HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018 11 20 AIS PC Small Wireless Facilties Code AmendmentsAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 11/20/2018
Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Kristina Kraaz, CAO
Staff Phone No: 541-744-4061
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Maintain and Improve
Infrastructure and Facilities ITEM TITLE: REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS OF THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE
REGARDING SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, JOURNAL # 811-18-000219-TYP4
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct a public hearing on the proposed legislative amendments and consider public
testimony along with the staff report prior to forwarding a recommendation to the
Springfield City Council regarding proposed amendments to Springfield Development Code section 4.3-145.
ISSUE STATEMENT: On September 27th, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order regarding wireless broadband infrastructure that
preempts many aspects of local management of small cell wireless infrastructure in the
public rights-of-way. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider amendments to the Springfield Development Code to enable the City to comply with the
new FCC rules.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Order and Recommendation
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings Exhibit B – Proposed Amendments to the Springfield Development Code
DISCUSSION:
On September 27th, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order regarding wireless broadband infrastructure that
preempts many aspects of local management of small cell wireless infrastructure in the
public rights-of-way. There are three main components to the Declaratory Ruling: (1) it caps local government fees for use of the right-of-way (not addressed by these proposed
amendments), (2) it preempts some local aesthetic regulations, and (3) it imposes 60-90 day shot clocks for small wireless facility applications. The new FCC rules become effective on January 14, 2019.
At a work session on November 5, 2018, the City Council directed staff to draft proposed
code amendments to enable the City to comply with the new FCC rules by January 2019.
The Springfield Development Code section 4.3-145 governs development standards regarding all wireless telecommunications systems (WTS) facilities within the City and its Urban Growth Boundary. It also determines the level of review required to approve
applications for WTS facilities. Staff have drafted proposed amendments to section 4.3-145 for facilities that fall under the FCC rules, which is limited to small wireless facilities
in City-owned public rights-of-way within City limits.
The proposed amendments adopt new, objective aesthetic standards for small wireless
facilities in the public rights-of-way, and reclassify these facilities as low-visibility WTS
facilities without regard to whether the facility will be located on an existing pole, modified or replaced pole, or new pole in the right-of-way. The amendments also include
some safety and engineering requirements for these facilities. These facilities also require encroachment permits from the City under the Springfield Municipal Code chapter 3; there may be additional requirements for the encroachment permit that are not listed in the
development code. The proposed amendments will also enable the City to review applications for small
wireless facilities under Type I ministerial review, rather than under Type III Discretionary Use approval. The change in review process is necessary to allow the City to approve or
deny applications for small wireless facilities within the FCC’s timelines for local review.
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR:
AMENDMENT TO THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING ]
SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY ] 811-18-000219-TYP4
NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL
To comply with the Federal Communications Commission’s Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, issued
on September 27, 2018, regarding small wireless facilities in the public rights-of-way, request that the Springfield
Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding
amendments to Springfield Development Code 4.3-145 Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities.
Notice was sent to the Department of Land Conservation and Development on November 14, 2018, which is less
than 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing in compliance with OAR 660-018-0020. However, because the
FCC rules become effective on January 14, 2018, the City has determined that expedited review is necessary and due
to circumstances outside its control. Alternately, if the FCC rulemaking does not fall under the emergency
exemption, the City intends to cure the untimely submission by leaving the City Council written record open until at
least December 19, 2018 per ORS 197.620.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to Springfield Development Code
Section 5.2-115.
On November 20, 2018, the Springfield Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed
text amendments. The public hearing was conducted in accordance with Springfield Development Code Sections
5.2-120 through 5.2-145. After review of the staff report, evidence in the record, and public testimony, the
Planning Commission determined that the code amendments meet the criteria of approval.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the Findings of Fact (Exhibit A) and evidence in the record, the proposed code amendments
(Exhibit B) meet the approval criteria of Springfield Development Code Section 5.6-115 .
ORDER/RECOMMENDATION
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that a RECOMMENDATION for approval of 811-18-000219-
TYP4 as amended be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for consideration at an upcoming public hearing.
____________________________ ____________________
Planning Commission Chairperson Date
ATTEST
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 1 of 7
STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Planning Commission Public Hearing Date: November 20, 2018
Springfield Journal #: 811-18-000219-TYP4 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION Proposal: Amendments to Springfield Development Code section 4.3-145 regarding small wireless facilities in the public rights-of-way, to comply with new FCC rules
Applicant: City of Springfield
Location: The proposed code amendments would apply to public right-of-way within the limits of the City of Springfield.
BACKGROUND
On September 27th, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order regarding wireless broadband infrastructure that preempts many aspects of local
management of small cell wireless infrastructure in the public rights-of-way. There are three main
components to the Declaratory Ruling: (1) it caps local government fees for use of the right-of-way (not addressed by these proposed amendments), (2) it preempts some local aesthetic regulations, and (3) it
imposes 60-90 day shot clocks (timelines within which an application must be approved) for small
wireless facility applications. The new FCC rules become effective on January 14, 2019.
Specifically, the new FCC rules apply to small wireless facilities, which are defined as facilities that meet
the following requirements: (1) Facilities:
• Mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height including their antennas; or
• Mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or
• That do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent, whichever is greater;
(2) Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment, is no more than 3 cubic feet in volume; and (3) All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless equipment
associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume.
The Springfield Development Code section 4.3-145 governs development standards regarding all wireless telecommunications systems (WTS) facilities within the City and its Urban Growth Boundary. It also
determines the level of review required to approve applications for WTS facilities. To comply with the
FCC order, staff have determined that the City should amend section 4.3-145 for facilities that fall under the FCC rules, which is limited to small wireless facilities in City-owned public rights-of-way within City
limits. Findings 8 and 9 below address how the proposed amendments enable the City to comply with the
new FCC rules.
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 2 of 7
The proposed amendments are limited to public rights-of-way inside City limits to address the FCC rules,
and will not apply in the urbanizable area. If Lane County determines that it should amend the standards
that apply to these facilities outside City limits, then the City and County can co-adopt standards for rights-of-way outside City limits at a later time.
NOTIFICATION AND WRITTEN COMMENTS Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the The Register Guard on Tuesday, November 13, 2018 as required by Springfield Development Code 5.2-115.B. Notice was also provided to Lane County as a right-of-way owner within the City and to Springfield Utility Board as the owner of
utility poles within the City. Under ORS 197.610(1) and Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change
to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD on November 14,
2018, which is less than 35 days prior to the Planning Commissions’ public hearing on the matter.
Under ORS 197.610(2) and OAR 660-018-0022(2), the local government may submit changes later than
the 35-day deadline if it determines that emergency circumstances outside the control of the local government require expedited review. The FCC’s Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order was
issued on September 27, 2018 and published in the Federal Register on October 15, 2018. Staff met with
the City Council in work session on November 5 to review the new FCC rules. The Council provided staff with direction to pursue amendments to the Springfield Development Code allow the City to comply
with the new FCC rules regarding objective aesthetic requirements and shot-clocks for reviewing applications. The FCC rules become effective on January 14, 2019. These circumstances necessitate expedited review and prevent the City from being able to comply with the requirement to provide DLCD
with 35 day notice prior to the first evidentiary hearing. In compliance with the City’s acknowledged procedures for legislative amendments to the Springfield Development Code, the first evidentiary hearing
is scheduled for the Springfield Planning Commission on November 20, 2018; the first City Council
public hearing is scheduled for December 3, 2018, and the amendments are tentatively scheduled for a second reading and adoption on January 7, 2019. The proposed amendments were submitted to DLCD on November 14, 2018, which is as early as practicable.
Alternately, if the FCC rulemaking is not an emergency circumstance that justifies expedited review, then
the City can cure the untimely submission under ORS 197.620 and OAR 660-018-0040(8). Specifically,
the City will cure the untimely submission of proposed changes by holding the evidentiary record open for an additional period of time equal to 10 days or the number of days by which the submission was late,
whichever is greater. The submission to DLCD on November 14, 2018 is 6 days before the Planning
Commission hearing. To cure the late submittal, the City intends to leave the written record open until at least December 19, 2018 (any testimony or evidence submitted into the record too late to be considered
by the Springfield Planning Commission will be included in the written record of the City Council, which will hold a de novo hearing on December 3, 2018).
APPROVAL CRITERIA Springfield Development Code Section 5.6-115 lists the approval criteria for an amendment to the code.
A. In reaching a decision on the adoption or amendment of refinement plans and this Code’s text, the
City Council shall adopt findings that demonstrate conformance to the following:
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 3 of 7
1. The Metro Plan;
2. Applicable State statutes; and
3. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Criteria A.1. Consistency with the Metro Plan
Finding 1: The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the prevailing Comprehensive Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element
was adopted in 2011 through Springfield Ordinance 6268 and Lane County Ordinance No. PA. 1274 as a refinement to the Metro Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element and Urbanization Elements were adopted in 2016 through Springfield Ordinance 6361 and Lane County
Ordinance No. PA 1304 as a refinement to the Metro Plan, but are not yet acknowledged. Amendments to the development code must be considered within the context of adopted policies. Thus any proposed amendments must be consistent with the Metro Plan and the Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and
Housing Element, Economic Element, and Urbanization Element. In addition, because the Economic Element and Urbanization Element are unacknowledged, any plan or land use regulation that implicates those elements must be consistent with any applicable Statewide Planning Goals.
Finding 2: Communication facilities generally are included as an element of “the minimum level of key
urban services” in Urbanization Element Policy 31. The proposed amendments specifically address small
wireless facilities in the public right-of-way that are necessary to meet future demand for wireless data services and access to broadband. Improving and increasing siting opportunities for small wireless
facilities in the public right-of-way consistent with this comprehensive plan text and the policies cited
under this criteria (A.1):
“31. For the purposes of land use planning and annexation approval, the Springfield Comprehensive Plan defines key urban facilities and services as: wastewater service; stormwater service; transportation; solid
waste management; water service; fire and emergency medical services; police protection; citywide park and recreation programs; electric service; land use controls; communication facilities; and public schools
on a districtwide basis.” Finding 3: The implementation action under Urbanization Element Policy 27 provides that the City will,
“Prepare and adopt comprehensive plan and zoning updates at the neighborhood, district, and corridor scale to determine the density, character and design of urban development in alignment with
infrastructure capacity to ensure efficient and economical delivery of urban services in balance with the
City’s financial resources.” The proposed amendments further this policy by ensuring that small wireless facilities in the public right-of-way do not conflict with other utilities already located in the public right-
of-way. Furthermore, the proposed amendments offer a set of objective criteria for siting these facilities
and allow them to be processed under Type I ministerial development review. This minimizes the cost to the City and to the wireless providers to deploy new wireless infrastructure, in keeping with the above
guidance under Policy 27. Finding 4: Many policies throughout the Metro Plan and Springfield 2030 Plan favor updating land use
regulations and zoning to allow for more efficient land use that supports higher density and mixed-use development (see, e.g., Springfield Transportation System Plan Policy 3.3, Residential Element Policy
H.6, Economic Element Policy E.6). Higher density development will require additional capacity for
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 4 of 7
wireless services. Making the City’s public rights-of-way available to this infrastructure to meet this new
demand for telecommunication services further frees up developable property within the City that
otherwise may have been needed for larger wireless telecommunications facilities systems (i.e. traditional, large “macrocell” towers).
Conclusion: The code amendments comply with applicable policies from the Metro Plan including the Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and therefore meet Criterion A.1.
Criteria A.2. Consistency with State statues. Finding 5: ORS Chapter 759 covers the regulation of telecommunication utilities within the State of Oregon. However, ORS 759 pertains to regulatory oversight of utility providers and how they conduct business within Oregon. This Chapter does not provide guidance or limitations for local jurisdictions
responsible for reviewing and approving WTS facilities in accordance with adopted zoning and Development Code standards.
Finding 6: In accordance with ORS 759.015, it is the goal of the State of Oregon to “secure and maintain high-quality universal telecommunications service at just and reasonable rates for all classes of customers
and to encourage innovation within the industry by a balanced program of regulation and competition”.
The state Public Utility Commission is responsible for administering the statutes with respect to telecommunications rates and services.
Finding 7: In accordance with ORS 759.016, it is the goal of the state of Oregon to promote access to broadband services in order to improve the economy, improve the quality of life in communities
throughout the state, and to reduce the economic gap between communities that have access to broadband digital services and those that do not. One of the ways that the State of Oregon policy proposes to achieve that goal is by “Removing barriers to the full deployment of broadband digital applications and
services and providing incentives for the removal of those barriers[.]” ORS 759.016(2)(d). Streamlining the development review process and standards that are applicable to small wireless facilities in the public right-of-way will reduce development-related barriers to the deployment of future mobile broadband
infrastructure. Finding 8: In the Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, the FCC determined that state and
local governments are preempted under the Telecommunications Act from applying aesthetic requirements for small wireless facilities unless they are (1) reasonable; (2) no more burdensome than
those applied to other types of infrastructure deployments; (3) objective; and (4) published in advance.
The new FCC rules become effective on January 14, 2019. The proposed amendments implement aesthetic standards for small wireless facilities that are reasonable. The City was provided with examples
of small wireless facilities by representatives of the wireless industry at the League of Oregon Cities’ “5G
Summit” on October 25, 2018. Most of the examples provided are designs that are permitted under the proposed standards. The proposed standards are no more burdensome than those applied to other types of
infrastructure; in general, they are less burdensome than other types of wireless telecommunications systems facilities because they do not provide for discretionary review. The proposed standards are objective in their regulation of aesthetics, and they are published in advance by virtue of being adopted
into the Springfield Development Code. The standards include the ability of the City Engineer to allow deviations or modifications to the proposed standards, but these are to allow adjustments for identified engineering or safety issues, and not to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of small wireless facilities.
Finding 9: The FCC Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order also includes new shot-clock requirements for approving all applications for small wireless facilities in the public right-of-way. These
shot-clock for attachments to existing or replacement poles is 60 days; the shot-clock for entirely new
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 5 of 7
poles in the public right-of-way is 90 days. Under the current regulations in SDC 4.3-145, most small
wireless facilities would require Type III development review and Discretionary Use approval. The Type
III review process requires 20 days for mailed notice of a quasi-judicial hearing, up to 21 days after the first public hearing to leave the record open allowed by law, 15 days to appeal the Planning
Commission’s decision to City Council, time to schedule the City Council appeal hearing and provide
notice of the hearing, and time for the City Council to make a decision. It would be nearly impossible to approve small wireless facilities under Type III review within 60 days and extremely difficult to do so
within in 90 days. Because the FCC rules preempt the City from applying discretionary aesthetic approval criteria, there is no need to provide a quasi-judicial decision-making process to an application for small wireless facilities in the public rights-of-way (unless necessitated within the Willamette River
Greenway Overlay District for a new pole). The proposed amendments to SDC 4.3-145 remove the discretionary approval criteria for small wireless facilities in the public right-of-way and classify these facilities as low visibility facilities that are subject to Type I ministerial review. The Type I ministerial
review process does not include mailed notice, a public hearing, or a hearing on appeal, and therefore will allow the City to approval or deny applications for small wireless facilities in the public rights-of-way within the shot-clocks established by the FCC.
Conclusion: There are no state statutes that directly apply to the content of the proposed amendments, but the proposed amendments are in keeping with the State of Oregon’s expressed
policy regarding access to telecommunications and broadband services. The proposed amendments comply with the federal Telecommunications Act as interpreted by the Federal Communications Commission. Therefore, the proposed amendments meet Criterion A.2.
3. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
Finding 10: Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement calls for “the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all
phases of the planning process.” The proposed amendments to SDC 4.3-145 are the subject of a legislative decision-making process with public hearings before the City’s Planning Commission and City
Council. The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a public hearing to consider the proposed amendment on November 20, 2016. The Planning Commission public hearing was advertised in the legal notices section of The Register-Guard on November 13, 2018. The recommendation of the Planning
Commission will be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for consideration at a public hearing scheduled for December 3, 2016. Staff finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with Goal 1.
Finding 11: Goal 2 – Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon’s statewide planning program. In accordance with Goal 2, land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a
comprehensive plan, and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan’s
policies into force and effect. As discussed under Criteria A.1., the City has adopted a comprehensive plan and the proposed amendments are consistent with that plan.
Finding 12: Goal 3 – Agricultural Land and Goal 4 – Forest Land apply to areas that are outside the City’s Urban Growth Boundary, and are not applicable.
Finding 13: The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged land use regulations for complying with Goals 5 through 10. Therefore, these goals are not applicable to the proposed
amendment. Finding 14: Goal 11–Public Facilities and Services addresses the efficient planning and provision of
public services such as sewer, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. Communications services are identified in Goal 11, but within the definition of urban facilities and services that are provided at the
appropriate type and level to support planned development. Wireless telecommunications systems are not
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 6 of 7
listed among the public facilities that must be included in local public facilities plans. As explained under
Criteria A.1, the proposed amendments reduce barriers to the deployment of new communications
services within Springfield to meet future demand for wireless data services and access to broadband.
Finding 15: Goal 12 – Transportation requires the City to plan for the provision of a “safe, convenient
and economic transportation system.” OAR 660-012-0060 requires that proposed amendments to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation that significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
facility provide mitigation. The proposed amendments address small wireless facilities that are located in the public rights-of-way, but they will not significantly affect any existing or planned transportation facility because they will not affect the flow of traffic or transit services within the right-of-way, nor will
they result in any increase in vehicle trips. The proposed amendments include requirements to protect traffic safety and pedestrian safety. The proposed text amendment does not affect the City’s ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 12 requirements. Therefore this action has no
effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 12. Finding 16: Goal 13–Energy Conservation states that “land and uses developed on the land shall be
managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles.” The proposed text amendment does not affect the City’s ordinances, policies,
plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13 requirements. Streamlining the standards and process
for siting small wireless facilities in the public rights-of-way is likely to have no net effect on energy conservation because these facilities are likely to replace demand for new macrocell WTS facilities.
Therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 13.
Finding 17: Goal 14–Urbanization requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and to
incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The proposed amendments streamline development review for siting telecommunications infrastructure in the public right-of-way in compliance with Goal 14, and do not otherwise affect the City’s adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or
studies adopted to comply with Goal 14 requirements.
Finding 18: Goal 15–Willamette River Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300 miles
of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City limits. The regulations in the City’s Willamette River Greenway Overlay District (SDC 3.3-300) and in SDC 4.3-145 allow low visibility and stealth facilities within the overlay. The proposed amendments to SDC 4.3-145
do not change or nullify the requirement for development proposals to comply with the City’s existing Willamette River Greenway regulations regardless of the underlying zoning, and to demonstrate
compliance with Goal 15 requirements. Staff notes that this proposed amendment applies only to facilities
located within existing public right-of-way inside the Springfield City limits. Small wireless facilities could be placed on existing or replacement utility poles, which would not result in any new disturbance of
land or habitat. Any small wireless facilities that are proposed for new poles inside the Greenway
Setback would require additional Discretionary Use approval under the provisions of SDC 3.3-300. Therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 15.
Finding 19: Goals 16-19 – Estuarine Resources; Coastal Shorelands; Beaches and Dunes; and Ocean Resources; these goals do not apply to land within the Willamette Valley, including Springfield.
Therefore, in the same way that Goals 3 and 4 do not apply in Springfield, Goals 16 through 19 do not apply in Springfield or to land use regulations adopted in Springfield.
Conclusion: The code amendments comply with applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules and therefore meet Criterion A.3.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Attachment 1, Page 7 of 30
Exhibit A – Staff Report and Findings, Page 7 of 7
Based on the findings above, staff concludes that the proposed text amendment to SDC 4.3-145 comply
with the applicable criteria of approval for amendments to the Springfield Development Code, under SDC 5.6-115. Staff recommendthat the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council
to adopt the proposed amendments.
Attachment 1, Page 8 of 30
Exhibit B
Proposed Code Amendments
The proposed code amendments are shown in legislative format (deleted text with strike-thru
red font and new text with underline red font).
4.3-145 Wireless Telecommunications System (WTS) Facilities
A. Purpose. This Section is intended to:
1. Implement the requirements of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996;
2. Provide a uniform and comprehensive set of standards and review procedures
for the placement, operation, alteration and removal of WTS facilities;
3. Allow new WTS facilities where necessary to provide service coverage and there
is a demonstrated need that cannot be met through existing facilities;
4. Maximize the use of existing WTS facilities in order to minimize the need to
construct additional facilities;
5. Encourage the siting of new WTS facilities in preferred locations;
6. Lessen impacts of new WTS facilities on surrounding residential areas; and
7. Minimize visual impacts of new WTS facilities through careful design,
configuration, screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques.
B. Applicability/Conflicts.
1. Applicability. This Section applies within Springfield’s city limits and its Urban
Services AreaGrowth Boundary. No WTS facility may be constructed, altered (to include
co-locations) or replaced, unless exempt, without complying with the requirements of
this Section. Exempt facilities are listed in Subsection D. below.
2. Conflicts. In cases where:
a. The development standards of this Section conflict with other Sections of
this Code, these standards will prevail.
EXCEPTION: In the Glenwood Riverfront, the WTS standards regarding type
and height of the antenna will apply. All other aspects of the application
submittal and review process specified in this Section will apply.
Attachment 1, Page 9 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 2 of 22
Page 2 of 22
b. These development standards conflict with Federal and/or State
regulations, the Federal and/or State regulations will prevail.
C. Pre-Existing WTS Facilities.
1. WTS facilities that lawfully existed prior to the adoption of the Ordinance
codified in this Section shall be allowed to continue their use as they presently exist.
2. Routine maintenance will be permitted on lawful pre-existing WTS facilities as
specified in Subsection D.1.
3. Lawfully existing WTS facilities may be replaced as specified in Subsection D.2.
D. Exemptions. The following shall be considered exempt structures or activities, however,
all other applicable Federal, State and City permits will be required:
1. Emergency or routine repairs or routine maintenance of previously approved
WTS facilities.
2. Replacement of existing previously approved WTS facilities.
a. A WTS facility may be replaced if it:
i. Is in the exact location of the facility being replaced;
ii. Is of a construction type identical in height, size, lighting and
painting;
iii. Can accommodate the co-location of additional antennas or
arrays;
iv. Does not increase radio frequency emissions from any source;
and
v. Does not intrude or cause further intrusion into a setback area.
b. Those WTS facilities that cannot meet the replacement standard in
Subsection D.2.a. will be treated as new construction, requiring Type I or III
review as specified in Subsection H.
3. Industrial, scientific and medical equipment operating at frequencies designated
for that purpose by the Federal Communications Commission.
4. Essential public telecommunications services: military, Federal, State, and local
government telecommunications facilities.
Attachment 1, Page 10 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 3 of 22
Page 3 of 22
5. Amateur and citizen band radio transmitters and antennas.
6. Military or civilian radar operating within the regulated frequency ranges for the
purpose of defense or aircraft safety.
7. Antennas (including, but not limited to: direct-to-home satellite dishes; TV
antennas; and wireless cable antennas) used by viewers to receive video programming
signals from direct broadcast facilities, broadband radio service providers, and TV
broadcast stations.
8. Low-powered networked telecommunications facilities that are less than 3 cubic
feet total volume for all equipment. Such facilities include including, but are not limited
to, microcell radio transceivers located on existing utility poles and light standards and
strand-mounted wi-fi devices within public right-of-way.
9. Cell on Wheels (COW), which are permitted as temporary uses in nonresidential
Metro Plan or 2030 Springfield Refinement Plan designations for a period not to exceed
14 days, or during a period of emergency as declared by the City, County, or State.
E. Definitions. The words and phrases used in this Section shall have the following
meanings:
Antenna. Any system of wires, poles, rods, reflecting discs or similar devices designed for
telephonic, radio, facsimile, data, or television telecommunications through sending and/or
receiving of electromagnetic waves when the system is either external to or attached to the
exterior of a structure. Antennas include, but are not limited to, devices having active elements
extending in any direction, and directional beam-type arrays having elements carried by and
disposed from a generally horizontal boom that may be mounted up and rotated through a
vertical mast or tower interconnecting the boom and antenna support. All of the latter elements
are part of the antenna.
Antenna Height. The vertical distance measured from the ground surface at grade to the tip
of the highest point of the antenna on the proposed structure.
Antenna Support. Any pole, telescoping mast, tower, tripod or any other structure that
supports a device used in the transmitting and/or receiving of electromagnetic waves.
Approval Authority.
1. Type I Review. Staff has the authority to approve new co-locations, equipment
replacement, and applications for low visibility and stealth WTS facilities.
2. Type III Review. The Planning Commission and the City Council are the
Approval Authority for applications to construct high and medium visibility WTS facilities
within the city limits.
Attachment 1, Page 11 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 4 of 22
Page 4 of 22
3. Type III Review. The Hearings Official, by agreement with Lane County, is the
Approval Authority for high and medium visibility WTS facilities located outside the city
limits but within the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary.
Camouflaged. Any WTS facility that is designed to blend into the surrounding environment.
Examples of camouflaged facilities include, but are not limited to: architecturally screened roof-
mounted antennas; building-mounted antennas painted to match the existing structure;
antennas integrated into architectural elements; towers made to look like trees; and antenna
support structures designed to look like flag poles or light poles.
Carrier. A company authorized by the FCC to build and/or operate a WTS facility.
Co-Location. The use of a single WTS tower for the placement of multiple antennas or related
telecommunications equipment often involving different carriers.
Equipment Building, Shelter or Cabinet. A cabinet or building used to house associated
equipment used by providers at a WTS facility. Associated equipment includes, but is not limited
to, air conditioning and emergency generators.
Façade-Mounted Antenna. An antenna architecturally integrated into the façade of a
building or structure.
Facility. A WTS facility.
Faux Tree. A WTS tower camouflaged to resemble a tree.
Guyed Tower. A WTS tower that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wires and ground
anchors.
High Visibility. The following WTS facilities are examples of high visibility facilities:
1. Monopoles, lattice towers and guyed towers.
2. Any WTS facilities that do not meet the definition of stealth, low visibility, or
moderate visibility.
Lattice Tower. A guyed or self-supporting three or four sided, open, steel frame support
structure used to support WTS equipment.
Low Visibility. The following are examples of low visibility WTS facilities that shall not exceed
the height limit of the base zone and shall not increase the height of an existing WTS facility:
1. Whip antennas not exceeding 6 feet in length or height, including mounting,
and measuring no more than 3 inches in diameter, located on existing structures
including, but not limited to, water storage tanks, high-voltage transmission towers,
Attachment 1, Page 12 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 5 of 22
Page 5 of 22
utility towers and poles, sign standards, and roadway overpasses, with equipment
cabinets that are screened from view.
2. Facilities, including equipment cabinets that are screened from view through the
use of architectural treatments, including, but not limited to, cupolas, steeples and
parapets, and are consistent with existing development on adjacent properties.
3. Additions to existing permitted low-visibility facilities, if the additions themselves
meet the definition of low visibility and are designed to minimize visibility the WTS
facility.
4. Changes to an existing building that are consistent with the building’s
architectural style and the equipment cabinets are not visible.
5. Small wireless facilities located on utility or light poles in the public right-of-way
that meet the standards in section 4.3-145.F.28.a. through c.
Maintenance. Emergency or routine repairs or replacement of transmitters, antennas, or other
components of previously approved WTS facilities that do not create a significant change in
visual appearance or visual impact.
Microcells. These devices provide additional coverage and capacity where there are high
numbers of users within urban and suburban macrocells. The antennas for microcells are
mounted at street level, typically on the external walls of existing structures, lamp-posts, and
other street furniture. Microcell antennas are usually smaller than macrocell antennas, and
when mounted on existing structures, can often blend into building features. Microcells provide
radio coverage over distances, typically between 100 meters and 1,000 meters, and operate at
power levels substantially below those of macrocells.
Moderate Visibility. The following WTS facilities are examples of moderate visibility facilities:
1. Panel-shaped antennas not exceeding 8 feet in length or height that are flush-
mounted to an existing building façade or other existing structure on at least one edge,
or extend a maximum of 24 inches from the building façade or other structure at any
edge, do not exceed the height of the building or other structure, and are designed to
blend with the color, texture, and design of the existing building or structure, with
equipment cabinets that are screened from view.
2. WTS facilities that are camouflaged, including, but not limited to, faux trees,
flag poles, and light poles; provided, that the equipment building, shelter, or cabinet for
the facility is screened or camouflaged.
Monopole. A WTS facility consisting of a single pole constructed for purposes of supporting 1
or more antennas without guy wires or ground anchors.
Attachment 1, Page 13 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 6 of 22
Page 6 of 22
Panel or Directional Antenna. An antenna or array of antennas designed to concentrate a
radio signal in a particular area.
Residential Zoning District. Any Springfield zoning district where single-family and or multi-
family dwelling units are intended to be the dominate land use.
RF. Radio frequency.
Roof-Mounted Antenna. Any antenna with its support structure placed directly on the roof of
any building or structure.
Screened. Concealed from view with a sight obscuring fence, wall or vegetation.
Service Area. The area served by a single WTS facility.
Side-Mounted Antennas. Those antennas that are mounted on the side of a tower structure
at any height, and including both the antennas and equipment with protective radome coatings.
This term also includes microwave dish antennas, solid or not, located at 150 feet or lower on a
tower structure, regardless of the dish diameter. The term does not include solid microwave
dish antennas exceeding 6 feet in diameter that are located above 150 feet on a tower
structure.
Small Top-Mounted Antennas. Any antenna mounted on the top of a tower structure where
the antenna is 20 feet or less in height and 6 inches or less in outside diameter.
Small Wireless Facility. A WTS facility located on an existing or proposed utility or light pole
in City limits in the public right-of-way that meets the dimensional standards in section 4.3-
145.F.28, typically taking the form of one or two small antennas and associated pole-mounted
equipment.
Speculation Tower. An antenna support structure designed for the purpose of providing
location mounts for WTS facilities, without a binding written commitment or executed lease
from a service provider to utilize or lease space on the tower at the time the application is
submitted.
Stealth. WTS facilities including, but not limited to, microcells, antennas, equipment cabinets,
and any other ancillary equipment that cannot be seen from any street or any adjacent
property, improved or unimproved, and that do not result in any apparent architectural changes
or additions to existing buildings. The addition of landscaping, walls, fences, or grading as
screening techniques does not make an otherwise visible WTS facility a stealth facility.
Telecommunications. The transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of
information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as
sent and received.
Attachment 1, Page 14 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 7 of 22
Page 7 of 22
Tower or WTS Tower. Any mast, pole, monopole, guyed tower, lattice tower, freestanding
tower, or other structure designed and primarily used to support antennas, including utility and
light poles in the public right-of-way when used to support antennas or small wireless facilities.
Whip Antenna. An antenna that transmits or receives signals in 360 degrees. Whip antennas
are typically cylindrical in shape, less than 3 inches in diameter and no more than 6 feet long,
including the mounting.
Wireless Telecommunications System (WTS) Facility. Any facility that transmits and/or
receives electromagnetic waves, including, but not limited to, antennas, dish antennas,
microwave antennas, and other types of equipment for the transmission or receipt of these
signals, including, but not limited to, telecommunications towers and similar supporting
structures, equipment cabinets or buildings, parking areas, and other accessory development.
This definition also includes any facility that transmits radio or television signals. This definition
does not apply to amateur radio stations as defined by the Federal Communications
Commission, Part 97 of the Commission’s Rules.
F. General Standards. The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 establishes limitations
on the siting standards that local governments can place on WTS facilities. Section 704 of the
Act states that local siting standards shall not:
1) “unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services”
2) “prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.”
All applications for WTS facilities are subject to the standards in this Section to the extent that
they do not violate Federal limitations on local siting standards. Where application of the
standards found in this Section constitutes a violation, the least intrusive alternative for
providing coverage shall be allowed as an exception to the standards.
1. Design for Co-Location. All new towers shall be designed to structurally
accommodate the maximum number of additional users technically practicable.
2. Demonstrated Need for New WTS Facilities. Applications shall demonstrate that
the proposed WTS facility is necessary to close a significant gap in service coverage or
capacity for the carrier and is the least intrusive means to close the significant gap.
3. Lack of Coverage and Lack of Capacity. The application shall demonstrate that
the gap in service cannot be closed by upgrading other existing facilities. In doing so,
evidence shall clearly support a conclusion that the gap results from a lack of coverage
and not a lack of capacity to achieve adequate service. If the proposed WTS facility is to
improve capacity, evidence shall further justify why other methods for improving service
capacity are not reasonable, available or effective.
4. Identify the Least Intrusive Alternative for Providing Coverage. The application
shall demonstrate a good faith effort to identify and evaluate less intrusive alternatives,
Attachment 1, Page 15 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 8 of 22
Page 8 of 22
including, but not limited to, less sensitive sites, alternative design systems, alternative
tower designs, the use of repeaters, or multiple facilities. Subsection F.5. defines the
type of WTS facilities that are allowed in each zoning district.
5. Location of WTS Facilities by Type. Subsection E. defines various types of WTS
facilities by their visual impact. These are: high visibility, moderate visibility, low visibility
and stealth facilities. Table 4.3-1 lists the type of WTS facilities allowed in each of
Springfield’s zoning districts.
Table 4.3-1
Zoning Districts Types Allowed
Special Heavy Industrial High visibility
Heavy Industrial Moderate visibility
Light-Medium Industrial Low visibility
Quarry Mining Operations Stealth
Community Commercial Moderate visibility
Campus Industrial Low visibility
Booth Kelly Mixed Use Stealth
Major Retail Commercial
Mixed Use Employment
Mixed Use Commercial
Medical Service
Public Land and Open Space (1)
Neighborhood Commercial Low visibility
General Office Stealth
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Use Residential
(1) Moderate visibility WTS facilities in the Public Land and Open Space District are allowed only within the city
limits.
6. Maximum Number of High Visibility WTS Facilities. No more than 1 high visibility
facility is allowed on any 1 lot/parcel.
EXCEPTION: The Approval Authority may approve exceeding the maximum number of
high visibility facilities per lot/parcel if one of the following findings is made:
a. Co-location of additional high visibility facilities is consistent with
neighborhood character;
b. The provider has shown that denial of an application for additional high
visibility WTS facilities would have the effect of prohibiting service because the
proposed facility would fill a significant gap in coverage and no alternative
locations are available and technologically feasible; or
Attachment 1, Page 16 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 9 of 22
Page 9 of 22
c. The provider has shown that denial of an application for additional high
visibility WTS facilities would unreasonably discriminate among providers of
functionally equivalent services.
7. Separation between Towers. No new WTS tower may be installed closer than
2,000 feet from any existing or proposed tower unless supporting findings can be made
under Subsections F.2., 3. and 4. by the Approval Authority.
8. WTS Facilities Adjacent to Residentially Zoned Property. In order to ensure
public safety, except for utility and light poles in the public right-of-way, all towers
located on or adjacent to any residential zoning district shall be set back from all
residential property lines by a distance at least equal to the height of the facility,
including any antennas or other appurtenances. The setback shall be measured from
that part of the WTS tower that is closest to the neighboring residentially zoned
property.
9. Historic Buildings and Structures. No WTS facility shall be allowed on any
building or structure, or in any district, that is listed on any Federal, State or local
historic register unless a finding is made by the Approval Authority that the proposed
facility will have no adverse effect on the appearance of the building, structure, or
district. No change in architecture and no high or moderate visibility WTS facilities are
permitted on any building or any site within a historic district. Proposed WTS facilities in
the Historic Overlay District are also subject to the applicable provisions of Section 3.3-
900.
10. Equipment Location. The following location standards shall apply to WTS
facilities, except for small wireless facilities located in the public right-of-way:
a. No WTS facility shall be located in a front, rear, or side yard building
setback in any base zone and no portion of any antenna array shall extend
beyond the property lines;
b. Where there is no building, the WTS facility shall be located at least 30
feet from a property line abutting a street;
c. For guyed WTS towers, all guy anchors shall be located at least 50 feet
from all property lines.
11. Tower Height. Towers may exceed the height limits otherwise provided for in
this Code. However, all towers greater than the height limit of the base zone shall
require Discretionary Use approval through a Type III review process, subject to the
approval criteria specified in Subsection I.
12. Accessory Building Size. All accessory buildings and structures built to contain
equipment accessory to a WTS facility shall not exceed 12 feet in height unless a greater
Attachment 1, Page 17 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 10 of 22
Page 10 of 22
height is necessary and required by a condition of approval to maximize architectural
integration. Each accessory building or structure located on any residential or public land
and open space zoned property is limited to 200 square feet, unless approved through
the Discretionary Use process.
13. Visual Impact. All WTS facilities shall be designed to minimize the visual impact
to the greatest extent practicable by means of placement, screening, landscaping, and
camouflage. All facilities shall also be designed to be compatible with existing
architectural elements, building materials, and other site characteristics. The applicant
shall use the least visible antennas reasonably available to accomplish the coverage
objectives. All high visibility and moderate visibility facilities shall be sited in a manner to
cause the least detriment to the viewshed of abutting properties, neighboring properties,
and distant properties.
14. Minimize Visibility. Colors and materials for WTS facilities shall be nonreflective
and chosen to minimize visibility. Facilities, including support equipment and buildings,
shall be painted or textured using colors to match or blend with the primary background,
unless required by any other applicable law.
15. Camouflaged Facilities. All camouflaged WTS facilities shall be designed to
visually and operationally blend into the surrounding area in a manner consistent with
existing development on adjacent properties. The facility shall also be appropriate for
the specific site. In other words, it shall not “stand out” from its surrounding
environment.
16. Façade-Mounted Antenna. Façade-mounted antennas shall be architecturally
integrated into the building design and otherwise made as unobtrusive as possible. If
possible, antennas shall be located entirely within an existing or newly created
architectural feature so as to be completely screened from view. Façade-mounted
antennas shall not extend more than 2 feet out from the building face.
17. Roof-Mounted Antenna. Roof-mounted antennas shall be constructed at the
minimum height possible to serve the operator’s service area and shall be set back as
far from the building edge as possible or otherwise screened to minimize visibility from
the public right-of-way and adjacent properties.
18. Compliance with Photo Simulations. As a condition of approval and prior to final
staff inspection of the WTS facility, the applicant shall submit evidence, e.g., photos,
sufficient to prove that the facility is in substantial conformance with photo simulations
provided with the initial application. Nonconformance shall require any necessary
modification to achieve compliance within 90 days of notifying the applicant.
19. Noise. Noise from any equipment supporting the WTS facility shall comply with
the regulations specified in OAR 340-035-0035.
Attachment 1, Page 18 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 11 of 22
Page 11 of 22
20. Signage. No signs, striping, graphics, or other attention-getting devices are
permitted on any WTS facility except for warning and safety signage that shall:
a. Have a surface area of no more than 3 square feet;
b. Be affixed to a fence or equipment cabinet; and
c. Be limited to no more than 2 signs, unless more are required by any
other applicable law.
21. Traffic Obstruction. Maintenance vehicles servicing WTS facilities located in the
public or private right-of-way shall not park on the traveled way or in a manner that
obstructs traffic.
22. Parking. No net loss in required on-site parking spaces shall occur as a result of
the installation of any WTS facility.
23. Sidewalks and Pathways. Cabinets and other equipment shall not impair
pedestrian use of sidewalks or other pedestrian paths or bikeways on public or private
land.
24. Lighting. WTS facilities shall not include any beacon lights or strobe lights,
unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other applicable
authority. If beacon lights or strobe lights are required, the Approval Authority shall
review any available alternatives and approve the design with the least visual impact. All
other site lighting for security and maintenance purposes shall be shielded and directed
downward, and shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards in Section 4.5-100,
unless required by any other applicable law.
25. Landscaping. For WTS facilities with towers that exceed the height limitations of
the base zone, at least 1 row of evergreen trees or shrubs, not less than 4 feet high at
the time of planting, and spaced out not more than 15 feet apart, shall be provided in
the landscape setback. Shrubs shall be of a variety that can be expected to grow to form
a continuous hedge at least 5 feet in height within 2 years of planting. Trees and shrubs
in the vicinity of guy wires shall be of a kind that would not exceed 20 feet in height or
would not affect the stability of the guys. In all other cases, the landscaping, screening
and fence standards specified in Section 4.4-100 shall apply.
26. Prohibited WTS Facilities.
a. Any high or moderate visibility WTS facility in the Historic Overlay
District.
b. Any WTS facility in the public right-of-way that severely limits access to
abutting property, which limits public access or use of the sidewalk, or which
constitutes a vision clearance violation.
Attachment 1, Page 19 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 12 of 22
Page 12 of 22
c. Any detached WTS facility taller than 150 feet above finished grade at
the base of the tower.
27. Speculation. No application shall be accepted or approved for a speculation
WTS tower, i.e., from an applicant that simply constructs towers and leases tower space
to service carriers, but is not a service carrier, unless the applicant submits a binding
written commitment or executed lease from a service carrier to utilize or lease space on
the tower.
28. Small Wireless Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way. Small wireless facilities in
the public right-of-way must comply with the following standards:
a. The structure to which a small wireless facility is attached must be:
i. A utility or light pole 50 feet or less in height, including antenna
height; or
ii. A light pole no more than 10% taller than the existing light pole or
closest adjacent light pole, including antenna height; or
iii. A utility pole no more than 10% taller than the existing utility pole
or the closest adjacent utility pole, including antenna height.
b. Each antenna associated with the small wireless facility, excluding
associated antenna equipment, must be no more than 3 cubic feet in
volume. Antenna equipment includes only such equipment that is
associated with, and accessory to, the antenna that is located in the
same position on a pole as the antenna, is installed at the same time as
the antenna, which the antenna requires to function.
c. All wireless equipment associated with the structure other than the
antenna, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna
and any pre-existing associated equipment on the structure, must be no
more than 28 cubic feet in volume.
d. No more than a total of two antennas or antenna arrays may be located
on a single pole.
e. Antennas may not project more than five feet above or two feet laterally
from the pole. Omni-directional antennas mounted above the pole may
not exceed the diameter of the pole on which they are attached.
f. All equipment must be mounted to the pole at least 10 feet above grade.
Alternately, equipment may be located in an underground vault or
another location on the pole upon approval by the City Engineer.
g. Other than the antenna, antenna equipment and power disconnect, all
pole-mounted equipment must be concealed in a single flush-mounted
Attachment 1, Page 20 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 13 of 22
Page 13 of 22
cabinet that complies with the dimensional standards in this section or
otherwise entirely shielded from public view. EXCEPTION: Multiple
equipment cabinets on a single pole are permitted only when necessary
to comply with the pole owner’s joint use requirements.
h. All cabling and wires that run between the antenna and equipment must
be concealed or shielded inside conduit.
i. All antennas, equipment, conduit, cabling, cabinets and ancillary parts
must be painted or textured in a non-reflective neutral color that matches
the pole.
j. Where there are no existing overhead utilities, utility service lines and
backhaul fiber must be located underground, unless approved otherwise
by the City Engineer.
k. All new or replacement utility or light poles in the public right-of-way that
are proposed for the purpose of attaching small wireless facilities must
comply with the following:
i. A replacement utility or light pole must be placed in the same
location as the existing pole, unless minor adjustments to location
are needed to comply with ADA requirements or for public safety,
as determined by the City Engineer.
ii. A new utility or light pole is permitted only when no other existing
utility or light pole is available or suitable to accommodate the
small wireless facility, and no other utility or light pole is available
or suitable to be replaced or modified to accommodate the small
wireless facility.
iii. The location of a new utility or light pole must not be located in a
sidewalk or vision clearance area; must not interfere with other
utilities, traffic control devices, or intersections; and must be safe,
as determined by the City Engineer.
l. Small wireless facilities are not permitted on decorative light poles and no
decorative light poles will be removed or replaced to accommodate small
wireless facilities. EXCEPTION: Upon a determination that no other
option is available for meeting an identified capacity or coverage need,
including locating the small wireless facility on private property outside
the public right-of-way, the City will permit replacement of a decorative
light pole with a small wireless facility that is camouflaged to match the
existing decorative pole.
G. Application Submittal Requirements. All applications for a WTS facility shall provide the
following reports, documents or documentation:
Attachment 1, Page 21 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 14 of 22
Page 14 of 22
1. Submittal Requirements for Low Visibility and Stealth Facilities (Type I review).
All applications for low visibility and stealth WTS facilities shall submit the following
reports and documentation:
a. Narrative. The application shall include a written narrative that describes
in detail all of the equipment and components proposed to be part of the WTS
facility, including, but not limited to, towers, antennas and arrays, equipment
cabinets, back-up generators, air conditioning units, lighting, landscaping and
fencing.
b. Geographic Service Area. The applicant shall identify the geographic
service area for the proposed WTS facility, including a map showing all of the
applicant’s and any other existing sites in the local service network associated
with the gap the facility is meant to close. The applicant shall describe how this
service area fits into and is necessary for the service provider’s service network.
The service area map for the proposed WTS facility shall include the following:
i. The area of significant gap in the existing coverage area;
ii. The service area to be effected by the proposed WTS facility;
iii. The locations of existing WTS tower facilities where co-location is
possible within a 5-mile radius of the proposed WTS facility.
c. Co-Location. An engineer’s analysis/report of the recommended site
location area is required for the proposed WTS facility. For small wireless
facilities in the public right-of-way, this report is required only when a new utility
or light pole is proposed. If an existing structure approved for co-location is
within the area recommended by the engineer’s report, reasons for not
collocating shall be provided demonstrating at least one of the following
deficiencies:
i. The structure is not of sufficient height to meet engineering
requirements;
ii. The structure is not of sufficient structural strength to
accommodate the WTS facility, or there is a lack of space on all suitable
existing towers to locate proposed antennas;
iii. Electromagnetic interference for one or both WTS facilities will
result from co-location; or
iv. The radio frequency coverage objective cannot be adequately
met.
Attachment 1, Page 22 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 15 of 22
Page 15 of 22
d. Plot Plan. A plot plan showing: the lease area, antenna structure, height
above grade and setback from property lines, equipment shelters and setback
from property lines, access, the connection point with the land line system, and
all landscape areas intended to screen the WTS facility.
e. RF Emissions. An engineer’s statement that the RF emissions at grade,
or at nearest habitable space when attached to an existing structure, complies
with FCC rules for these emissions; the cumulative RF emissions if co-located.
Provide the RF range in megahertz and the wattage output of the equipment.
f. Description of Service. A description of the type of service offered
including, but not limited to: voice, data, video and the consumer receiving
equipment.
g. Provider Information. Identification of the provider and backhaul
provider, if different.
h. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation. Provide the zoning and
applicable comprehensive plan (e.g., Metro Plan, 2030 Springfield Refinement
Plan) designation of the proposed site and the surrounding properties within 500
feet.
i. FCC, FAA or Other Required Licenses and Determinations. Provide a
copy of all pertinent submittals to the FCC, FAA or other State or Federal
agencies including environmental assessments and impact statements, and data,
assumptions, calculations, and measurements relating to RF emissions safety
standards.
j. Small Wireless Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way. Applications for small
wireless facilities in City limits in the public right-of-way must also include:
i. A structural report stamped by an Oregon licensed engineer that
the utility or light pole can structurally accommodate the proposed
small wireless facility; For attachment to existing utility or light
poles, the engineer who authors and stamps the report must have
conducted an in-person inspection of the pole and any issues with
the condition of the pole must be noted in the report;
ii. A photo simulation showing the maximum silhouette, color and
finish of the proposed facility;
iii. For poles that are not owned by the City of Springfield, a copy of
the existing or proposed pole attachment agreement or facility
lease; and
iv. All necessary permits and applications required under the
Springfield Municipal Code, which may be processed concurrently.
2. Submittal Requirements for Moderate and High Visibility Facilities (Type III
Review). Applications for moderate and high visibility WTS facilities shall require all of
Attachment 1, Page 23 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 16 of 22
Page 16 of 22
the required materials for low visibility and stealth WTS facilities specified in Subsection
G.1. In addition to the applicable Site Plan and Discretionary Use application
requirements, WTS applications shall require the applicant to address the following:
a. Height. Provide an engineer’s diagram showing the height of the WTS
facility and all of its visible components, including the number and types of
antennas that can be accommodated. Carriers shall provide evidence that
establishes that the proposed WTS facilities are designed to the minimum height
required from a technological standpoint to meet the carrier’s coverage
objectives. If the WTS facility tower height will exceed the height restrictions of
the applicable base zone, the narrative shall include a discussion of the physical
constraints, e.g., topographical features, making the additional height necessary.
The narrative shall include consideration of the possibility for design alternatives,
including the use of multiple sites or microcell technology that would avoid the
need for the additional height for the proposed WTS facility.
b. Construction. Describe the anticipated construction techniques and
timeframe for construction or installation of the WTS facility to include all
temporary staging and the type of vehicles and equipment to be used.
c. Maintenance. Describe the anticipated maintenance and monitoring
program for the antennas, back-up equipment, and landscaping.
d. Noise/Acoustical Information. Provide the manufacturer’s specifications
for all noise-generating equipment including, but not limited to, air conditioning
units and back-up generators, and a depiction of the equipment location in
relation to abutting properties.
e. Landscaping and Screening. Discuss how the proposed landscaping and
screening materials will screen the site at maturity.
f. Co-Location. In addition to the co-location requirements specified in
Subsection G.1.c., the applicant shall submit a statement from an Oregon
registered engineer certifying that the proposed WTS facility and tower, as
designed and built, will accommodate co-locations, and that the facility complies
with the non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emission standards as specified
by the FCC. The applicant shall also submit:
i. A letter stating the applicant’s willingness to allow other carriers
to co-locate on the proposed facilities wherever technically and
economically feasible and aesthetically desirable;
ii. A copy of the original Site Plan for the approved existing WTS
facility updated to reflect current and proposed conditions on the site;
and
Attachment 1, Page 24 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 17 of 22
Page 17 of 22
iii. A depiction of the existing WTS facility showing the proposed
placement of the co-located antenna and associated equipment. The
depiction shall note the height, color and physical arrangement of the
antenna and equipment.
g. Lease. If the site is to be leased, a copy of the proposed or existing
lease agreement authorizing development and operation of the proposed WTS
facility.
h. Legal Access. The applicant shall provide copies of existing or proposed
easements, access permits and/or grants of right-of-way necessary to provide
lawful access to and from the site to a City street or a State highway.
i. Lighting and Marking. Any proposed lighting and marking of the WTS
facility, including any required by the FAA.
j. Utilities. Utility and service lines for proposed WTS facilities shall be
placed underground.
k. Alternative Site Analysis. The applicant shall include an analysis of
alternative sites and technological design options for the WTS facility within and
outside of the City that are capable of meeting the same service objectives as
the proposed site with an equivalent or lesser visual or aesthetic impact. If a new
tower is proposed, the applicant shall demonstrate the need for a new tower,
and why alternative locations and design alternatives, or alternative technologies
including, but not limited to microcells and signal repeaters, cannot be used to
meet the identified service objectives.
l. Visual Impact Study and Photo Simulations. The applicant shall provide a
visual impact analysis showing the maximum silhouette, viewshed analysis, color
and finish palette, and screening for all components of the proposed WTS facility.
The analysis shall include photo simulations and other information necessary to
determine visual impact of the facility as seen from multiple directions. The
applicant shall include a map showing where the photos were taken.
3. Independent Consultation Report.
a. Review and approval of WTS facilities depends on highly specialized
scientific and engineering expertise not ordinarily available to Springfield staff or
to residents who may be adversely impacted by the proposed development of
these facilities. Therefore, in order to allow the Approval Authority to make an
informed decision on a proposed WTS facility, the Director may require the
applicant to fund an independent consultation report for all new moderate and
high visibility facilities. The consultation shall be performed by a qualified
professional with expertise pertinent to the scope of the service requested.
Attachment 1, Page 25 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 18 of 22
Page 18 of 22
b. The scope of the independent consultation shall focus on the applicant’s
alternatives analysis. The consultant will evaluate conclusions of applicant’s
analysis to determine if there are alternative locations or technologies that were
not considered or which could be employed to reduce the service gap but with
less visual or aesthetic impact. There may be circumstances where this scope
may vary but the overall objective shall be to verify that the applicant’s proposal
is safe and is the least impactful alternative for closing the service gap.
c. The applicant shall be informed of the Director’s decision about the need
for an independent consultation at the time of the Pre-Submittal Meeting that is
required under Section 5.1-120C. It is anticipated that the independent
consultation will be required when the applicant proposes to locate a moderate
or high visibility WTS facility in a residential zoning district or within 500 feet of a
residential zoning district. Other instances where a proposed WTS facility may
have a visual or aesthetic impact on sensitive neighborhoods could also prompt
the Director to require an independent consultation.
H. Review Process. The review process is determined by the type of WTS facility or activity
that is proposed. High or moderate visibility WTS facilities, defined in Subsection E., require
Type III Planning Commission or Hearings Official review. Low visibility or stealth facilities, and
the co-location of new equipment of existing facilities are allowed under a Type I staff review
with applicable building or electrical permits. Routine equipment repair and maintenance do not
require planning review; however, applicable building and electrical permits are required.
1. Development Issues Meeting. A Development Issues Meeting (DIM) as specified
in Subsection 5.1-120A. is required only for high and moderate visibility WTS facility
applications. Applicable development standards as specified in Subsection F. and
submittal requirements as specified in Subsection G., will be discussed at the DIM.
2. Type I Review Process. The following WTS facilities are allowed with the
approval of the Director with applicable building and electrical permits:
a. Stealth and low visibility WTS facilities, as defined in Subsection E., in
any zoning district.
b. Façade-mounted antennas or low powered networked
telecommunications facilities, e.g., as those employing microcell antennas
integrated into the architecture of an existing building in a manner that no
change to the architecture is apparent and no part of the WTS facility is visible to
public view.
c. Antennas or arrays that are hidden from public view through the use of
architectural treatments, e.g., within a cupola, steeple, or parapet which is
consistent with the applicable building height limitation.
Attachment 1, Page 26 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 19 of 22
Page 19 of 22
d. New antennas or arrays including side-mounted antennas and small top-
mounted antennas that are attached to an existing broadcast communication
facility located in any zone. No more than 3 small top-mounted antennas shall be
placed on the top of any one facility without a Type III review.
e. To minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation and
clustering of towers, co-location of antennas or arrays on existing towers shall
take precedence over the construction of new towers, provided the co-location is
accomplished in a manner consistent with the following:
i. An existing tower may be modified or rebuilt to a taller height to
accommodate the co-location of additional antennas or arrays, as long as
the modified or rebuilt tower will not exceed the height limit of the
applicable zoning district. Proposals to increase the height of a tower in a
residential zoning district, or within 500 feet of a residential zoning district
shall be reviewed under a Type III process. The height change may only
occur one time per tower.
ii. An existing tower that is modified or reconstructed to
accommodate the co-location of additional antennas or arrays shall be of
the same tower type and reconstructed in the exact same location as the
existing tower.
f. WTS Small wireless facilities proposed within the public right-of-way on
an existing, modified, or replacement utility or light pole in any zoning district in
City limits, that meet the standards in section 4.3-145.F.28., so long as they
meet all of the following:
i. The antennas do not project more than 24 inches above the existing
utility pole support structure;
ii. No more than a total of 2 antennas or antenna arrays are located on a
single pole; and
iii. The equipment cabinet is no larger than 6 cubic feet and is concealed
from public view by burying or screening by means other than walls or fences.
g. Co-location of antennas or arrays on existing WTS facilities.
h. The Director will use the applicable criteria specified in Subsection I. to
evaluate the proposal.
3. Type III Review Process. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official review
and approve a Discretionary Use application and a concurrently processed Site Plan
Review application for the following WTS facilities:
Attachment 1, Page 27 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 20 of 22
Page 20 of 22
a. High visibility and moderate visibility WTS facilities.
b. All other locations and situations not specified in Subsections H.2. and 3.
c. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official will use the applicable
criteria specified in Subsection I. in place of the Discretionary Use criteria in
Section 5.9-120 to evaluate the proposal.
4. Council Notification and Possible Review.
a. A briefing memorandum shall be prepared and submitted to the City
Council upon receipt of an application for a high or moderate visibility or any
other WTS facility subject to review by the Planning Commission. By action of the
City Council, an application for a facility proposed within the city limits may be
elevated for direct City Council review. In those instances where an application is
elevated for direct review, the City Council shall be the Approval Authority and
will use the applicable criteria specified in Subsection I. in place of the
Discretionary Use criteria in Section 5.9-120 to evaluate the proposal.
b. By agreement with Lane County, the Hearings Official shall be the
Approval Authority for applications outside of the city limits but inside of the
Springfield Urban Growth Boundary. The Hearings Official will use the applicable
criteria specified in Subsection I. in place of the Discretionary Use criteria in
Section 5.9-120 to evaluate the proposal.
I. Approval Criteria.
1. Low Visibility and Stealth WTS Facility Applications. The Director shall approve
the low visibility and stealth WTS facility applications upon a determination that the
applicable standards specified in Subsection F. and the submittal requirements specified
in Subsection G. are met.
2. Moderate and High Visibility WTS Facility Applications. The Approval Authority
shall approve moderate visibility and high visibility WTS facility applications upon a
determination that the applicable standards specified in Subsection F. and the submittal
requirements specified in Subsection G. are met. Through the Discretionary Use review,
the Approval Authority shall also determine if there are any impacts of the proposed
WTS facility on adjacent properties and on the public that can be mitigated through
application of other Springfield Development Code standards or conditions of approval
as specified in Subsection J.
J. Conditions of Approval. For Type III applications, the Approval Authority may impose
any reasonable conditions deemed necessary to achieve compliance with the approval criteria
as allowed by Section 5.9-125.
Attachment 1, Page 28 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 21 of 22
Page 21 of 22
K. Maintenance. The property owner and the carrier in charge of the WTS facility and
tower shall maintain all equipment and structures, landscaping, driveways and mitigating
measures as approved. Additionally:
1. All WTS facilities shall maintain compliance with current RF emission standards
of the FCC, the National Electric Safety Code, and all State and local regulations.
2. All equipment cabinets shall display a legible operator’s contact number for
reporting maintenance problems.
L. Inspections.
1. The City shall have the authority to enter onto the property upon which a WTS
facility is located to inspect the facility for the purpose of determining whether it
complies with the Building Code and all other construction standards provided by the
City and Federal and State law.
2. The City reserves the right to conduct inspections at any time, upon reasonable
notice to the WTS facility owner. In the event the inspection results in a determination
that violation of applicable construction and maintenance standards established by the
City has occurred, remedy of the violation may include cost recovery for all City costs
incurred in confirming and processing the violation.
M. Abandonment or Discontinuation of Use. The following requirements apply to the
abandonment and/or discontinuation of use for all WTS facilities:
1. All WTS facilities located on a utility pole shall be promptly removed at the
operator’s expense at any time a utility is scheduled to be placed underground or
otherwise moved.
2. All operators who intend to abandon or discontinue the use of any WTS facility
shall notify the City of their intentions no less than 60 days prior to the final day of use.
3. WTS facilities shall be considered abandoned 90 days following the final day of
use or operation.
4. All abandoned WTS facilities shall be physically removed by the service provider
and/or property owner no more than 90 days following the final day of use or of
determination that the facility has been abandoned, whichever occurs first.
5. The City reserves the right to remove any WTS facilities that are abandoned for
more than 90 days at the expense of the facility owner.
6. Any abandoned site shall be restored to its natural or former condition. Grading
and landscaping in good condition may remain.
Attachment 1, Page 29 of 30
Exhibit B – Proposed Code Amendments, Page 22 of 22
Page 22 of 22
N. Review of WTS Facilities Standards. In the event that the Federal or State government
adopts mandatory or advisory standards more stringent than those described in this Section,
staff will prepare a report and recommendation for the City Council with recommendations on
any necessary amendments to the City’s adopted standards.
Attachment 1, Page 30 of 30