Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curbside Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee Advances Proposal for Annual Curbside Occupancy Fee for Driveway Curb Cuts
Summary
Supervisors forwarded an ordinance to add an annual public right‑of‑way occupancy assessment (proposed $3/sq ft, $100 minimum) for curb cuts and driveway encroachments to compensate for lost general curbside parking; staff said revenue is modest but enforcement needs strengthening.
The Board committee advanced legislation that would amend the Public Works code to establish an annual public right‑of‑way occupancy assessment for portions of curbside and driveway encroachments that remove general curbside parking from public use.
Sponsor Supervisor Jacob McGoldrick told the committee the proposal is intended to recognize the value of curbside parking when property owners obtain exclusive use that denies general public access. The proposal would apply the same $3 per square foot rate currently used for minor sidewalk encroachments and would include a roughly $100 annual minimum for small encroachments.
Budget office staff cautioned the committee that enforcement and collection have been uneven: their analysis showed roughly 40% of currently assessed encroachment fees are not collected, and DPW recommended stronger collection procedures and collaboration with the Treasurer/Tax Collector to improve recovery rates. DPW estimated the average fee would fall between $100 and $130 per year depending on driveway width.
Planning staff endorsed the legislation on policy grounds to preserve sidewalk and curbside public space, saying sidewalks and curbside areas are a crucial part of the city’s public realm and should not be surrendered lightly for private use. Public comment reflected split views: homeowners and some merchants said curb cuts have private value and the fee is reasonable, while other residents argued an annual assessment amounts to a recurring tax and disproportionately affects property owners who invest in their properties.
The sponsor offered an amendment exempting reconstructed driveways that do not increase in size. With that amendment, the committee moved the ordinance forward with the recommendation that DPW strengthen enforcement and collection practices.
Next steps: the ordinance will go to the full Board; DPW and the Treasurer/Tax Collector were asked to present improved enforcement options.
