2006_0821_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

�� �� Memo To: Mayor and City Council - �• Prom: Chris Miller, Finance Directc7�f �� r Date: August 21,2006 �__.�•�� Re: Discussionon Establishinga City-Owned Fiber Conduit System Date: 08/121/06 Ctem: 7. Fiber Conduit System Introduction At the May 15, 2006 City Council meeting, the Council affirmed nine newly established goals for the upcoming year (200612007). One of the stated goals was: Continue to research and develop new technologies that will enhance programs and services by ��rz�� reducing operating costs and/or improving the level oj service currently being provided The proliferation of fiber optic technology presents many new opportunities for the City. Over the next year, City Staff will be evaluating these opportunities and in the event they prove to be viable, we will bring them to the Council for discussion. One potential opportunity is the establishment of a City-owned fiber conduit system, which is discussed further below Discussion Items A City-owned fiber conduit system would entail a series of underground protected pipes or sleeves, similar to the City's water and sewer systems. Once in place, the conduit could be used by telephone, cable tv, and other service providers as a means of connecting individual premises to their facilities via fiber. This conduit could also be used by the City for a variety of applications as well. To capture the full value of a city-owned fiber conduit system, the City would have to establish, by ordinance, "high-density corridors" which would designate a portion of the public right-of- way for which telecommunication service providers would be required to locate their cables (i.e. co-locate). The City Attorney has researched this issue and has concluded that the City has the authority to require service providers to locate in a city-owned conduit system. A copy of the opinion is attached. While the construction of a city-owned fiber conduit system could take place at any time and location, the Twin Lakes Redevelopment project might provide an opportunity to explore this idea. In this instance, the City could require the developer to install the conduit, and then convey the asset back to the City. It is presumed that the developer would pass the added costs on to the eventual property owner in the same manner as they currently do for t�e cost of the buildings, utilities, and other improvements.