Research · Paper 3 of 5

A proportionate liability insurance requirement

A $1,000,000 liability requirement — reportedly under consideration — is not supported by the City's own treatment of comparable residential encroachments or by peer-city practice. If the City specifies a minimum limit, $500,000 per occurrence — the limit it already uses for residential encroachments — is the consistent choice.

What loss is the City protecting against?

The credible liability exposure is bodily injury from a pedestrian fall. Falls can occasionally be serious — the CDC reports that falls are the most common cause of traumatic brain injury, and nearly 319,000 older adults are hospitalized for hip fractures each year. Those figures establish that a fall can be serious; they do not establish that a properly covered charging cable presents a frequent or million-dollar risk.

The relevant risk is narrower than "falls" generally. The permitted condition is a visible, stable cable protector, used only during charging, crossing the sidewalk perpendicularly, and removed afterward — a device whose entire purpose is to reduce the hazard an uncovered cord would create. No published claims history specific to residential EV cable covers was located, and no evidence that these devices regularly produce catastrophic claims. Absent such evidence, the insurance limit should be derived from comparable permitted uses, not from the theoretical maximum loss of any fall.

Alexandria already answers this question at $500,000

The City's Insurance Requirements for Encroachment Permits (2023) is explicitly tiered by risk:

Highlighted rows: the residential tier — where a temporary cable crossing naturally belongs. The guidance also allows the City to modify limits based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, or special circumstances.

A temporary cable protector is most analogous to the City's residential category and to a temporary ramp — not to a restaurant, parklet, or commercial operation with continuous public exposure. Requiring $1 million would treat this narrow residential use more stringently than the City's established standard for residential encroachments, without identifying a corresponding increase in exposure.

Peer-city practice does not support a special $1M limit

• Cambridge, MA requires proof of homeowners or renters insurance for its across-sidewalk EV charging permit — with no special dollar limit published. Coverage is confirmed without forcing residents into a commercial insurance structure.
• Seattle, WA goes further: residents following its published charging-cord guidance (visible, stable, secure cable ramp; perpendicular placement; removal when not charging) need no street-use permit at all, and the guidance imposes no separate insurance requirement.

Seattle's program is not identical to what is proposed for Alexandria, but it demonstrates that a city can manage this risk primarily through equipment and operating rules rather than a large bespoke liability limit. Details on both programs: Peer City Programs.

Recommended standard

This standard is defensible because it:

1. confirms that funds and a legal defense are available if a claim occurs;
2. matches Alexandria's existing residential encroachment limit;
3. is consistent with Cambridge's reliance on ordinary personal insurance; and
4. avoids importing the $1 million commercial standard without evidence.

The City retains authority to require a higher limit for an unusual site or documented special risk. Practically, the difference matters for residents: personal liability or umbrella coverage in this range is an ordinary consumer product (modeled at roughly $150–$500/yr in the cost analysis), while commercial general liability policies naming the City are costlier and may simply be unavailable to homeowners.

Sources