Take these three actions: 1. WRITE A PUBLIC COMMENT LETTER. It recently came to my attention that these are still being accepted (even though the official comment period is over). These go into the public record and bolster our case. Sample language that you can cut and paste is included at the end of this message. Send it to prc@seattle.gov. Include: the project address: 3114 P NE 65th St, Seattle WA; the project number: 3026196; YOUR mailing address. 2. CALL & EMAIL LARRY WEIS AND SEPHIR HAMILTON OF SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. Even if you have already done so, do it again. Larry Weis (General Manager of Seattle City Light) Office: (206) 684.3200 larry.weis@seattle.gov Sephir Hamilton (Chief of Staff, Seattle City Light) Office: (206) 684-3718 sephir.hamilton@seattle.gov 3. WRITE THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. Even if you have already done so, do it again. http://www.seattle.gov/mayor/get-involved/contact-the-mayor We have gotten the attention of decision-makers. We met with Councilman Rob Johnson, and he is supporting the cause. But the final decision has not been made. WE NEED TO PUSH SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. Seattle City Light makes the final decision. You may use any or all of the following in your public comment letter to prc@seattle.gov, and in your correspondence with city officials: Project address: 3114 P NE 65th St, Seattle WA; Project number: 3026196; [YOUR NAME & MAILING ADDRESS] Dear Mr. Weis and Mr. Hamilton: Please do NOT permit project 3026196 for the following reasons: 1. NOTICE, AS REQUIRED BY LAW, WAS NOT PROVIDED. Signage at the development site was grossly inadequate and did not meet Code requirements. Mailed notice was grossly inadequate and did not meet Code requirements. The content of the (inadequate) notice provided lacked material elements and did not meet Code requirements. 2. THE TIMING OF THE APPLICATION AND SIGNAGE SUGGESTS BAD FAITH. The application was first published online (in the City’s Land Use Information Bulletin), and the sign was first placed on the utility pole, on December 22, 2016, the first full day of Christmas vacation for the Assumption-St. Bridget School. As a result, the 14-day comment period ended on January 4, the first day the students resumed school after Christmas break. The school community was not aware of the proposal because everyone was on Christmas holiday. And by the time they found out, it was too late, as the public comment period was over. 3. THE NEW POLE WILL HAVE AN EXTREMELY LARGE, 70-FOOT-RADIUS "FALL ZONE." The fall-zone includes several residential homes and the gymnasium used by the Assumption-St. Bridget school (for two classrooms and the school’s before- and after-school care programs). The current 41-foot pole has a much smaller “fall zone,” which only includes two commercial businesses and NOT the gymnasium or residential homes. There is a bus stop just a few steps west of the utility pole. It is easy to imagine a scenario where, on a wet or snowy day, a bus careens into the utility pole, causing devastating and incalculable loss. 4. THE PROJECT WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE RETAIL AND PEDESTRIAN NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AREA. Currently, the neighborhood commercial area consists of two businesses, the Bryant Corner Cafe and the dentist office. --If this project is erected, many people that would otherwise eat at the sidewalk tables of the Bryant Corner Cafe will not. The Bryant Corner Cafe is the heart and soul of the neighborhood--where ladies groups meet every Wednesday for coffee, where families ritually enjoy brunch every Sunday after church. --The proposed site is 30 feet away from a school-patrol-controlled crosswalk, used by students from at least 4 different area schools. --People walking their kids to school will take other routes. --It will be harder for Dr. Eberhardt and the Bryant Corner Cafe to hire and maintain employees. --The Metro bus stop (just a few steps west of the project) supports three different routes and is used by hundreds of commuters daily. 5. THE PROJECT WILL VIOLATE THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. Under the ADA, city governments are required to retrofit sidewalks and curb ramps whenever any alterations are carried out. To our knowledge, there are no plans to retrofit the sidewalk and curb in connection with this project in order to meet ADA standards. 6. THE PROJECT WILL VIOLATE CITY NOISE ORDINANCES. The project will include an equipment and machinery cabinet to support the operation of the cell tower. The machinery inside the cabinet will operate 24 hours a day, and it will make significant noise. The noise levels from this machinery cabinet will exceed the 55 dBA limit established by the Seattle Municipal Code (based on an acoustical report submitted by TMobile as part of its application). 7. THE NEW POLE WILL HAVE A LARGER FOOTPRINT AND THEREFORE CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGAL SALE OR LEASE OF THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY TO A PRIVATE PARTY. 8. THE PROJECT HAS INACCURATELY BEEN DESCRIBED AS THE "REPLACEMENT" OF A UTILITY POLE; WHEN IN FACT, THE PROJECT INVOLVES SOMETHING BIGGER--THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW, FREESTANDING TRANSMISSION TOWER. Under the Code, the primary function of the City’s poles is to support the City’s electrical lines and equipment. Here the 70’ pole will exist for the primary purpose of holding TMobile’s cellular communications facilities, not to support the City’s electrical lines. The height increase is significant in dramatic (almost 200%). The new pole will have a bigger footprint than the old pole. The project is more than a “replacement” of a utility pole. It involves the construction of a new transmission tower. The permitting process and criteria for a new free-standing transmission tower are different from what the applicant is currently using. 9. THE COMMUNITY STRONGLY OPPOSES THE PROJECT. A petition on Change.org protesting the project currently has over 450 signatures from community members. 10. THE PROJECT COULD HAVE HARMFUL HEALTH EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY MEMBERS, ESPECIALLY SMALL DEVELOPING CHILDREN. 11. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN IMPROPERLY CLASSIFIED AS NOT APPEALABLE TO THE CITY'S HEARING EXAMINER. Under the Code, administrative-conditional-use decisions are subject to appeal to the City's Hearing Examiner. Here, the Department of Construction and Inspection has improperly taken away our right to appeal its recommendation decision to the Hearing Examiner, in violation of the Code. 12. CERTAIN MATERIALS SUBMITTED BY TMOBILE IN ITS APPLICATION CONTAIN FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION. For example, the acoustical report submitted by TMobile contains measurements/numbers that directly conflict with the project plans, and misleads one to think that the machinery supporting the cell tower will be quieter and less disruptive than what is actually the case. In addition, the application contains significant misrepresentations regarding the property line between 3116 NE 65th St (currently occupied by tenant Bryant Corner Cafe) and 3114 NE 65th St (currently occupied by dentist office of Dr. Karl Eberhardt). This is important because construction of the project will likely involve trespassing onto the neighboring parcel, but the application is drafted to falsely suggest that there will be no trespassing. 13. T-MOBILE DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT GAP IN COVERAGE. T-Mobile claims that Project 3026196 is necessary because there is a "significant gap in coverage" in the neighborhoods along NE 65th, from 33rd Ave NE to 26th Ave NE. However, the T-Mobile coverage map advertised on its consumer website indicates that this area has "Excellent" coverage. Either T-Mobile's website advertising is false OR T-Mobile is making a misrepresentation in its application for Project 3026196. Both claims made by T-Mobile cannot be true.