By Amanda Sachi and Nate Osterberg

Over the past six years, cities have seen unprecedented infrastructure build-out in the public right of way. Advances in technology and increased federal funding have fueled a nationwide telecommunications boom, and the COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated that growth as demand for reliable broadband surged. The public right of way includes city-owned land used for streets, sidewalks, and underground utilities. As telecommunications providers expand fiber and related infrastructure, more equipment is being installed in these shared spaces. That pressure is creating new challenges and unintended consequences for municipalities.

Growing strain on city systems

Public rights of way are increasingly overcrowded and accurate utility records are limited. At the same time, many cities have not established clear telecommunications design standards.

This combination can overwhelm permitting systems, and place inexperienced contractors in tight, complex environments. The risk of utility strikes increases, ranging from minor damage to serious gas and water incidents. Payment structures that reward speed over care can further elevate risk. The result may include safety concerns, strained emergency response resources, and higher municipal costs.

Strengthening permit review and coordination

Clear design guidelines are an important first step. Cities should require that plans submitted for permit review identify existing utilities and receive approval before construction begins. When required by the utility owner or municipality, plans should also include utility offsets or clearance requirements.

Municipalities should conduct a thorough review of submitted plans before issuing permits and designate a point of contact to coordinate with utility providers during the review process. Identifying conflicts early helps ensure compliance with established standards and reduces issues during construction.

Providers often seek to permit and construct multiple or large project areas at the same time. This approach can create unsafe conditions, such as open excavations left overnight, and allow poor restoration to go unaddressed if standards are not enforced.

Large projects place heavy demand on the 811 utility locating system, which helps identify and mark underground utilities before digging begins. When locating crews are stretched thin, some utilities may not be marked even if contractors follow the required process. Inspections also become more difficult when several companies are working in the same area at the same time.

In these situations, it can be unclear who is responsible for damage or unfinished restoration work. Residents may be left with disrupted boulevards or landscaping and little information about who is responsible. Complaints often end up being directed to city staff, which can create additional work and frustration.

Practical steps to reduce damage

Cities have a natural ally in private utility owners, including gas and electric providers. These stakeholders face many of the same challenges from the ongoing build-out and have invested significant resources to address them. Collaboration can lead to meaningful improvements, beginning with the permitting process.

In some jurisdictions, permit applications require mapping of existing facilities within the project scope as part of plan-and-profile utility permit submittals. Additionally, some municipalities incorporate bonding requirements into the permitting process, with bonds released only after the project area is fully or substantially restored.

Municipalities may cap permits based on the amount of footage they can reasonably manage with available resources. Refillable escrow accounts can help incentivize contractor performance. Some cities limit new permit issuance until project restoration is complete, supporting damage prevention and accountability.

Additional permit requirements that support coordination and damage prevention include:

• Integrating Gopher State One Call language in permit applications. This reminds contractors of Minnesota’s excavation laws and their requirement to notify 811 before digging.
• Requiring 811 notifications that reflect the size and scope of the project. This helps utility companies assign enough staff and resources to locate and mark underground utilities.
• Requiring meet tickets to support ongoing project updates as construction progresses. Meet tickets are an 811 tool that facilitates communication between construction crews and locating stakeholders. Because large 811 project tickets may be difficult to mark within the 48-hour window — particularly in Minnesota, where projects exceeding 1 mile require a meet ticket — these tools can help reduce production delays and utility damages.

Impacts on emergency response

Natural gas companies and fire departments also benefit from a more coordinated approach. Fire departments are typically required to respond to all natural gas facility damage or leaks. Because standard gas facility depths often place lines in conflict with ongoing infrastructure build-out, response demands can increase during peak construction periods.

Working together to protect communities

Municipalities do not need to manage these challenges alone. Many utility providers are adopting improved technologies and damage-prevention practices. Through collaboration, cities and utility providers can establish clear standards and effective permitting and construction processes that protect infrastructure and reduce disruptions, safety risks, and costs.

Amanda Sachi is a project engineer, and Nate Osterberg is director of strategic growth at WSB (wsbeng.com). WSB is a member of the League’s Business Leadership Council (lmc.org/sponsors).