addition to the response provided on November 16, 2014, I've attached a response to additional public comment on behalf of AT&T. I believe the attached addresses all points raised in the public comment, but if not, please let us know so that we may supplement the response. The attached response includes a narrative dated December 9, 2014,with the following attachments: • April 20, 2013 Jefferson County Planning and Building Department letter, with attached May 3, 1993 Baker Construction, Inc. memorandum • RF Justification, with Exhibits A-E • Exhibit B, Grant of Easement, County Rec. No. 545503 (August 3, 2009) • Zoning Drawings, dated August 27, 2013 • Copy of Applicant's August 15, 2014 response to County information request Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information, and we appreciate your time and consideration of the attached. Best, LOG ITEM 1 Ian._. • Kristen. ' Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St.#75604 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com From: Kristen Larson<kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Date:Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 9:25 AM To: Colleen Zmolek<CZmolek @co.jefferson.wa.us> Cc: Ken Lyons<ken.lyons @wirelesscounsel.com> Subject: Re: Response to 11/6 information request Good morning Colleen, Confirming that in addition to the list of items received 11/6/14,we are still working on and intend to submit a response to the most recent public comment received by the County, copies of which we received when we met that day. We will have that additional information to you as soon as possible. Best, Kristen. Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St. #75604 Seattle, WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com From: Kristen Larson<kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com> Date:Sunday, November 16, 2014 at 5:01 PM To: Colleen Zmolek<CZmolek @co.jefferson.wa.us> Cc: Ken Lyons<ken.lyons@wirelesscounsel.com> Subject: Response to 11/6 information request Dear Colleen, Thanks so much for your time this past week. Please extend our thanks to Stacie as well. On behalf of applicant AT&T, I've attached a response to the information request received from the County on 11/6/14. I believe the information attached addresses all points raised during our discussion, but if not, please let us know. Please don't hesitate to contact me by phone or email if I can answer any questions or provide any additional information. Have a good start to the week! Best, Kristen. 2 3 • • Kristen J. Larson Busch Law Firm PLLC 93 S.Jackson St.#75604 Seattle,WA 98104-2818 425-628-2665 Office 608-469-7353 Wireless 206-327-9049 Fax kristen.larson @wirelesscounsel.com www.WirelessCounsel.com LrY7i ITEM 3 'as- _, . of • Colleen Zmolek From: Colleen Zmolek Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 12:00 PM To: 'Suzanne McDermott' Subject: RE: A T& T Cell Tower MLA13-00116 Hi Suzanne, Still working on decision, staff report and SEPA. I expect to have all complete in the next month. As an interested party you will receive a copy of the decision and a link to all scanned documents in the file. Thank you for your patience. Sincerely, Colleen ZmoCek Associate Planner, Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4462 czmolekco.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County DCD Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW. Our office is open to the public 9:oo a.m.-4:30 p.m. Monday to Thursday,closed Fridays. From:Suzanne McDermott [mailto:zardof @msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 2:12 PM To: Colleen Zmolek Subject: RE: A T&T Cell Tower MLA13-00116 Colleen: Have there been any recent update(s).? We have still not heard from or received any notice from the county regarding this permit process. Thank you for your reply. Suzanne McDermott 12 Machias Loop Port Ludlow, WA 98365 360-437-8036 LOG ITEM • • Prom: CZmolek @co.lefferson.wa.0 To: zardof @msn.com Subject: RE: A T &T Cell Tower MLA13-00116 Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 16:49:34 +0000 Hi Suzanne, I am currently working on the staff report and do not have a time frame for the decision on the cell tower application, MLA 13-00116. My goal is to have a decision by late January or early February. As a party of interest you will be notified of the decision. Happy Holidays. Colleen ZmoCek Associate Planner, Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4462 czmolekco.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County DCD Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter P2.5( HCW. Our office is open to the public 9:Oo a.m.-4:30 p.m. Monday to Thursday,closed Fridays. From: Zoe Ann Lamp Sent:Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:10 AM To: Suzanne McDermott Cc: Colleen Zmolek Subject: RE: A T&T Cell Tower Ms. McDermott, Several months ago I accepted a position in Public Works so I no longer review permit applications. Colleen Zmolek is the planner who has been assigned to this project. I have cc'd her on this email so she can respond to you. Sincerely, Zoe Ann Lamp, AICP Transportation Planner Jefferson County Department of Public Works 623 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend,WA 98368 Ph: 360.385.9162 Fax: 360.385.9234 Email: zlamp @co.iefferson.wa.us Web: www.co.iefferson.wa..us/publicworks From:Suzanne McDermott [mailto:zardof@msn.com] ! `EM Sent:Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:05 AM To:Zoe Ann Lamp .... Subject: A T&T Cell Tower : 3■ Dear Zoe Ann: Could you give us the current status or an update on when a decision may be made on their building 2 • • permit application? Thank you. Ron & Suzanne McDermott 360-437-8036 zardof @msn.com LOG ITEM gas Chapter 173-60 WAC: M .IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 1 of 9 WASHINGTON STATE EG ‘ 'T A U ch WACs>Title 173>Chapter 173-60 Inside the Legislature • Find Your Legislator Last Update: 12/6/00 • Visiting the Legislature Chapter 173-60 WAC • Agendas, schedules and MAXIMUM ENVIRONMENTAL Calendars • Bill Information NOISE LEVELS • Laws and Agency Rules • Legislative Committees Chapter Listing • Legislative Agencies • Legislative Information WAC Sections Center • E-mail Notifications 173-60_010 Authority and purpose. it Civic Education • History of the State 173-60-020 Definitions. Legislature 173-60-030 Identification of environments. 173-60-040 Maximum permissible environmental noise Outside the Legislature levels. Congress-the Other 173-60-050 Exemptions. Washington • TVW 173-60-060 Nuisance regulations not prohibited. • Washington Courts 173-60-070 Reserved. • OFM Fiscal Note Website 173-60-080 Variances and implementation schedules. 173-60-090 Enforcement policy. Access Washingtono 173-60-100 Appeals. 173-60-110 Cooperation with local government. 173-60-120 Effective date. 173-60-010 Authority and purpose. These rules are adopted pursuant to chapter 70.107 RCW, the Noise Control Act of 1974, in order to establish maximum noise levels permissible in identified environments, and thereby to provide use standards relating to the reception of noise within such environments. Vessels, as defined in RCW 88.12.010(21) and regulated for noise under chapter 88,12 RCW (Regulation of recreational vessels), shall be exempt from chapter 173-60 WAC. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.107 RCW. WSR 94-12-001 (Order 92-41), § 173-60-010, filed 5/18/94, effective 6/18/94; Order 74-32, § 173-60-010, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 2 of 9 173-60-020 Definitions. (1) "Background sound level" means the level of all sounds in a given environment, independent of the specific source being measured. (2) "dBA" means the sound pressure level in decibels measured using the "A" weighting network on a sound level meter. The sound pressure level, in decibels, of a sound is 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound to a reference pressure of 20 micropascals. (3) "Department" means the department of ecology. (4) "Director" means the director of the department of ecology. (5) "Distribution facilities" means any facility used for distribution of commodities to final consumers, including facilities of utilities that convey water, waste water, natural gas, and electricity. (6) "EDNA" means the environmental designation for noise abatement, being an area or zone (environment) within which maximum permissible noise levels are established. (7) "Existing" means a process, event, or activity in an established area, producing sound subject to or exempt from this chapter, prior to the effective date of September 1, 1975. (8) "Local government" means county or city government or any combination of the two. (9) "Noise" means the intensity, duration and character of sounds, from any and all sources. (10) "Person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, governmental body, state agency or other entity whatsoever. (11) "Property boundary" means the surveyed line at ground surface, which separates the real property owned, rented, or leased by one or more persons, from that owned, rented, or leased by one or more other persons, and its vertical extension. (12) "Racing event" means any motor vehicle competition conducted under a permit issued by a governmental authority having jurisdiction or, if such permit is not required, then under the auspices of a recognized sanctioning body. (13) "Receiving property" means real property within which the maximum permissible noise levels specified herein shall not be exceeded from sources outside such property. (14) "Sound level meter" means a device which measures sound pressure levels and conforms to Type 1 or Type 2 as specified in the American National Standards Institute Specification S1.4-1971. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.107 RCW. WSR 94-12-001 (Order 92-41), § 173-60-020, filed 5/18/94, effective 6/18/94; WSR 83-15-046 (Order DE 82-42), § 173-60-020, filed 7/19/83; Order DE 77-1, § 173-60-020, filed 6/1/77; Order 74-32, § 173- 60-020, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.1 IEM tai http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL NS... Page 3 of 9 173-60-030 Identification of environments. (1) Except when included within specific prior designations as provided in subsections (2), (3), and (4) of this section, the EDNA of any property shall be based on the following typical uses, taking into consideration the present, future, and historical usage, as well as the usage of adjacent and other lands in the vicinity. (a) Class A EDNA - Lands where human beings reside and sleep. Typically, Class A EDNA will be the following types of property used for human habitation: (i) Residential (ii) Multiple family living accommodations (iii) Recreational and entertainment, (e.g., camps, parks, camping facilities, and resorts) (iv) Community service, (e.g., orphanages, homes for the aged, hospitals, health and correctional facilities) (b) Class B EDNA - Lands involving uses requiring protection against noise interference with speech. Typically, Class B EDNA will be the following types of property: (i) Commercial living accommodations (ii) Commercial dining establishments (iii) Motor vehicle services (iv) Retail services (v) Banks and office buildings (vi) Miscellaneous commercial services, property not used for human habitation (vii) Recreation and entertainment, property not used for human habitation (e.g., theaters, stadiums, fairgrounds, and amusement parks) (viii) Community services, property not used for human habitation (e.g., educational, religious, governmental, cultural and recreational facilities). (c) Class C EDNA - Lands involving economic activities of such a nature that higher noise levels than experienced in other areas is normally to be anticipated. Persons working in these areas are normally covered by noise control regulations of the department of labor and industries. Uses typical of Class A EDNA are generally not permitted within such areas. Typically, Class C EDNA will be the following types of property: (i) Storage, warehouse, and distribution facilities. (ii) Industrial property used for the production and fabrication of durable and nondurable man-made goods (iii) Agricultural and silvicultural property used for the production of crops, wood products, or livestock. (d) Where there is neither a zoning ordinance in effect nor an adopted comprehensive plan, the legislative authority of local government may, by ordinance or resolution, designate specifically described EDNAs which conform to the above use ITEM l ov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 http://app e g.wa.g Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 4 of 9 criteria and, upon departmental approval, EDNAs so designated shall be as set forth in such local determination. (e) Where no specific prior designation of EDNAs has been made, the appropriate EDNA for properties involved in any enforcement activity will be determined by the investigating official on the basis of the criteria of (a), (b), and (c) of this subsection. (2) In areas covered by a local zoning ordinance, the legislative authority of the local government may, by ordinance or resolution designate EDNAs to conform with the zoning ordinance as follows: (a) Residential zones - Class A EDNA (b) Commercial zones - Class B EDNA (c) Industrial zones - Class C EDNA Upon approval by the department, EDNAs so designated shall be as set forth in such local determination. EDNA designations shall be amended as necessary to conform to zone changes under the zoning ordinance. (3) In areas not covered by a local zoning ordinance but within the coverage of an adopted comprehensive plan the legislative authority of the local government may, by ordinance or resolution designate EDNAs to conform with the comprehensive plan as follows: (a) Residential areas - Class A EDNA (b) Commercial areas - Class B EDNA (c) Industrial areas - Class C EDNA Upon approval by the department EDNAs so designated shall be as set forth in such local determination. EDNA designations shall be amended as necessary to conform to changes in the comprehensive plan. (4) The department recognizes that on certain lands, serenity, tranquillity, or quiet are an essential part of the quality of the environment and serve an important public need. Special designation of such lands with appropriate noise level standards by local government may be adopted subject to approval by the department. The director may make such special designation pursuant to the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 3404 RCW. [Order 74-32, § 173-60-030, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-040 Maximum permissible environmental noise levels. (1) No person shall cause or permit noise to intrude into the property of another person which noise exceeds the maximum permissible noise levels set forth below in this section. aso http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL Na... Page 5 of 9 (2)(a) The noise limitations established are as set forth in the following table after any applicable adjustments provided for herein are applied. EDNA OF EDNA OF NOISE SOURCE RECEIVING PROPERTY Class A Class B Class C CLASS A 55 dBA 57 dBA 60 dBA CLASS B 57 60 65 CLASS C 60 65 70 (b) Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the noise limitations of the foregoing table shall be reduced by 10 dBA for receiving property within Class A EDNAs. (c) At any hour of the day or night the applicable noise limitations in (a) and (b) above may be exceeded for any receiving property by no more than: (i) 5 dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period; or (ii) 10 dBA for a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period; or (iii) 15 dBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period. [Order 74-32, § 173-60-040, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-050 Exemptions. (1) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040 between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.: (a) Sounds originating from residential property relating to temporary projects for the maintenance or repair of homes, grounds and appurtenances. (b) Sounds created by the discharge of firearms on authorized shooting ranges. (c) Sounds created by blasting. (d) Sounds created by aircraft engine testing and maintenance not related to flight operations: Provided, That aircraft testing and maintenance shall be conducted at remote sites whenever possible. (e) Sounds created by the installation or repair of essential utility services. (2) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040 (2)(b): (a) Noise from electrical substations and existing stationary equipment used in the conveyance of water, waste water, and natural gas by a utility. (b) Noise from existing industrial installations which exceed the standards contained in these regulations and which, over the previous three years, have consistently operated in excess of 15 hours per day as a consequence of process necessity and/or demonstrated routine normal operation. Changes in aC ov/WAC/default.as x?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 r http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.as Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 6 of 9 working hours, which would affect exemptions under this regulation, require approval of the department. (3) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040, except insofar as such provisions relate to the reception of noise within Class A EDNAs between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (a) Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity. (b) Sounds originating from forest harvesting and silvicultural activity. (4) The following shall be exempt from all provisions of WAC 173-60-040: (a) Sounds created by motor vehicles when regulated by chapter 173-62 WAC. (b) Sounds originating from aircraft in flight and sounds that originate at airports which are directly related to flight operations. (c) Sounds created by surface carriers engaged in interstate commerce by railroad. (d) Sounds created by warning devices not operating continuously for more than five minutes, or bells, chimes, and carillons. (e) Sounds created by safety and protective devices where noise suppression would defeat the intent of the device or is not economically feasible. (f) Sounds created by emergency equipment and work necessary in the interests of law enforcement or for health safety or welfare of the community. (g) Sounds originating from motor vehicle racing events at existing authorized facilities. (h) Sounds originating from officially sanctioned parades and other public events. (i) Sounds emitted from petroleum refinery boilers during startup of said boilers: Provided, That the startup operation is performed during daytime hours whenever possible. (j) Sounds created by the discharge of firearms in the course of hunting. (k) Sounds caused by natural phenomena and unamplified human voices. (I) Sounds created by motor vehicles, licensed or unlicensed, when operated off public highways EXCEPT when such sounds are received in Class A EDNAs. (m) Sounds originating from existing natural gas transmission and distribution facilities. However, in circumstances where such sounds impact EDNA Class A environments and complaints are received, the director or his designee may take action to abate by application of EDNA Class C source limits to the facility under the requirements of WAC 173-60-050(5). (6) Nothing in these exemptions is intended to preclude the department from requiring installation of the best available noise abatement technology consistent with economic feasibility. The establishment of any such requirement shall be subject to the +ac° 9 http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 7 of 9 provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.04 RCW. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.107 RCW. WSR 94-12-001 (Order 92-41), § 173-60-050, filed 5/18/94, effective 6/18/94; WSR 83-15-046 (Order DE 82-42), § 173-60-050, filed 7/19/83; Order DE 77-1, § 173-60-050, filed 6/2/77; Order 75-18, § 173- 60-050, filed 8/1/75; Order 74-32, § 173-60-050, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-060 Nuisance regulations not prohibited. Nothing in this chapter or the exemptions provided herein, shall be construed as preventing local government from regulating noise from any source as a nuisance. Local resolutions, ordinances, rules or regulations regulating noise on such a basis shall not be deemed inconsistent with this chapter by the department. [Order 74-32, § 173-60-060, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-070 Reserved. Reserved. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.107 RCW. WSR 00-24-134 (Order 00-24), § 173-60-070, filed 12/6/00, effective 1/6/01; WSR 94-12-001 (Order 92-41), § 173-60-070, filed 5/18/94, effective 6/18/94; Order DE 77-1, § 173-60-070, filed 6/1/77; Order 74-32, § 173-60-070, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-080 Variances and implementation schedules. (1) Variances may be granted to any person from any particular requirement of this chapter, if findings are made that immediate compliance with such requirement cannot be achieved because of special circumstances rendering immediate compliance unreasonable in light of economic or (cD(p physical factors, enroachment [encroachment] upon an existing noise source, or because of nonavailability of feasible technology or control methods. Any such variance or renewal http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M•IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL N.... Page 8 of 9 thereof shall be granted only for the minimum time period found to be necessary under the facts and circumstances. (2) An implementation schedule for achieving compliance with this chapter shall be incorporated into any variance issued. (3) Variances shall be issued only upon application in writing and after providing such information as may be requested. No variance shall be issued for a period of more than 30 days except upon due notice to the public with opportunity to comment. Public hearings may be held, when substantial public interest is shown, at the discretion of the issuing agency. (4) Sources of noise, subject to this chapter, upon which construction begins after the effective date hereof shall immediately comply with the requirements of this chapter, except in extraordinary circumstances where overriding considerations of public interest dictate the issuance of a variance. [Order 74-32, § 173-60-080, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-090 Enforcement policy. Noise measurement for the purposes of enforcing the provisions of WAC 173-060-040 shall be measured in dBA with a sound level meter with the point of measurement being at any point within the receiving property. Such enforcement shall be undertaken only upon receipt of a complaint made by a person who resides, owns property, or is employed in the area affected by the noise complained of, EXCEPT for parks, recreational areas, and wildlife sanctuaries. For enforcement purposes pursuant to RCW 70.107.050, each day, defined as the 24-hour period beginning at 12:01 a.m., in which violation of the noise control regulations (chapter 173-60,WAC) occurs, shall constitute a separate violation. [Order DE 76-5, § 173-60-090, filed 2/5/76; Order 74-32, § 173- 60-090, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-100 Appeals. Any person aggrieved by any decision of the department in relation to the enforcement of the maximum permissible noise levels provided for herein, the granting or denial of a variance or ra the approval or disapproval of a local resolution or ordinance for q noise abatement and control may appeal to the pollution control hearings board pursuant to chapter 43.218 RCW under the procedures of chapter 371-08 WAC. http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015 Chapter 173-60 WAC: M,IMUM ENVIRONMENTAL Ne... Page 9 of 9 [Order 74-32, § 173-60-100, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-110 Cooperation with local government. (1) The department conceives the function of noise abatement and control to be primarily the role of local government and intends actively to encourage local government to adopt measures for noise abatement and control. Wherever such measures are made effective and are being actively enforced, the department does not intend to engage directly in enforcement activities. (2) No ordinance or resolution of any local government which imposes noise control requirements differing from those adopted by the department shall be effective unless and until approved by the director. If approval is denied, the department, following submission of such local ordinance or resolution to the department, shall deliver its statement or order of denial, designating in detail the specific provision(s) found to be objectionable and the precise grounds upon which the denial is based, and shall submit to the local government, the department's suggested modification. (3) The department shall encourage all local governments enforcing noise ordinances pursuant to this chapter to consider noise criteria and land use planning and zoning. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.107 RCW. WSR 87-06-056 (Order 86-40), § 173-60-110, filed 3/4/87; Order 74-32, § 173- 60-110, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] 173-60-120 Effective date. This chapter shall become effective on September 1, 1975. It is the intention of the department to periodically review the provisions hereof as new information becomes available for the purpose of making amendments as appropriate. [Order 74-32, § 173-60-120, filed 4/22/75, effective 9/1/75.] ' , http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-60&full=true 3/25/2015