Title
Resolution approving the setting of rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Fee and the Heavy Construction Vehicle Fee and adding both fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.
body
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code (“Municipal Code”) imposes upon all persons who excavate segments of the City’s pavement the obligation to pay a Utility Pavement Cut Fee (Municipal Code § 13.06.020(a) referred to herein as “Utility Cut Fee”); and
WHEREAS, Municipal Code section 13.06.020(b) authorizes the City Council to establish the amount of the Utility Cut Fee by resolution; and
WHEREAS, Municipal Code § 13.06.040 provides for certain exceptions to the payment requirement of the Utility Cut Fee, including an exception for all excavations performed by or for the City; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with NCE Consulting Engineers (“NCE”) to study the impact of utility cuts on the City’s street network and to develop proposed fees related to these impacts; and
WHEREAS, NCE completed a study, in March 2025, comparing pavement performance for the street sections with and without cuts, quantify damage caused by utility cuts to the pavement within the City and to develop a fee schedule for the City to recover any costs associated with such damage (“Utility Cut Fee Study”), which is attached to the staff report accompanying this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Fee Study concluded that pavements with cuts of any size deteriorate far more rapidly than pavements without cuts across all pavement age groups, and therefore, utility cuts reduce the remaining service life of all pavement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the entities responsible for excavating into the City right of-way bear the burden of the resulting cost of this degradation and shortened life of the surface rather than the taxpayers of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Fee Study establishes that there is a reasonable correlation between the amount of the proposed Utility Cut Fee and the additional costs associated with repairing and maintaining pavement with utility cuts; and
WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Fee adopted herein is considered a fee pursuant to Article XIII C, section 1(e) of the California Constitution which excludes such fees from the definition of “tax”; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution does not conflict with provisions of State law, including but not limited to, Public Utilities Code sections 7901 and 12808 related to interstate telecommunications franchises because the fees hereunder are not charged for the same right granted by State law, but instead are charged to recover costs of mitigating the degradation that the excavation causes to City pavement and the increased cost to the City in reconstructing a street that has been patched following an excavation; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution is in conformance with Section 253(C) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 which expressly recognizes the authority of local governments to impose reasonable nondiscriminatory fees upon telecommunications providers using the public right-of-way, as well as California Government Code 50030 which specifically authorizes the imposition of a permit fee that do not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the service for which the fee is charged; and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code requires that all individuals who obtain a building permit must pay a Heavy Construction Vehicle Fee (Municipal Code § 15.66.020(a) referred to herein as “Construction Vehicle Fee”); and
WHEREAS, Section 15.66.020(b) of the Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to establish the amount of the Construction Vehicle Fee by resolution; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.66.040 of the Municipal Code provides for certain exceptions to the payment requirement of the Construction Vehicle Fee, including an exception for all City projects; and
WHEREAS, NCE also completed a study to investigate damage caused to City streets by heavy construction vehicles related to the construction of development projects (“Final Memo-Financial Impact of Heavy Construction Vehicles on City’s Streets” referred to herein as “Construction Vehicle Fee Study”), which is attached to the staff report accompanying this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, with regard to the impact of construction vehicles, the Construction Vehicle Fee Study found that such vehicles contribute to the damage to City streets by reducing the life of the pavement; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee is necessary to address the deterioration of City roadways caused by construction vehicles; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution is in conformance with Vehicle Code section 9400.8 because it is a fee charged as a condition of development not a fee for the use of City roads; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee is exempt from the definition of “tax” under Article XIII C, section 1(e)(6) because it is a charge imposed as a condition of property development; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to assess the Construction Vehicle Fee through the Mitigation Fee Act; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee Study establishes that there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the proposed Construction Vehicle Fee and the costs of remedying the impacts to the City’s pavement caused by construction vehicles used in new development that adds additional residential or nonresidential square footage; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee Study establishes that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the pavement improvements that will be funded by the Construction Vehicle Fee revenues and the types of development projects on which the fee will be imposed because those development projects require the use of heavy construction vehicles that damage the City’s streets and pavements, and the fees are calculated to reimburse the City for the City’s costs of remedying the damage caused by development activity that uses heavy construction vehicles to transport materials and equipment; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee Study substantiates a methodology for calculating the impacts of heavy construction vehicles used in new development on City roads and the proportional costs of each development to reimburse the City for its costs of repairing the damage to its roads caused by each new development project; and
WHEREAS, the staff report includes information that supports the City’s actions; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fees will not exceed the estimated reasonable costs of the City for the roadway repair work for which the fees are imposed; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Fee Study establishes proposed amounts and provides an evaluation of the need for new Construction Vehicle Fees; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66018 the enactment or increase in any fees to be charged for services must be adopted by the City Council by ordinance or resolution, after providing notice and holding a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66018 and 6062a, a notice of a public hearing on the proposed fee schedule, including the proposed Utility Cut Fee and the proposed Construction Vehicle Fee, was published on September 10, 2025 and September 17, 2025 in the San Mateo Daily Journal a newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66016, at least fourteen (14) days prior to the public hearing at which this proposed fee schedule was introduced, notice of the time and place of the hearing, including a general explanation of the matter to be considered, and a statement that the data required by this subdivision is available, was mailed to interested parties who filed written requests with the City for mailed notice of meetings on new or increased fees or service charges; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing before the City Council was held on September 24, 2025 at which public testimony was received and duly considered on the proposed new fees; and
WHEREAS, at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing referenced above, the City made available for public inspection information required under Government Code section 66018; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of South San Francisco herby resolves as follows:
1.) Findings. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
a) The above recitals are correct and are material to this Resolution and are incorporated into this Resolution as findings of the City Council.
b) The fees are not a “tax” under Section 1(e) of Article XIII C of the California Constitution and do not exceed the reasonable costs to the City of repairing damage to the City’s roads caused by development activity or cuts into the paving of the City’s streets.
2.) Adoption of Fee Reports. The City Council approves and adopts the Utility Cut Fee Study and the Construction Vehicle Fee Study and determines that they are consistent with the General Plan.
3.) Master Fee Schedule. The Utility Cut Fee and the Construction Vehicle Fee are hereby adopted at the rates set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, which are attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. The new fees shall be incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule.
4.) Automatic Increase in Fees. Beginning July 1, 2026 and each July 1 thereafter, the City Manager, or their designee, shall adjust the Utility Cut Fee and the Construction Vehicle Fee in accordance with the annual percentage increase in the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index (CCI) for the San Francisco area for the month of May over the same CCI for the month of May of the prior year. The master fee schedule will be updated to reflect the adjustments to the Utility Cut Fee and the Construction Vehicle Fee made pursuant to this section.
5.) Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect 60 days after its adoption and shall be published or posted as required by law.
6.) Validity. The above recitals are true and correct, are material to the adoption of this Resolution, and are incorporated herein by reference.
7.) Environmental Review. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This action is not a project within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it has no potential for physical effects on the environment because it involves an adoption of certain fees and/or charges imposed by the city, does not commit the City to any specific project, and said fees and/or charges are applicable to future development projects and/or activities, each of which future projects and/or activities will be fully evaluated in full compliance with CEQA when sufficient physical details regarding said projects and/or activities are available to permit meaningful CEQA review (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15004(b)(1)). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause significant effect on the environment, is not defined as a “project” under CEQA. Therefore, approval of the fees and/or charges is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(4); and, even if considered a “project” under CEQA, is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that approval of the fees and/or charges may have a significant effect on the environment.
8.) Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Resolution be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this and each section, subsection, phrase, or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrase, or clauses be declared unconstitutional on their face or as applied.
9.) The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a certified Resolution to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk.
* * * * *