§ 70-905. Review procedures and requirements.

(a)

No new WCF shall be constructed and no colocation or modification to any WCF may occur except after a written request from an applicant, reviewed and approved by the city in accordance with this article. All WCFs shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures:

(1)

Submittal requirements. In addition to an application form, signal interference letter, removal affidavits, and payment of all application and review fees, as established by resolution of city council, each applicant shall submit a scaled site plan, photo simulation, scaled elevation view and other supporting drawings, calculations, and other documentation showing the location and dimension of all improvements, including information concerning topography, radio frequency coverage, tower height, setbacks, drives, parking, fencing, landscaping, adjacent uses, drainage, and other information deemed by the director to be necessary to assess compliance with this section. Documents requiring signatures and seals by appropriate qualified professionals shall be provided by applicant after approval of the application by the director.

(2)

Inventory of existing sites. Each applicant for a WCF shall provide to the director a narrative and map description of the applicant's existing or then currently proposed WCFs within the city, and outside of the city within one mile of its boundaries. In addition, the applicant shall inform the city generally of the areas of the city in which it believes WCFs may need to be located within the next three years. The inventory list should identify the site name, site address, and a general description of the facility (for example, rooftop antennas and ground mounted equipment). This provision is not intended to be a requirement that the applicant submit its business plan, proprietary information, or make commitments regarding locations of WCFs within the city. Rather, it is an attempt to provide a mechanism for the city and all applicants for WCFs to share general information, assist in the city's comprehensive planning process, and promote colocation by identifying areas in which WCFs might be appropriately constructed for multiple users.

The city may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional permits under this section or other organizations seeking to locate WCFs within the jurisdiction of the city, provided however, that the city is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable.

(3)

Abandonment and removal. Prior to approval, affidavits shall be required from the owner of the property and from the applicant acknowledging that each is responsible for the removal of a WCF that is abandoned or is unused for a period of six months.

(4)

In all zoning districts, applications for base stations, alternative tower structures, and towers may be permitted only as a conditional use in accordance with the requirements of this article. All applications for towers shall demonstrate that other alternative design options such as base stations or alternative tower structures are not viable options as determined by the city. Notwithstanding anything in this article to the contrary, no towers located in the right-of-way shall exceed 35 feet in height.

(5)

Applications for base stations, alternative tower structures and small cell facilities within right-of-way. In all zoning districts each application for a base station, alternative tower structure or small cell facility within the right-of-way shall be reviewed and considered for approval by the director for conformance with this article and the applicant's execution of a license agreement as approved by the director. Applicants may appeal the director's decision by submitting a written notice of appeal to the city manager within ten calendar days from the date of the director's decision. The notice of appeal must specifically set forth the grounds for appeal and include all documentation the applicant deems relevant. The city manager shall within ten business days of receipt of the notice of appeal and review of all documentation submitted by the applicant and the director's decision issue a final decision which may affirm, overturn or modify the director's decision.

Except for WCFs in the right-of-way that meet all requirements of this article, the director may refer the application to planning and zoning commission for conditional use review if the director finds the proposed WCF to have a significant visual impact (e.g., proximity to historic or designated view corridors, or on significant community features), or otherwise is substantially incompatible with the structure on which the WCF will be installed, or it does not meet the clear intent of this article.

(6)

Review procedures for eligible facilities requests.

a.

Application. In all zoning districts, eligible facilities requests shall be considered a use by right subject to administrative review. The city shall prepare, and make publicly available, an application form which shall be limited to the information necessary for the city to consider whether an application is an eligible facilities request. Such information may include, without limitation, whether the request:

1.

Would result in a substantial change;

2.

Violate a generally applicable law, regulations, or other rule codifying objective standards reasonably related to public health and safety.

The application may not require the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification or colocation.

b.

Type of review. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request pursuant to this section, the director shall review such application to determine whether the application so qualifies.

c.

Timeframe for review. Subject to the tolling provisions of subparagraph d. below, within 60 days of the date on which an applicant submits an application seeking approval under this section, the city shall approve the application unless it determines that the application is not covered by this subsection.

d.

Tolling of the timeframe for review. The 60-day review period begins to run when the application is filed, and may be tolled only by mutual agreement of the city and the applicant, or in cases where the director determines that the application is incomplete:

1.

To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the city must provide written notice to the applicant within 30 days of receipt of the application, specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application;

2.

The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a supplemental written submission in response to the city's notice of incompleteness; and

3.

Following a supplemental submission, the city will notify the applicant within ten days that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified in paragraph (d)(1). In the case of a second or subsequent notice of incompleteness, the city may not specify missing documents or information that were not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness.

e.

Failure to act. In the event the city fails to act on a request seeking approval for an eligible facilities request under this section within the timeframe for review (accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed granted. The deemed grant becomes effective when the applicant notifies the city in writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the application has been deemed granted.

f.

Interaction with Telecommunications Act Section 332(c)(7). If the city determines that the applicant's request is not an eligible facilities request as set forth in this article the presumptively reasonable timeframe under Section 332(c)(7), as prescribed by the FCC's Shot Clock order, will begin to run from the issuance of the city's decision that the application is not a covered request. To the extent such information is necessary, the city may request additional information from the applicant to evaluate the application under Section 332(c)(7) reviews.

(7)

Decision. Any decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a WCF, shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence in a written record. The applicant shall receive a copy of the decision.

(8)

Compliance with applicable law. Notwithstanding the approval of an application for colocation as described herein, all work done pursuant to WCF applications must be completed in accordance with all applicable building and safety requirements as set forth in the Code and any other applicable federal, state, and/or local laws and regulations. In addition, all WCF applications shall comply with the following:

a.

Comply with any permit or license issued by a local, state, or federal agency with jurisdiction of the WCF;

b.

Comply with easements, covenants, conditions and/or restrictions on or applicable to the underlying real property;

c.

Be maintained in good working condition and to the standards established at the time of application approval; and

d.

Remain free from trash, debris, litter, noxious weeds, graffiti, and other forms of vandalism. Any damage shall be repaired as soon as practicable, and in no instance more than ten calendar days from the time of notification by the city or after discovery by the owner or operator of the site.

(9)

Compliance report. Upon request by the city, the applicant shall provide a compliance report within 45 days after installation of a WCF, demonstrating that as installed and in operation, the WCF complies with all conditions of approval, all applicable Code requirements and standard regulations.

(Ord. No. 16-11, § 1, 11-14-16; Ord. No. 17-11, § 1, 8-15-2017; Ord. No. 18-16, § 6, 11-20-2018)