Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Cut Fee Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances street cut fee ordinance to incentivize utility coordination; vote 10-0 to approve ordinance for finalization
Summary
Council approved on first reading an ordinance to change street-cut fees to a flat per-square-foot charge for uncoordinated cuts and to waive fees for utilities that coordinate within the city's one-year planning window; the ordinance was approved on the floor and will return next week for final adoption.
The Los Angeles City Council on May 30 approved on the floor an ordinance that revises the city’s street-cut fee schedule to encourage utilities and developers to coordinate work with the Bureau of Street Maintenance and Bureau of Engineering. The ordinance amends the fee structure so that coordinated work within the city’s resurfacing planning window is exempt from fees while uncoordinated cuts would be assessed a flat per-square-foot fee (a proposed $14 per square foot was discussed).
City staff described the policy as a direction from the Public Works and Budget and Finance committees to shift incentives from penalizing cuts to incentivizing coordination. Staff said the City would maintain a one-year moratorium on cutting into newly resurfaced streets and would ask utilities to share one-year and five-year plans so the city can schedule resurfacing with fewer later cuts. Staff spokesman explained that the flat fee applies to cuts on streets of any age if utilities fail to coordinate, replacing a prior system that charged by street category and age.
Councilmembers raised concerns about how the ordinance would affect long-running development projects and non-profit or publicly assisted projects that receive city funding late in their construction process. Councilmember Alex Hernandez cited examples where deferred building inspections or last-minute changes produced large fees for projects such as the Bryson Apartments and a charter school, emphasizing a need for exceptions where the city’s internal processes caused belated cuts. Councilmembers asked staff to explore an exception process for cases where lack of city coordination created the need for a cut after the fact. Councilmember Misakowski supported moving forward with the ordinance while directing staff to consider an exception mechanism.
On roll call the council recorded 10 ayes; the chair stated the ordinance is approved and will be carried over one week (as required for ordinances) for second reading. No final appropriation or administrative exceptions were enacted on the floor; council instructed Public Works and Bureau of Engineering to coordinate guidance for developers and to study exception criteria.
The ordinance was discussed at length on the floor and in committee beforehand, and staff said existing collections show the fee has been collected historically and that most recent cuts are on local streets. The proposed flat fee level and the zone-of-influence around trenches were described as consultant recommendations during the briefing.
