Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (Streets and Sidewalks) to streamline the permitting process for temporary installations related to sidewalk dining and parklets within the City's right-of-way.  (Citywide)
Thank you. Moving on to item 40, please. Report from Public Works Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Long Beach Municipal Code to streamline the permitting process for temporary installations related as sidewalk dining and parklets within the city's right of way citywide. Thank you. Let me turn this over to Mr. West. Mr. Mayor, council members. One of the real cool things about our city is the opportunity to have outdoor dining. More and more and more restaurants. And cafes want to do that. In addition to that, we're one of the few cities in California that does parklets out on our streets, and those are getting more and more popular. So to smooth that so people know exactly the path to get a parklet, the path to get outdoor dining. Mr. Beck and his team in public works have put together a booklet so that there's a clear path to follow to get those permissions. And I'll turn it over to Craig. Thank you, Mr. Manager. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the Council. Let's see here. We have a presentation that we wanted to share with you just to kind of detail some of the work that's been done and what's being proposed tonight. So we're talking about both parklets and sidewalk dining. And essentially the city has been operating under a pilot program to allow these to go into our public right of way. As the city manager indicated, it really does provide a nice sense of neighborhood and community and has been a game changer for many of our business and entertainment corridors. Interestingly enough, we were here talking about fore street business corridor earlier. Our first parklet in the city actually happened on Fourth Street in front of Lola's in 2011. And you've seen kind of a number of them go in since. And we've really treated these as a case by case basis. So an applicant would come in, they would meet with city staff, they would have a conversation about what their goals were, what the sizing of the parklet would be. We worked with them to ensure that they were putting the right materials in the public right of way, and then all that would kind of culminate to come to council for action and direction on how to move forward. So it was a very labor intensive process and we wanted to take a look at how could we streamline that and make it easier for the applicants and honestly for the community to engage in the process. So our goals were really to standardize and simplify the approval process and also to develop a technical handbook, as the manager mentioned, to guide people along the way of of really what are elements that we would accept and what are elements that we wouldn't accept in? So those are our goals. This is there is a really robust document and I really would like to recognize the hard work by our planning team. So development services planners were very involved in putting together our guidebook. And I think from the images that I'm sharing here, these are just some excerpts from the actual guidebook itself. But it's very user oriented. It's, it's, it's put together in a very cohesive way. And I think it really helps people understand what the goals are of our particular program. So part of what we're here to propose this evening are a couple of things. One have to do with the uses and I'm sorry, I just want to see if there's another page here. No. One has to do with the uses and when. You may recall that we had an item before council, I don't know, about eight or nine months ago to have a use on Pine Avenue that was outside of typical dining uses that we've approved in the past, and that was to provide for fitness activity out in the right of way. And at that time, the council directed staff to really evaluate what are the best uses for parklets and where would we land on recommendations and how should we utilize our public right of way, not only for parklets but also for sidewalk dining or other uses? And so we're really back to make a recommendation for you this evening that we keep that relatively narrow, that we would continue to support dining activities both in our sidewalk right of way and as a parklet that we would allow planting to occur. So if there was a desire to add some landscaping that complemented the business area, that those would be things that were supported. Certainly bicycle parking or maybe e-scooter parking would be one of those items if the council adopts a permanent E-SCOOTER program. And also we believe that it's important to support public art and there may be opportunities where public art would be appropriate in a public right of way or parklet. That doesn't mean that we want to preclude those other uses. We just believe that it's important that Council has an opportunity to weigh in on what those might be. So what we're essentially proposing tonight is that if something falls within, what we're saying would be a permitted use, that it would be a streamline permitting process. And that streamlined, permanent permitting process would be provided at the staff level. So the value of this is that it can happen much quicker, A and B, that it would cost the applicants less money. So as you know, we base our fees on cost recovery. And if we were able to eliminate some steps in the process, the amount of staff time involved could also reduce the cost to the applicants. So part of what's being proposed tonight is just that. And it would allow folks to utilize the guidebook, bring forward their application in a streamline application process. It could be handled at the staff level and approved. If there was a desire to go with a non typical use, then we would go through a traditional process, evaluate that, bring that forward to council for consideration. There is another discussion as we went out to the different business improvement districts about the impacts to parking. And as you know, with this council, there are some community groups that are very concerned about parking, rightfully so. And as we kind of evolve as a community where parking is in great demand now, that may become less demand in the future. And we just want to strike the right tone. So what we're recommending this evening is that we would cap the amount of parklets in a parking area at 20%. So we would believe it's appropriate, again, at a staff permitting level to allow up to 20% of the parking used to be converted into a parklet. If an application came in that went beyond that 20%, that would be an item that we would bring to Council for Council's full consideration. So again, we wouldn't preclude those parklets, but we want to have this body have an opportunity to weigh in. So that is essentially what we're proposing. So the benefits of these changes are that it strengthens the current program by being more informative, by utilizing the guidebook where we're much more transparent into what would be allowed in the right of way. It simplifies the process, as I mentioned, it does reduce costs to the applicants. It does address the design standards that we've collaboratively worked with, with our planning team. And I think it's ultimately a more efficient and effective collaborative process with the business community. So that concludes my staff report, and I'm certainly available to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes, thank you so much, Craig. I think this has been a policy many, many years in the making. And I just want to I'm just glad that we've gotten to this point. Thank you for your work in this. And I know Bill Pittman has also been behind the scenes, working very closely with a lot of our businesses to make sure they come to fruition and streamline the process. So it's wonderful to see that. I guess you sort of answered my question because this has been in the works. But I know this sort of came about because of Joe Ferrara from Groundwork Fitness that wanted to do a gym parklet, which is going very, very well. And I know along Pine Avenue we're even looking at like a bar for small dogs. We've looked at how we're looking at a kid's parklet just different uses that could be a mix of something really creative along Pine Avenue. And so from what I'm understanding here is that aside from what we have there, like the bicycle, the art, it will have to come to council for review, which is great. At least there's a process there. Have we explored any have there been any other request in the meantime for Parklets that are sort of out of that scope at all? Not currently. The applications that we have are typically dining and so those there are a couple of dining permits that are pending, but I don't have any to my knowledge that are outside of what we're presenting tonight. And I think, Councilmember, that you did bring up a number of different uses and we recognize those. And actually at the staff level, I think we would support them. I think we found it challenging to try to list them all and it became this kind of exhaustive list. And so we thought that for the sake of simplification, it was easier to just designate a few uses in the guidebook and then tailor the guidebook to those uses and but yet still allow and certainly provide and support a path forward and just bring those kind of outside the normal use or whatever is normal, but outside kind of the standardized use to council and allow council to support that. And I agree that GEO Jim Parklet is fantastic and it really does a lot to activate the street. It really is great. And one last question. What is the fee? What what type of sort of permitting fee is associated with this parklet? So currently the fee is 40 $800. We believe that will ultimately cut in half. I don't have that for you this evening, but I think that's where it will land. 24, 20 $500, most likely. We haven't actually gone through the streamlined process yet, so we're not 100% sure how much staff time is is involved. But that's our our current belief is that it should cut in half. Okay, great. Well, thank you so much for. And thank you for getting us here. Q Council member Pier. Yes. I also want to thank you for the work. I know that going through the Parklet process, each one is very different. Each one has a different staff, different ideas, different point people. So having had the socialists go through their experience with trying to add the parklet on the side, it gave me an appreciation for the work that you guys do and trying to get folks to follow a guideline. So I really am very excited about this. And when we unfortunately we used to have the toy shop on Broadway and one of the ideas we had was when we finished the Broadway project that we would have a like a toy corner that was a parklet there. But we will find another use for that parklet. Just want to thank you guys, the team and really appreciate this. Thank you. Councilman Austin. Thank you. Had a couple of just quick questions. I think there's a lot of great work that's going on going into this the staff report and the the. I like the idea of streamlining the process for particularly those business owners and business districts that want to activate the corridors. But in improving this, will we be basically approving giving up 20% parking in any business corridor? That's the recommendation before council is that we would allow at a staff level for PARKLETS to be approved up to 20%. If there was a desire or an application came in beyond that, then those would come to council for review. So the item before us does more than just parklets though, right? I mean, it's for outdoor dining. So beyond parklets, I mean, if a business wanted to just create an outdoor patio. Yeah. So thinking of Bixby Knolls, I think an example is we do have a couple sidewalk dining permits and Bixby knows that certainly isn't currently impacting any parking. I consider a parklet is something that's happening in the street right of way versus sidewalk dining, which is happening in the sidewalk right of way. And we talk a lot about local control. I'm really the the blanket giving up 20% parking potentially is a concerning to me because not every business district not every corridor is created equally. And I'd like to at least have the discretion to to to work with my community to determine whether or not that is something that that would work. I mean, that I think that is a pretty big leap. And so I would ask for for an amendment, friendly amendment. And I don't know who I propose that to be, possibly the the maker of the motion here to to exempt that that particular piece of that or to give discretion to to to various communities on that. I'm just going to say that a bit. Councilman Gonzales. Well, it's a staff led item. So what? What would you suggest, Greg? Maybe I could just comment on that. I think, Councilmember, the staff struggled with that as well and trying to find what is that right balance. One of the things that we are requiring is support from the bid. If it is in a business district to move the parklet forward. So I'll give you an example. Right now, there are currently no Parklets in Belmont. Sure, there have been folks that have brought forward a desire to place a part parklet in Belmont Shore, but so far the bid and the parking commission have not been supportive. So that is a different control point potentially. I'm certainly open if the council wants to lower that recommendation. Again, we were thinking about Fourth Street as an example where roughly a hundred parking spaces were created tonight. That will be part of the parking district. And when you think about those spaces, what would be the appropriate number for Parklets? And we felt that 20 of those hundred would roughly be the right number. But again, I'm open to the council's direction. So I'll have them in my motion and show some flexibility here. I would be be I think 10% would be good. But then beyond that, it would require a process that will come before the council. I will just just note that our our business improvement district do a great job. None of our business improvement directors are elected by the residents that surround those business districts. And so when we talk about parking impacts, we're not quite there yet in some of my areas. But I can tell you the Long Beach Boulevard, you know, we want to do some things up in Virginia, Bay Village, Bixby Knolls. I know there's some some request and ideas for for Parklets there as well. And I'm certainly open to that. But I want to I want to be be cautious that I don't jump ahead of myself and give away parking, that that is so preciously needed for all of our businesses. So so I wouldn't make a friendly amendment to the 10%. Councilman Gonzales. Sure. We can do that? Or would would the language be relaxed to be able to say like contingent upon community? Input. I mean, what can you give us some direction here on? I mean, I'm. So currently the proposal in front of council to consider is 20% of the available parking spaces. I think the better thing to do would be for council to come up with what that discretionary number would be. Because you remember we're essentially talking about a two step process. There's going to be one that can happen at the staff level. So if you're telling me tonight that 10% is a more appropriate number, then I would be able to, at the staff level, approve permits up to 10% if a parklet came in. That took more than that 10%, then that's coming to council. So again, I think it's really where council feels comfortable at having a more streamlined and discretionary process with staff versus the items that you want us to bring forward. And I'm completely open to, to where this council lands. But. That may also impact the the fee structure that we ultimately end up with. Thank you, Councilwoman. Yep, it's fine. I just wanted to get some input from our director, so thank you. Okay, so we're going to amend that to be 10% as a motion. I want to also give you a public comment here in just a minute. But what I just said, Mr. Beck, how many parklets do we have total across the city? Mayor, I knew you were going to ask me that question, and I wish I had the number I tried to to if you had the number don't have I believe it is 12, but I didn't get that number verified before then. Okay. No, thank you then. They're fantastic. So the one thing I will say, I mentioned this before to Mr. West, and it's just something I think we just need to do a better job of is we have these 12 parklets all amazing, all different, all different. They look great. The architecture is fantastic. I think where we're behind is none of them are true public Parklets I believe all 12 of our parklets are essential extensions of a sidewalk experience, which is which is great, and we encourage those and we want more of those. But I think if you go to most cities that are really progressive on on these types of uses and you are seeing public parklets that are open to the public where you don't have to actually purchase something. And so I would just encourage us that as we move forward, that we really look at locations where we could put in like, like councilwoman, like you mentioned, the public, the Parklet or a an area for for families to to relax or just pedestrian space so that people can enjoy the parklet. Because I do, I'm a little concerned. I every time we add a parklet. And don't add the public component. We are removing space and not adding to public space. And so I just my concern not I support this item, but I just don't want us to continue to approve or give more leeway to keep approving this these these these expansions while not. Giving the space back to the public in any bigger way. So if we can just make that note and I'd love to see us address this, I also how would and looking at this proposal, it certainly is geared towards a business or a restaurant wanting to come forward and propose a parklet. What about a public parklet? If an organization wanted to do that, it sounds like they can do that through this process as well. Yeah. In May, I should point out something else which I didn't mention in my staff report. There is an annual renewal process that currently required under our PARKLET program, and we are recommending that that continues. We are going to streamline the annual renewal so we wouldn't require a full RESA medal, but there is a renewal process. So if we do get to kind of a critical point and we feel that we need to take back some public space, we have that opportunity to cancel the actual permit and have the parklet removed. So that's try to address part of your first question. The other part of your question, we have seen for the first time multiple business applications for a parklet that happened for Pine Avenue. So our last parklet that was put in was actually is actually there to support multiple and not just one business. So I think we are moving in that direction. I think that you've experienced and I agree you'll look when you look through the guidebook, there is some imagery from other cities where it's more of a public space with seating, etc. in in this permit process that we're proposing this evening, for example, in the downtown, the debate could be an applicant on their own. It doesn't have to be for a business. They could propose a public space or a Berkeley or something like that. So it could come forward from a community organization and not necessarily just a business. Thank you. And I just want to reiterate, I know means I'm interested in removing anyone's permits or taking back all of these fantastic parklets as I love them and use them. I just think we have to. If the city does not make a focus effort on actually converting these into public spaces and not private spaces, I think we're doing ourselves in the public a disservice. And so I'd like to see an effort from public works in in getting public parklets built across the city. So any public comment? Seeing none. Rock roll call vote. Councilman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pierce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Suber not. Hi, Councilwoman Mongo I. Vice Mayor Andres. Councilmember. Your Honor. I. Councilman Austin. Council Member Richardson. Motion carries.