HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 011 - Wireless Telecom FacilitiesREVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending Deschutes County Code
Title 18, Section 18.116.250, Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities, and Section
18.128.340, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities,
to Provide Greater Siting Flexibility for Co -Location
by Removing Specific Restrictions.
ORDINANCE NO. 2010-011
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Planning Division staff initiated a text amendment to Deschutes County
Code ("DCC") Title 18, Section 18.116.250, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, and Section 18.128.34-0,
Wireless Telecommunications Facilities., to provide greater siting flexibility for co -location by removi ig
specific restrictions; and
WHEREAS, after notice was give in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held on
January 28, 2010 before the Deschutes County Planning Commission and, on January 28, 2010 the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the text amendments; and
WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held on
March 1, 2010 before the Board of County Commissioners ("Board"); and
WHEREAS, the Board considered this matter after a public hearing on March 1, 2010 and concluc ed
that the public will benefit from changes to the land use regulations; now therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 18, Section 18.116.250, Wireless Telecommunicatio=ns
Facilities, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "A", attached and incorporated by reference herein, AA ith
new language underlined and deleted language setforth in stri'�.
Section 2. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 18, Section 18.128.340, Wireless Telecommunicatit ns
Facilities, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "B", attached and incorporated by reference herein, 1,1, ith
new language underlined and deleted language setforth in str k h.
///
PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2010-011 (MARCH 17, 2010)
Section 3. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings in support of this decision Exhibit "C",
attached and incorporated by reference herein.
Dated this of , 2010 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Date of 1st Reading: 1st day of March, 2010.
Date of 2nd Reading: 15th day of March, 2010.
DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair
ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair
TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner
Record of Adoption Vote:
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Dennis R. Luke
Alan Unger
Tammy Baney
Effective date: day of , 2010.
PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2010-011 (MARCH 17, 2010)
18.116.250. Wireless Telecommunications Facilities.
A. Tier 1 Facilities. Wireless telecommunications facilities that do not require aviation lighting,
that utilize natural wood colors or muted tones from amongst colors approved by Ordinance 97-
017, that utilize a radio equipment cabinet or shelter that is less than 4-2,0200 square feet in area
and less than 10 feet in height, and that meet the following standards are allowed outright in any
zone other than the Exclusive Farm Use, the Surface Mining Zone, and the Forest Zones and
shall not be subject to any other provision of the zone:
1. Facilities established by co -locating an additional set of antennas on an existing wireless
telecommunications tower or monopole that do not exceed the County approved height of
the tower or monopole, and de- not add- r<st+4 l -kap - nttside the existing -lease
-area. Notwithstanding any provision of DCC 18.116.250(A), facilities established under
DCC 18.116.250(A)(1) are permitted outright in any zoning district.
2. Facilities that make use of existing vertical,. lawfully established...._structures, including but
not limited to power or telephone utility poles or towers, parking lot or street lighting
standards or flagpoles. 1.44 --thy R _ _ 2 4,-A4-, a vertical structure -is
if it v<as-constructed--atter- eiving--all--r uirett e-att >r--bui;€446 € errnits
<,+t ..tar-l3el<at.e... e.3;eittber.._.12, .1.9.97the o(' -adoption -<at--Ordinanee4:7-063-, ... A pole
location in a public right of way shall not be fenced. Antennas established on an existing
vertical structure shall be installed so that they do not exceed the height of the existing
vertical structure by more than 15 feet. New structures in this category are limited to
equipment shelters that do not require a building permit. Walk-in equipment shelters shall
be set back out of any road right of way at least 20 feet back from the pole location. Any
necessary road right of way permits shall be obtained from the Deschutes County Road
Department. Equipment cabinets shall be subject only to the road right of way setback
requirements.
3. Facilities that are established by attaching or placing an antenna or set of antennas on an
existing.. lawfully ...,established building not designated as an historic structure, where the
antenna array does not exceed the height of the building by more than 15 feet. All
equipment shall be stored inside a building. ----1 .t,._.tla..-purpose--d3#=--1:3F::;i.
41.+1-14Jirt -exists if it wa.s constructed atter -feeeiving all recittirtd l nd--t+ e arid/or-building
pets tits tand--...was ecc,tti3led---i:m i3r iielbre November• ....12.. 1997,---the----date-of-adoption---of
Ordinance 97 063.
4. Facilities that include installation of a new wood monopole that does not exceed the height
limit of the underlying zone, and does not exceed 45 feet in height. All equipment shall be
stored in a building that has a t=Hd ioor.._--area that does not exceed 4-202.0 square feet in
area brand does not exceed --10 feet in height. The monopole, and any building, shall be set
back from adjacent property lines according to the setbacks of the underlying zone. Any
microwave dishes installed on the monopole shall not exceed a diameter of threefour --feet.
No more than two dishes shall be installed on a monopole or tower. The perimeter of a
lease area for a facility established under DCC 18.116.250(A)(4 ) shall be landscaped with
shrubs eight feet in height and planted a maximum of 24 inches on center.
B. Tier 2 Facilities. Wireless telecommunications facilities that do not require aviation lighting,
that utilize a wood monopole for supporting antennas and/or microwave dishes and that meet
the criteria in DCC 18.116.250 are allowed outright, subject to site plan review under DCC
18.116.250(8) (and not DCC 18.124.060) in the following zones: La Pine Commercial District
(LPCD), La Pine Industrial District (LPID), Rural Industrial (RI), Rural Service Center (RSC),
Rural Service Center-Wickiup Junction (RSC-WJ), Terrebonne Commercial District (TeC), and
Tumalo Commercial District (TuC). Lattice towers or metal monopoles are not permitted with
a Tier 2 facility.
Page 1 of 2 - Exhibit A to ORDINANCE 2010-011
1. An application for site plan review for a Tier 2 wireless telecommunications facility shall
meet the following criteria:
a. Maximum Monopole Height. In the LPCD, LPID, RSC, RSC-WJ, TeC, and TuC
zones, the maximum height of a monopole,.... inclui<lirag-- that --...pports antennas andIor
microwave dishes for a wireless telecommunications facility shall be 60 feet from
finished grade. In the RI Zone, the maximum height of a monopole.,...._including--that
srrpjxrtt antennas and or microwave dishes, for a wireless telecommunications facility
shall be 75 feet from finished grade.
b. Setbacks. All equipment shelters shall be set back from property lines according to the
required setbacks of the underlying zone. A monopole shall be set back from any
adjacent dwelling a distance equal to the height of the monopole, ..ludi_r s}-antannas
and micro rave d shQs......_from finished grade, or according to the setbacks of the
underlying zone, whichever is greater.
c. Shelters. Any equipment shelter shall be finished with natural aggregate materials or
from colors approved with Ordinance 97-017.
d. Landscaping. The perimeter of a lease area shall be landscaped with plant materials
appropriate for its location. The lessee shall continuously maintain all installed
landscaping and any existing landscaping used to screen a facility.
e. Cabinets. Any equipment cabinets shall be finished with colors from amongst those
colors approved with Ordinance 97-063. Such colors shall be non -reflective and
neutral.
f. Fences. A sight obscuring fence, as defined by DCC Title 18, shall be installed around
the perimeter of the lease area. The sight obscuring fence shall surround the monopole
and the equipment shelter.
C. Tier 3 Facilities. Wireless telecommunications facilities (or their equivalent uses described in
the EFU, Forest, and SM Zones) not qualifying as either a Tier 1 or 2 facility may be approved
in all zones, subject to the applicable criteria set forth in DCC 18.128.330 and 18.128.340.
1. A request for a written determination from the County as to whether a proposed facility
falls within Tiers 1 or 2 of DCC 18.116.250 shall be submitted to the County in writing and
accompanied by a site plan and proposed schematics of the facility. If the County can issue
a written determination without exercising discretion or by making a land use decision as
defined under ORS 197.015(10), the County shall respond to the request in writing.
2. A request for a written determination from the County as to whether a proposed facility
falls within Tiers 1 or 2 of DCC 18.116.250 that involves exercising discretion or making a
land use decision shall be submitted and acted upon as a request for a declaratory ruling
under DCC 22.40.
(Ord. 2010-011 §1, Ord. 2000-19 §1, 2000; Ord. 97-063 §1, 1997; Ord. 97-017 §7, 1997)
Page 2 of 2 — Exhibit A to ORDINANCE 2010-011
18.128.340. Wireless Telecommunications Facilities.
An application for a conditional use permit for a wireless telecommunications facility or its
equivalent in the EFU, Forest, or Surface Mining Zones shall comply with the applicable standards,
setbacks and criteria of the base zone and any combining zone and the following requirements. Site
plan review under DCC 18.124 including site plan review for a use that would otherwise require
site plan review under DCC 18.84 shall not be required.
A. Application Requirements. An application for a wireless telecommunications facility shall
comply with the following meeting, notice, and submittal requirements:
1. Neighborhood Meeting. Prior to scheduling g.._a....1.err-a.pp1ieatieIi.dco ferenc..e....with..._Planning
D" suhiYission.,_ofa land use application for a wireless telecommunications
tI,ih; the applicant shall provide notice of and hold a meeting with interested owners of
property nearby to a potential facility location. 1 o the t neatest extent practicable. the
nui hborluxtd...nicetinr, shal1bc held in the general ......vicinity of the proposed wireless
telecommunications _f..ihty_...._Notice shall be in writing and shall be mailed no less than 10
days prior to the date set for the meeting to owners of record of property within:
a. One thousand three hundred twenty feet for a tower or monopole no greater than 100
feet in height, and
b. Two thousand feet for a tower or monopole at least 100 feet and no higher than 150
feet in height. Such notice shall not take the place of notice required by DCC Title 22.
2. Pre -Application Conference. Applicant shall attend a scheduled pre -application conference
prior to submission of a land use application.'Fite applicant shall provide the prop()scd
location of the required neighborhoodmeeting tingg Ini review h tPlanning Division shill' to
ensure compliance with subsection A(I) above. An application for a wireless
telecommunications facility permit will not be deemed complete until the applicant has had
a pre -application conference with Planning Division staff.
3. Submittal Requirements. An application for a conditional use permit for a wireless
telecommunications facility shall include:
a. A copy of the blank lease form.
b. A copy of the applicant's Federal Communications Commission license.
c. A map that shows the applicant's search ring for the proposed site and the properties
within the search ring, including locations of existing telecommunications towers or
monopoles.
d. A copy of the written notice of the required neighborhood meeting and a certificate of
mailing showing that the notice was mailed to the list of property owners falling within
the notice area designated under DCC 18.128.340(A)(1).
e. A written summary of the neighborhood meeting detailing the substance of the
meeting, the time, date and location of the meeting and a list of meeting attendees.
f. A site plan showing the location of the proposed facility and its components. The site
plan shall also identify the location of existing and proposed landscaping, any
equipment shelters, utility connections, and any fencing proposed to enclose the
facility.
g. A copy of the design specifications, including proposed colors, and/or elevation of an
antenna array proposed with the facility.
h. An elevation drawing of the facility and a photographic simulation of the facility
showing how it would fit into the landscape.
i. A copy of a letter of determination from the Federal Aviation Administration or the
Oregon Department of ration -Aeronautics 4-) isiori \ iation as to whether or
not aviation lighting would be required for the proposed facility.
B. Approval Criteria: An application for a wireless telecommunication facility will be approved
upon findings that:
Page 1 of 2 — Exhibit B to ORDINANCE 2010-011
1. The facility will not be located on irrigated land, as defined by DCC 18.04.030.
2. The applicant has considered other sites in its search area that would have less visual
impact as viewed from nearby residences than the site proposed and has determined that
any less intrusive sites are either unavailable or do not provide the communications
coverage necessary. To meet this criterion, the applicant must demonstrate that it has made
a good faith effort to co -locate its antennas and._microwave dishes on existing monopoles in
the area to be served. The applicant can demonstrate this by submitting a statement from a
qualified engineer that indicates whether the necessary service can or cannot be provided
by co -location within the area to be served.
3. The facility is sited using trees, vegetation, and topography to the maximum extent
practicable to screen the facility from view of nearby residences.
4. A tower or monopole located in an LM Zone is no taller than 30 feet. Towers or
monopoles shall not be sited in locations where there is no vegetative, structural or
topographic screening available.
5. In all cases, the applicant shall site the facility in a manner to minimize its impact on scenic
views and shall site the facility using trees, vegetation, and topography in order to screen it
to the maximum extent practicable from view from protected roadways. Towers or
monopoles shall not be sited in locations where there is no vegetative, structural or
topographic screening available.
6. Any tower or monopole is finished with natural wood colors or colors selected from
amongst colors approved by Ordinance 97-017.
7. Any required aviation lighting is shielded to the maximum extent allowed by FAA and/or
ODOT-Aeronautics regulations.
8. The form of lease for the site does not prevent the possibility of co -location of additional
wireless telecommunication facilities at the site.
9. Any tower or monopole shall be designed in a manner that it can carry the antennas of at
least one additional wireless carrier. This criterion may be satisfied by submitting the
statement of a licensed structural engineer licensed in Oregon that the monopole or tower
has been designed with sufficient strength to carry such an additional antenna array and by
elevation drawings of the proposed tower or monopole that identifies an area designed to
provide the required spacing between antenna arrays of different carriers.
10. Any approval of a wireless telecommunication facility shall include a condition that if the
facility is left unused or is abandoned by all wireless providers located on the facility for
more than one year the facility shall be removed by the landowner.
1 (Ord, ;010-t)i1a?,,..Ord. 2000-019 §2, 2000; Ord. 97-063 §2, 1997; Ord. 97-017 §8, 1997)
Page 2 of 2 — Exhibit B to ORDINANCE 2010-011
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FILE NUMBER: TA -09-2
APPLICANT: Deschutes County
REQUEST: Text amendment to DCC 18.116.250 and 18.128.340, to provide greater
siting flexibility for co -location of wireless telecommunications facilities
STAFF CONTACT: Anthony Raguine, Senior Planner
The Deschutes County Planning Comrriissiori held a work session on December 17, 2009 and a
public hearing on January 28, 2010 to discuss a text amendment initiated by Deschutes County
staff to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Sections 18.116.250 and 18.128.340. Sections
18.116.250 and 18.128.340 of the code were adopted via Ordinance 97-0631, on November 12,
1997. Since that time, the Planning Division has processed numerous wireless
telecommunication facility applications, with 27 applications processed since November 2008
alone. The purpose of the proposed text amendment is to update the above -referenced code
sections based on staff's experience and recurrent issues identified by the wireless
telecommunications industry.
The Planning Commission voted 6-0 in favor of recommending approval of the text amendment.
No comments from the public or from representatives of the wireless telecommunications
industry have been received.
The Board of County Commissioners ("Board") held a work session on February 24, 2010 and a
public hearing on March 1, 2010. The Chair conducted the first reading of the ordinance on
March 1, 2010 and second reading on March 17, 2010.
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT
The proposed text amendment is detailed in the attached eExhibits A and B of Ordinance 2010-
011, with text underlined for new language and shown as strikethrough for deleted language.
Below staff provides explanations for the major proposed changes.
DCC 18.116.250, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
18.116.250(A)
Staff proposes to change the maximum equipment cabinet or shelter square footage from 120
square feet to 200 square feet. When the original ordinance was drafted, a structure that was
120 square feet or less in size did not require a building permit. Since then, the building code
has been changed to allow a structure up to 200 square feet in size without a building permit.
1 Prior to adoption of Ordinance 97-063, Deschutes County adopted interim regulations for siting wireless
telecommunications facilities via Ordinance 97-017.
Page 1 of 3 — Exhibit C of Ordinance 2010-011
18.116.250(A)(1)
One of the underlying principles in the current ordinance is to encourage co -location and
minimize the need for more towers or monopoles. The county provided an incentive to
operators to co -locate by including streamlined procedures under Tiers 1 and 2, which do not
require a conditional use permit. However, we have found that the limitations in the lease area
language in this section has frustrated that effort to encourage co -location.
As currently written, this subsection would require all equipment cabinets and shelters to be
located within the existing lease area for carriers that wanted to co -locate an additional set of
antennas on an existing tower or monopole. What staff has found is that many of the existing
lease areas for approved wireless telecommunications sites are too small to accommodate
additional equipment cabinets or shelters. As a result, carriers have been required to apply for
a conditional use permit when co -locating only because their equipment cabinets were sited
outside of the existing lease area. This change would continue to promote co -location without
unduly exacting additional land use permits or fees when the necessary equipment cannot be
sited within the existing lease area.
18.116.250(A) (2 & 3)
Similar to the co -location discussion above, the county provided an incentive to operators to co -
locate on existing vertical support structures or buildings. However, this incentive has been
underutilized because of the date limitation present in the current code.
Subsections 2 & 3 allow co -location of antennas on a vertical support structure or building.
However, the vertical structure or building must have been existing on or before November 12,
1997, the date of adoption of Ordinance 97-063. This restriction was included in the original
wireless telecom ordinance because of fears that antennas on top of buildings and other vertical
support structures would proliferate across Deschutes County. This has not been the case.
Based on staff's experience, the vast majority of wireless antennas require much greater height
than can be achieved via co -location on an existing vertical structure or building. However, staff
has encountered a few situations where co -location was a viable option except that the structure
was not in existence as of November 12, 1997. This change would provide greater flexibility to
carriers when determining possible antenna locations and may preclude the need to construct a
new tower or monopole.
DCC 18.128.340, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
18.128.340(A)(1)
This subsection requires the applicant to hold a pre -application neighborhood meeting. In a few
cases, members of the community have expressed frustration that the meeting was not held
near the proposed wireless telecom facility location. This change would put a greater emphasis
on holding the neighborhood meeting in the general vicinity of the proposed facility location.
REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
The proposed amendment revises sections of Deschutes County Code Title 18 specific to
wireless telecommunications facilities. Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles
18, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative zoning text amendment. Therefore, the county must
determine that the proposed Title 18 text amendments are consistent with the Federal
Page 2 of 3 — Exhibit C of Ordinance 2010-011
Telecommunications Act of 1996, state statute if the County Zoning Code and Comprehensive
Plan have not been amended to adopt required changes in state statute, the Statewide Planning
Goals ("Goals") if the County Comprehensive Plan has not been amended to adopt required
changes in the Goals, the County's Comprehensive Pian to the extent it has been
acknowledged by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development as complying
with the Statewide Planning Goals, and the County's zoning code. The parameters for
evaluating these text amendments are based on whether there are adequate factual findings
that demonstrate this consistency.
State Statutes
Other than those statutes specific to allowed uses in the Exclusive Farm Use, Forest Use, and
Surface Mining, staff is unaware of any state statutes that specifically regulate the siting of
wireless telecommunications facilities. The proposed text amendments do not alter any allowed
uses or propose to add uses not already allowed in the above -referenced resource zones.
Additionally, the statutes regarding siting of facilities in these resource zones have already been
incorporated into the County Code. Thus, staff believes no state statutes are relevant to the
proposed text amendments.
Statewide Planning Goals
No changes to the Goals have been adopted by the Oregon Land Conservation and
Development Commission since the County's Comprehensive Plan was last acknowledged as
being in compliance with the Goals. Therefore, because these proposed changes are to the
County's zoning code that implements the County's Comprehensive Plan, the Goals are not
applicable to these changes.
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
Based on staff's review of the Comprehensive Plan, an argument could be made that any
number of chapters in the Comprehensive Plan, such as Chapter 23.24, Rural Development;
Chapter 23.88, Agricultural Lands; Chapter 23.92, Forest Lands, could be affected by changes
to the wireless telecommunications facility regulations since these towers are allowed in most of
the county zones. The proposed changes, however, are minor. The change from 120 to 20C
square feet for the equipment cabinet does not result in much more land being used by any
future facility. The other suggested changes to both DCC Chapter 18.116 and Chapter 18.12ie
provide primarily clarifying and few additions to or reductions in the existing applicatior
requirements and approval criteria. Furthermore, as stated above, many of the proposed
changes are intended to encourage co -location, which will likely minimize the number of tower:,
built resulting in less impact to each of the zones. Thus, a thorough discussion of each of the
Comprehensive Plan chapters is not necessary.
DECISION:
Based on the above findings, the Board approves the proposed language of TA -09-2 and
adopts Ordinance 2010-.
Page 3 of 3 — Exhibit C of Ordinance 2010-011