CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL 4-21-26

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL 3 A. Enforceability of Policies - As described in the Agenda Report, staff consulted with specialized legal counsel to recommend an appropriate and enforceable structure for the revised regulations. The three policies are fully enforceable and provide the City with the same regulatory authority with respect to the various standards included, as would be the case if the suggested language were added to the ordinance itself. Staff does not recommend any further revisions be made to the ordinance or policy in that regard. B. Noticing Requirements, Findings for Denial, and Distance from Residential Structures - The comments suggest that these topic areas are missing or should be addressed more comprehensively in the ordinance or policy. Staff reviewed these suggestions, and noted that the policies comprehensively address these items, including:  Siting preferences and priorities, which require a demonstration of infeasibility for each less-preferred location to be proposed.  Setbacks, design standards, height limits, and placement.  Requirement for the “least intrusive means” to provide required service (e.g. use of stealth techniques, use of the smallest and least visible equipment, design techniques, materials, and finishes that minimize visibility).  Requirements for alternative sites analysis.  For small cell facilities in the public right-of-way, preference for use of existing poles and structures, limiting new poles except where necessary, and concealing and limiting the height of poles.  Requirements for facilities within the public right-of-way for bonding and removal of abandoned equipment.  Inclusion of “legal safeguard” language to ensure consistency with applicable state and federal laws.  Specific findings for approval for the different facility types in each policy. Should the approving body not be able to make any one of the required findings, the application could be denied. Since these items are already addressed in the proposed policy, no revisions are recommended for any of the above topic areas. 5. Should the following modifications be made to the proposed standards? 1) Small Cells, Increase Separation Requirement: Suggestion to require a minimum separation distance of 300 feet from the nearest other small cell facility [Proposed policy requires a 250-foot separation]