The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 04/03/2018Kent City Council Workshop Minutes April 3, 2018 Kent, Washington Date: Time: PIacer Attending: Approved April L7,2018 April 3, 2018 5 p.m. Council Chambers East/West Mayor Dana Ralph Bill Boyce, Council President Tina Budell, Councilmember Brenda Fincher, Councilmember Satwinder Kaur, Councilmember Dennis Higgins, Councilmember Les Thomas, Councilmember Toni Troutner, Councilmember Council President Boyce opened the meeting at 5:01 p.m. Aoenda: Capital Investment Strategy Barbara Lopez, Deputy Finance Director, provided a recap of the February City Council retreat including the lack of city-wide strategies for prioritizing capital needs, allocating limited resources, and maintaining existing infrastructure. An effective strategy requires a solid policy foundation. Finance and ECD are working to draft policies Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner, indicated decisions need to be made regarding what projects make it on the list, and that each division creates master plans. Bonsteel conveyed that there is a need to create a cohesive project list that reflects citywide goals. Lopez reviewed Capital Investment Criteria examples that were modeled after the City of Redmond:¡ Infrastructure Preservation, Replacement, Risk Mitigation, and Facility Needs. Scope of impact on Kent residents. Subarea Action Plans (Downtown or Midway). Bonsteel provided additional clarification regarding the subarea plans and indicated there is a need to reflect the investment into those plans.. Health & Safety¡ EnvironmentalQuality. High Priority Councilmember Budell provided feedback regarding the scoring criteria and Lopez provided clarification. Councilmember Higgins indicated Kent should research why Environmental Quality is included in the scoring criteria. Page I of 4 Kent City Council Workshop Minutes April 3, 2018 Kent, Washington Approved April L7,2018 Lopez indicated that all projects, including projects funded by enterprise funds will be scored to maintain a cohesive planning process. Scoring Projects Weighting. Lopez reviewed hypothetical criteria weighting scenarios with 30 capital projects funded in 2018 using equal criteria ranking, high priority ranking, sub-area priority ranking, and infrastructure priority ranking. Council President Boyce suggested the department directors provide recommendations to the Council regarding the percentages they would like used for the scoring criteria. Bonsteel reviewed funding strategies and how Kent might use this tool, including:. Set policy direction on how to use this. Many policy options are available. Start with infrastructure maintenance¡ Start with downtown. Consider high cost projects differently Bonsteel clarified that the Council will need to provide guidance on how the funding strategy will be drafted to address how limited resources might be allocated to the highest priorities for the city. Derek Matheson, Chief Administrative Officer, provided next steps, that include having the Mayor and directors meet and come up with scenarios to bring back to the Council for guidance. Matheson clarified that the list that comes from the scoring criteria, is not binding on the Mayor and the Council. It becomes a guidepost and the Mayor has the right to propose the capital budget to the council. Lopez reviewed the Capital Investment Strategy next steps and timeline, including drafting capital planning policies, updating the project lists, project scoring and prioritization, develop funding forecasts, and development Capital Investment Strategy report. The Government Finance Officers Association best practice for Capital Planning Policies was provided to the councilmembers that includes the recommendation that a description of how an organization will approach capital planning, including how stakeholder departments will collaborate to prepare a plan that best meets the operational and financial needs of the organization. Small Cells (5c) Update Christina Schuck, Assistant City Attorney, presented details regarding small cells (sG). Page 2 of 4 Kent City Council Workshop Minutes April 3, 2018 Kent, Washington Approved April L7, 2018 Schuck provided an overview of small cell aesthetics from surrounding cities that include location, design, colors, bulk/massing, pole height, other restrictions and designs, and if those cities have passed ordinances. Councilmember Higgins asked if there is a downside to adopting high standards. Schuck advised there is a difference between high standards and inflexibility. Are there any locations the council would like to limit the location of small cells. Chad Bieren, Deputy Public Works Director, advised that careful consideration should be made regarding the desire for high speed services. Erin George, Current Planning Manager, advised that design standards don't apply to utility poles, Council requested making the small cell equipment as unobtrusive as possible George provided details regarding the permitting process and indicated that current code allows attachments to Kent property that includes right-of-way permit administrative approval is required for antenna 10' or less than existing height of pole, and a conditional use permit is required if the antenna will be more than 10' higher than the existing pole. Details were provided regarding permitting timelines, staff reports, and hearing requirements. Details were provided regarding the Economic and Community Development department's work on a simple zoning code amendment to define small cells and identify process. Information regarding franchise utility permits was presented, including the proposed review by public works staff to ensure that the permits will be in compliance with the franchise agreement conditions. Mayor Ralph expressed her concerns that the pictures that carriers present will not look like what is installed. Schuck advised that once carriers deploy infrastructure on a pole, they can't make a substantial change, but there are exceptions to the rule. Federal law says carriers can make changes without city oversight unless substantial change or it defeats a concealment measure. Schuck indicated language to cover these changes will be included in the franchise agreements, Schuck advised that Kent can't do a lot with utility pole aesthetics, but can focus on location, height, and what the equipment looks like. Franchises can be drafted to include provisions as follows: Minimize appearance from existing residential structures Page 3 of 4 Kent Cíty Council Workshop Minutes Non-utility pole aesthetics (city-owned infrastructure provisions) can include: Internal antennas and equipment in a plain pole External equipment and antennas Approved April L7,2018 Limit the amount of cubic feet of equipment per 150-foot radius No co-location Other location restrictions Limit replacement pole height to 10 feet taller or t5o/o, whichever is less Paint to match pole Conceal wires in conduit No illumination Limits on stickers/decals Width and mounting April 3, 2018 Kent, Washington outside the franchise Council expressed the desire to have standards that require carriers match existing poles. Schuck provided next steps, including negotiating franchises, continue researching city-owned poles, and preparing a draft ordinance. Bieren advised that public works needs Council direction regarding the drafting of an ordinance for cell providers installing on Utility Poles. The meeting concluded at 6:47 p.m. Kimberley City Clerk April 3, 2018 moto Page 4 of 4