Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts overhaul of excavation rules, including higher bonds and new inspection fee
Summary
Ordinance No. 705, amending the city excavation code, was introduced and adopted; the ordinance increases financial security requirements, adds a $50 inspection fee, limits winter excavation to emergencies, and creates application and warranty provisions while staff will finalize the fee schedule by resolution.
The Soda Springs City Council adopted Ordinance No. 705, an update to municipal code section 12‑12 that revises the city’s excavation permitting rules and replaces Ordinance No. 324 (adopted in 1969).
Alan (role not specified) and public‑works staff summarized the principal changes: a bond to secure road and asphalt repairs where excavation occurs in the asphalt, a nonrefundable $50 inspection fee, limits on winter excavation (allowed only for emergencies approved by the department), a standard one‑year warranty period with half the bond refunded on completion and the remainder after 12 months, and a requirement that most excavation work occur Monday–Friday. Staff noted compaction testing and inspection requirements and warned that the bond amount shown on the permit form is substantially higher than historical practice.
Council members pressed staff on practical impacts. Several members said the proposed jump in security (from a historical $1,500 figure toward a higher figure noted on application materials) could be burdensome for contractors and homeowners doing emergency repairs. Staff said the higher bond is intended to ensure the city is not left to fund extensive asphalt repair if contractors fail to complete work; the application form reflects a fee schedule that will be finalized by separate resolution so that fees can be adjusted without repealing the ordinance itself.
Council voted to adopt Ordinance No. 705 after a motion and second. Several council members requested that staff return with a fee‑schedule resolution and a revised permit/application packet to reduce unintended consequences (for example: allowing certified checks, clarifying acceptable bond types, and aligning compaction/testing requirements with local availability). Council also asked staff to check warranty language for compliance with state code and to confirm whether compaction testing requirements are enforceable given local testing resources.
The council adopted the ordinance by roll call vote and directed staff to prepare the associated application and fee resolution for subsequent council consideration.
