City of Mercer Island, Washington - Home City of Mercer Island, Washington - Home Facebook Twitter YouTube
site map
Back
LINE
*
Notify me by Email
Wednesday, September 25, 2002

Call To Order

Vice Chairman Sandler called the meeting to order at 7:43 PM in the Council Chambers, 9611 SE 36th Street, Mercer Island, Washington.

Roll Call

Bryan Caditz, Marcia Dawson, Attila Laszlo, Vice Chairman Norman Sandler, and George Wittman were present. Carl Bryant and Chairman Fred Glick were absent.

Staff Present

Richard Hart, Development Services Director; John Scandola, Associate Planner

Minutes

Commissioner Dawson moved, Commissioner Laszlo seconded, to approve the minutes for the special meeting of August 14, 2002. The minutes were approved by a vote of 5-0.

Regular Business

Action Item #1: The applicant, In Form Architects, is requesting design review and approval for the replacement of two canopy wall signs, the replacement of a monument sign, the installation of two fuel station canopy signs, and the refacing of the canopies for the conversion of an existing Texaco service station to a Shell service station. This station is located at 7655 Sunset Highway (DSR02-023). This proposal has been continued from the August 14, 2002 Design Commission meeting.

John Scandola, Associate Planner, summarized the staff report for the proposed service station conversion. At the previous meeting, the Design Commission felt that the background colors of the service station building and fuel station canopy were too bright and recommended that the applicant return to the Commission with a more muted color scheme. The Commission recommended using gray as a background color, which is the color used of the Shell station located on SE 28th Street in the Town Center. The applicant returned with a proposal to use tan instead of the originally proposed white and yellow. Staff recommended approval with the use of a different color than tan.

John Hibbard, 12330 120th Avenue NE, Kirkland, WA 98034, represented the applicant and presented the proposal.

The Design Commission questioned the use tan instead of the recommended gray. The applicant indicated that gray could not be used due to an agreement between Shell’s corporate stations, such as the locations on Sunset Highway and 78th Avenue SE, and independently owned stations, such as the station on SE 28th Street. Tan was chosen as a background color since it was acceptable to Shell.

Vice Chairman Sandler opened the public testimony portion of the meeting; there were no comments so the public testimony portion of the meeting was closed.

The Design Commission expressed a need for consistency regarding colors of the existing and proposed Shell stations in the Town Center. A significant difference in background colors of these stations would stand out and the Commissioners prefer the gray of the SE 28th Street service station. The Commission concluded that the proposed tan color of the Shell proposal was not appropriate and did not meet the Town Center design standards. The applicant should return with a proposal that is consistent with the gray color scheme of the existing Shell station on SE 28th Street.

Motion:
Commissioner Wittman moved, seconded by Commissioner Dawson, to continue the review for the proposed conversion of the existing Texaco service station to a Shell service station, located at 7655 Sunset Highway (DSR02-023) to the October 23, 2002 Design Commission meeting. The Commission requested that the applicant should return with a new proposal that addresses the following issues:

  1. The color proposal for this location should be consistent with the color scheme of the Shell station located at 7833 SE 28th Street in the Town Center in order to meet the current design standards and criteria outlined in MICC Title 19, Division II, Part 2. Design Requirements. The Design Commission would like to see consistency of colors between the existing and proposed Shell stations located on Mercer Island and fewer bright and bold colors.
  2. The applicant should examine using a palette of grays that are present at the 7833 SE 28th Street location.
  3. The primary colors of the Shell identification signs should be white, similar to the identification signs of the Shell station on SE 28th Street.
  4. The color of the underside of the fueling station canopy should be identical to the underside of the canopy of the SE 28th Street location.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.


Action Item #2:
The applicant, In Form Architects, is requesting design review and approval for the installation of three canopy wall signs, the replacement of a monument sign, the removal of an existing wall sign, and the refacing of canopies for the conversion of an existing Texaco station to a Shell station. This station is located at 2903 78th Avenue SE (DSR02-024). This proposal has been continued from the August 14, 2002 Design Commission meeting.

John Scandola, Associate Planner, summarized the staff report for the proposed service station conversion. At the previous meeting, the Design Commission felt that the background colors of the food mart building and fuel station canopy were too bright and recommended that the applicant return to the Commission with a more muted color scheme. The Commission recommended using gray as a background color, which is the color used of the Shell station located on SE 28th Street in the Town Center. The applicant returned with a proposal to uses tan instead of the originally proposed white and yellow. Staff recommended approval with the use of a different color than tan.

John Hibbard, 12330 120th Avenue NE, Kirkland, WA 98034, represented the applicant and presented the proposal.

As with the previous Action Item, the Design Commission questioned the use of tan instead of the recommended gray. The applicant indicated that gray could not be used due to an agreement between Shell’s corporate stations, such as the locations on Sunset Highway and 78th Avenue SE, and independently owned stations, such as the station on SE 28th Street. Tan was chosen as a background color since it was acceptable to Shell.

Vice Chairman Sandler opened the public testimony portion of the meeting; there were no comments so the public testimony portion of the meeting was closed.

The Design Commission expressed a need for consistency regarding colors of the existing and proposed Shell stations in the Town Center. A significant difference in background colors of these stations would stand out and the Commissioners prefer the gray of the SE 28th Street service station. The Commission concluded that the proposed tan color of the Shell proposal was not appropriate and did not meet the Town Center design standards. The applicant should return with a proposal that is consistent with the gray color scheme of the existing Shell station on SE 28th Street.

Motion:
Commissioner Laszlo moved, seconded by Commissioner Dawson, to continue the review for the proposed conversion of the existing Texaco service station to a Shell service station, located at 2903 78th Avenue SE (DSR02-024) to the October 23, 2002 Design Commission meeting. The Commission requested that the applicant should return with a new proposal that addresses the following issues:

  1. The color proposal for this location should be consistent with the color scheme of the Shell station located at 7833 SE 28th Street in the Town Center in order to meet the current design standards and criteria outlined in MICC Title 19, Division II, Part 2. Design Requirements. The Design Commission would like to see consistency of colors between the existing and proposed Shell stations located on Mercer Island and fewer bright and bold colors.
  2. The applicant should examine using a palette of grays that are present at the 7833 SE 28th Street location.
  3. The primary colors of the Shell identification signs should be white, similar to the identification signs of the Shell station on SE 28th Street.
  4. The color of the underside of the fueling station canopy should be identical to the underside of the canopy of the SE 28th Street location.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.


Action Item #3: The applicant, VoiceStream Wireless, is requesting design review and approval for the installation of a wireless communications facility (WCF) to be placed on a 100’ tall replacement utility pole to be located in the ROW of Island Crest Way near SE 58th Street (DSR0009-02/VAR0009-003/SEP0003-003). The associated equipment cabinet will be buried adjacent to the utility pole. The proposal includes a variance request to allow for the installation of antennas that are larger than microcells.

Richard Hart, Development Services Director, summarized the staff report for the proposed WCF. Mr. Hart discussed the legal issues regarding the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and FCC regulations, which jurisdictions must follow when reviewing and regulating wireless communication facilities. Staff offered two options to the Design Commission regarding the review of this project. The recommended option is the approval of the WCF proposal with the condition that the height of the facility is to not exceed 83’, which is the height of a nearby WCF. The secondary option is to continue the review to a future meeting if the Design Commission needs more information regarding the justification of the need of the facility and other placement options.

Craig Walkenhorst of SecuraSite LLC, 2373 NW 185th Ave., Hillsboro, OR, represented the applicant and presented the WCF proposal. Alec Petrofson and Mike Corcoran of VoiceStream, 4500 NE Irving, Suite 530, Portland, OR, also represented the applicant. The applicant stated that a variance was required since the VoiceStream network operates at a frequency that cannot be used by antennas that are the size of “microcells” as defined in the Mercer Island City Code. Therefore, antennas larger than “microcells” are required. They also contend that a facility at this location is needed to eliminate the lack of service coverage over this portion of the island.

Vice Chairman Sandler opened the public comment portion of the meeting, and there were comments from the following citizens:

Jane Christenson, 5717 91st Avenue SE: Ms. Christenson has concerns about the proliferation of these facilities along Island Crest Way and why the applicant is not collocating on an existing facility. She claims that local communities have discretion in regulating WCFs.

Virgil Peterson, 8940 SE 56th Street: Mr. Peterson indicated that an 83’ tall pole will have visual impacts and yet the facility may not function properly at that height.

Jane Clayton, 5720 91st Avenue SE: Ms. Clayton feels that this facility is too big, too close to the adjacent residences, and there are too many facilities along Island Crest Way. The City needs to have more regulatory control over such facilities.

Colin Fukano, 5639 89th Avenue SE: Mr. Fukano objects to the proposed location of this facility since it is adjacent to their property. He suggests that VoiceStream look at the west side of Island Crest Way as a possible location.

Peter Christenson, 5717 91st Avenue SE: Mr. Christenson indicated that the City is addressing VoiceStream but not the citizens. He feels that the Design Commission has the authority to deny the project and objects to the proposed location’s proximity to the elementary school.

Fred LaCroix, 9104 SE 57th Street: Mr. LaCroix feels that the need for this facility at this location has not been justified.

Michael Cimino, 5649 89th Avenue SE: Mr. Cimino is concerned about the potential safety risks of such a facility located adjacent in their neighborhood.

Vice Chairman Sandler closed the public testimony portion of the meeting. The Commission then discussed a number of issues and concerns regarding the proposed project. These issues are as follows:

  • How much authority does the Design Commission have in regulating such facilities? Can the Commission regulate the number and height of WCFs?
  • The documentation of need for this proposal at this location.
  • The need for a master plan of wireless communication facilities on Mercer Island.
  • How well will the WCF be screened?
  • Is it possible to locate the facility on the west side of Island Crest Way?
  • Can this facility be collocated on an existing facility?
  • The need for a more detailed analysis of coverage and collocation possibilities.

The applicant responded that this facility is unstaffed and will not impact traffic along Island Crest Way. He said that collocation is typically a preferred option since zoning issues have already been addressed and the tower is already there. However, collocating on existing facilities along Island Crest Way will not address their coverage needs on Mercer Island.

The Commission determined that they need more information regarding the need for this facility at this location and collocation possibilities. The Commission asked Staff to provide an updated map of all the wireless communications facilities and the associated carriers on the island.

Motion:
Commissioner Wittman moved, seconded by Commissioner Caditz, to continue the public meeting for design review of the VoiceStream Wireless project (DSR0009-002/VAR0009-003/SEP0009-003) to the October 9, 2002 Design Commission meeting. This review should be continued in order to obtain information relating to the need of such facilities and the specific design and location of such facilities in order to meet the City’s review criteria and standards. The information requested by the Design Commission is as follows:

  • A clear evaluation of the need for the proposed facility based on geographic areas without service.
  • A map that features all VoiceStream wireless communications facilities that serve Mercer Island and their areas of coverage. These facilities could be located off of the island. A clear explanation of the meaning of the map features should be included.
  • A geographic explanation of the percentage of calls that are dropped due to the lack of the proposed facility.
  • An evaluation of potential collocation with existing or proposed facilities on Island Crest Way. This assessment should include an explanation of coverage if the proposed facility would be collocated as opposed to being installed at the proposed location.
  • An assessment of the feasibility of locating this facility on the west side of Island Crest Way.
  • An evaluation of the differences in coverage between an 83’ high tower and a 100’ high tower.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.

Other Business

Director’sComments:
Director Hart described the process involving for amending the City Code relating to WCFs. Direction for any changes to the City’s code regarding WCFs would have to come from City Council. These changes would not affect the VoiceStream proposal.

Commissioners’ Absences:
Commissioner Laszlo will no longer be with the Commission and Commissioner Dawson indicated that she would be unable to attend the meeting on October 9, 2002.

Council Liaison Report:
Councilmember Cairns was not present.

Next Regular Meeting:
There are four agenda items scheduled for the next meeting of October 9, 2002. The continuation of the VoiceStream WCF and three proposed AT & T WCFs. Shores.

Adjournment
10:37 PM

[Important Note: The proceedings of the Design Commission meeting were recorded on tape and are on file with the Development Services Group. The complete agenda and official minutes of this meeting are also available from the Development Services Group.]

 

City of Mercer Island Washington | All Rights Reserved © 2018| Privacy Policy | printer friendly version Printer friendly version | Site by ProjectA.com