HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOC Minutes 2020-03-111
TOWN OF ITHACA CODES AND ORDINANCES COMMITTEE (COC)
Meeting of March 11, 2020 – 5:32 P.M.
Approved Minutes
Present: Bill Goodman, Chair; Pat Leary, Eric Levine, Eva Hoffmann, Bill King; Marty Moseley,
Director of Code Enforcement; Chris Balestra, Planning; and Susan Brock, Counsel.
Absent: Yvonne Fogarty, Susan Ritter and Paulette Rosa
1. Member Comments/Concerns
None.
2. Approval of Minutes from September 11, 2019 & January 29, 2020 meetings
Susan Brock provided a redlined set of the September 2019 minutes in the mailout for the committee
to consider. After a short discussion, the committee approved the September 2019 minutes as changed,
with Eric moving and Pat seconding the vote. Eva Abstained.
The committee also unanimously approved the January 29, 2020 minutes, with a few typos and
corrections. Moved by Eric, seconded by Eva.
3. Continued discussion of Town Telecommunications Law revisions
Chris explained to the committee that the flow charts that were included in the mail out were more
accurate versions of the flow chart that Susan drafted at the last COC meeting. The revised charts
explain the approval process for all facilities. They also include references to the revised
“Recommendations for Approval Process and Aesthetic Requirements” list - also included in the mail
out - which apply to the various facilities.
Susan walked the committee through the revised charts, explaining that they are meant to help the
town decide how they want to regulate and treat the various wireless facilities. The blue chart applies
to facilities that are not collocated onto an existing structure - these refer to a new tower or new small
wireless facility/system. Susan explained that the new small wireless facilities are generally much
shorter than a traditional cell tower, with most of them around 50 feet tall maximum. The chart shows
which approval process, aesthetic requirements and shot clock for approvals apply to a new tower
versus a small wireless facility, or for a wireless facility system (e.g. Distribution Antenna
System/DAS). The blue chart also contains highlighted questions for the committee to consider. The
committee decided to require the same process for DAS systems regardless of whether they were
located in or out of the ROW. The committee also agreed that a new individual small wireless facility
required internal Planning staff review instead of Planning Board approval. (See the discussion later in
the meeting about whether to require Planning Board approval of new small wireless facilities located
within scenic views.)
The red chart applies to facilities that are collocated onto existing structures. Susan explained that this
chart was more complicated because it involved more FCC Orders to follow. She explained the
“substantial change” Order that relates to proposed changes to existing cell towers and the subsequent
municipal approval requirement (“shall approve”) that applies to non-substantial changes. Susan noted
2
that the FCC wasn’t specific as to which Order applied to small wireless facility collocation changes
and that it remained unclear if the “substantial change” Order applied to small cells at all. The red chart
reflected different procedures under the “substantial change” category for small facility collocations.
The committee reviewed the FCC criteria for what constituted a substantial change for communication
towers outside the ROW. The committee also reviewed the separate (and more stringent) FCC criteria
for what constituted a substantial change for communication towers in the ROW (multi-part test that
included items such as height increases more than 10% or 10 feet, new items on structures that extend
horizontally more than six feet, increase in the size of cabinets by a certain percentage, etc.). After a
long discussion, the committee decided to treat small cell collocations that constitute “substantial”
changes just like all other substantial changes and require Planning Board site plan approval and
special permit. Chris will modify the red chart accordingly.
Susan guided the committee to the remaining portions of the red chart that did not apply to the
“substantial change” Order (collocations onto structures other than communications towers). Staff
recommended internal staff review of collocations on existing structures, whether the collocation was a
small cell wireless facility or not. The only change would be the FCC shot clock requirement, which is
60 days for small cell wireless collocations on structures and 90 days for all other collocations on
structures. The COC agreed to the internal staff review.
The two flow charts are attached to these minutes, annotated to illustrate the committee’s discussion
and decisions.
During the discussion of the flow charts, Eva mentioned that she didn’t see anything related to the
protection of scenic views. She requested a prohibition of new facilities located in public spaces, such
as along roads and in parks, or the locations that are listed in the town Scenic Resources Inventory.
The committee discussed this and asked staff to revise the aesthetic requirements recommendation list
to include Planning Board review for any small cell facility located within the top ten views listed in
the Scenic Resources Inventory. This would be for cell systems (DAS) and for individual cells. Chris
will look at other laws to see if she can pull language related to scenic view protection from them to
use for the revised list.
The committee then moved on to a review of the revised “Recommendations for Approval Process and
Aesthetic Requirements” list that was included in the mail out. The committee had a question about
undergrounding of equipment, and a discussion ensued around the concept of requiring
undergrounding for all facilities (utilities), not just telecommunications facilities. We may need to
update the list to remove or revise undergrounding as a requirement. Chris and Susan will research
this more thoroughly.
The COC concluded their review of the flow charts and recommendation list.
4. Other Business
The committee approved the 2020 COC meeting schedule.
The next meeting will be April 8th and the agenda will include a continued review of the
Telecommunications Law update, along with potential updates to the Building and Fire
Prevention Local Law and more updates to the Sign Law.
3
There is the potential for the next meeting to be virtual, given the COVID-19 outbreak. Chris
will email committee members instructions on attending the meeting via Zoom software if
people are quarantined at home.
Meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m.
Moved: Eric
2nd: Pat
Abstained: Yvonne
Meeting minutes approved.
TownofIthacaPlanningDepartmentWorkingDraftforMarch11,2020COCMeeting:WirelessFacilityReview/ApprovalProcessFlowChartp?c3(j(CçC\-v\J_Q*1S-)SrccaALc\psi-Coc\mQIr(ac\m%ccd1IsProposedFacilityCollocatedOntoAnExistingStructure?I—’1+1IsitaNewSmallWirelessFacility?•NewTower(#1*)•RequiresPBsiteplanapproval&specialpermit,buildingpermit.•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements,per§332(c)(7).•150dayshotclockforapprovals.IsitaNewIndividualSmallWirelessFacility?INOIIIISeestaff-prepared“RecommendationsforApprovalProcessandAestheticRequirements:AllwirelessFacilities”,revisedMarch11,2020•System(e.g.DAS,#4*)•RequiresPBsiteplanapproval&specialpermit,buildingpermit.•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements.•01ffrequirementsdependingifin/outofROW?)•90dayshotclockforapprovals.•RequiresinternalPlanningstaffreview,buildingpermit(okwithCOC?)•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements.•90dayshotclockforapprovals.‘Ncoj-Cc1
TownofIthacaPlanningDepartmentWorkingDraftforMarch11,2020COCMeeting:Wirele5sFacilityReview/ApprovalProcessFlowChartIstherea“substantial”changeperFCCorder§6409(a)?IoccAQcrJ%DIsProposedFacilityCollocatedontoAnExistingStructure?IvsNOIsitcollocatedontoaCommunicationsTower?IsitaSmallWirelessFacilityCollocation?<—€L/NO•§6409(a)“shallapproverequirement”(#2*)•Buildingpermitonly.•Documentationrequiredtoprovethatitfallsunder§6409(a)•60dayshotclock.•RequiresinternalPlanningstaffreview,buildingpermit(okwithccc?)-QS•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements.•90dayshotclockforapprovals.•RequiresinternalPlanningstaffreview,buildingpermit(#5*)•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements.•60dayshotclockforapprovals.J.*seestaff-prepared“RecommendationsforApprovalProcessandAestheticRequirements:AllWirelessFacilities”,revisedMarch11,2020fle4IIesPBsiteplanapproval&specialpermit,buildingpermit(#3*)•Townlawcontainsaesthetic,location,dimensional,etc.requirements(staffneedstoestablish).90dayshotclockforapprovals.NequiresinternalP1ningstaffreview,builngprmit(okwithC.)•TownIcontainsaesttic,cation,dimnsional,tc.requirements.•60dayshotclocjsorapprovals./