Recommendation to receive and file an update on the Open Streets Initiative plan regarding temporary parklets on the 2nd Street Corridor in Belmont Shore.  (District 3)
Motion is carried. Thank you. 47, please. Item 47 Report from Public Works Recommendation to receive and file an update on the Open Streets Initiative Plan regarding temporary parklets on the Second Street Corridor District three. I think our city staff's in the back. I think if there's one minute we're getting the staff. Thank you, members of the city council. We're happy to present tonight on a lot of work that's gone into reviewing Parklets on the second street quarter. And I will turn it over to Eric Lopez and his team to give the presentation. Thank you, Tom. So the San Diego will. Start with some. What, some initial comments, and then Carlos is going to walk us through a presentation. He got. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council, thank you for having us here this evening. I'm just going to provide a little context. Before Carl Hickman, our traffic engineer, provides the the formal report on this. And there's a misconception, it appears in the public that the discussion between temporary parklets and permanent parklets and that the existing temporary structures could potentially be converted to permanent. And before we get started, I just want to make sure everybody's clear that that is not the case. Permanent parklet structures have very different requirements than temporary parklet structures. I'm here to tell you tonight that none of the temporary structures currently anywhere in the city would qualify as a permanent structure. And in each case, those structures would have to be removed and a new structure would be installed, assuming that it meets the requirements of a permanent structure, which are a lot more stringent than the temporary ones. So just to start it off, I wanted to make sure everybody understood that any discussion about making temporary parklets permanent does not mean that the existing structure would be revised to be considered permanent. So that said, I'd like to turn it over to Carl Hickman, our traffic engineer, who's going to give us an update this evening. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And council members. This has been a long road. We've been working on Parklets now for 18 months or so and we've done quite a bit of work in public works to make the parklets of the program happen. Let's get started. There's a little bit of background regarding the parklets. Again, it was a citywide effort to support the economic recovery for businesses amid the social distancing health order. The first temporary parklets were installed in May of 2020. There was a vast majority that were installed for the 4th of July weekend in 2020. Programs peak citywide there were 124 temporary parklets 136 participating businesses because many businesses share parklets. Currently citywide, there are 96 Parklets installed and 99 participating businesses. Ten Parklets have been removed since September alone because we are in the process of removing Parklets. When we find that business owners no longer need them or they may request us further removals, so we do have an ongoing process. When I'm contacted to remove the park, this whenever possible. Now as a licensed traffic engineer, one of my main concerns with apartments is safety. Here are some of the safety elements that I look at when we consider installing temporary parklets. We want to look to see that we have that object marker on the corner of the park that you see the yellow and black sign. That designates the corner of the parklet. We want to make sure that the remaining traveled way that's the roadway between the edge of the parklet and the centerline is a minimum of 12 feet. Now we can varied from that occasionally, but it depends on the situation. 12 feet is the typical standard. We do look at the structural elements of the of the parklet to make sure that it is sturdy. We also fill the plastic rails, a minimum of three quarters of the way with water to make sure that they are able to withstand the impact from a vehicle. We do look at many stormwater drainage elements to make sure that along a curb line, water can flow like it normally would along the gutter. We also look for safe pedestrian passage on the sidewalks, make sure that there's 88 clearances and we pay close attention to utility complex. There were some cases where some of the properties were installed over the top of gas lines that we didn't know existed. And then we found out later that we had to make modifications because we couldn't have the gas lines underneath the temporary parklets. And I want to reiterate that existing temporary parklets cannot simply convert automatically to a permanent status. These temporary apartments are not designed to be permanent. They are installed with temporary type materials. So any modification to a permanent status would be a major redo. Now, back in September, we were asked to take a closer look at the Belmont Shore area. Why is Belmont Shore unique? Well, first of all, it's a pretty high dense neighborhood, high density, a lot of businesses, services, amenities in the area, especially between Bayshore and Livingston. A lot of visitors visit the area. There's a lot of pedestrian activity, as you know. And of course, there's the nearby residential homes on both sides of the street. Second Street is kind of narrow, actually, although it's two lanes in each direction. It's still a relatively narrow roadway and it provides a direct link to PCH, Pacific Coast Highway. So really, second Street acts almost like an arterial that is really meant to serve a large volume of vehicles. Obviously there are impacts to nearby residents with all of the activity in the area. It is an attractor, definitely. And of course, as I mentioned, all the traffic that goes up and down. Second is an important factor. Also the area does impact the coastal zone on the area from Livingston to Clermont is actually in the local coastal zone. Which means that any kind of discussion with the coastal zone and a decision by the local coastal zone would mean that is not appealable. So current conditions in CD3, in the entire council district, there are 38 total temporary parklets and 38 participating businesses. On Belmont Shore Loan from Second Street to Bay Shore, there are 25 temporary parklets. 30 participating businesses. Four Parklets are shared by two or more businesses. Three businesses have a pair of temporary parklets. That means one on second and one on a side street. And we also removed eight temporary parklets to date again as businesses contact us or we deem them unnecessary. We do the removals as quickly as we can. One of the issues that has come up quite often is the parking impacts in Belmont Shaw. And we did a very good inventory of all the parking spaces and we found that there were 517 total metered spaces on street, there's 351 and the public lots, there was 166 total, again 517 so far to date, as we sit right now, there are 56 stalls converted to temporary parklets, 38 stalls on Second Street and 18 stalls on the side streets. The total available for parking still is 461 stalls. So really we've converted 11% of the total available metered stalls to parklets temporary parklets. 7% on Second Street and 4% on the side streets. And there's a graphic representation there, you know, with your pie, the slice of the pie that shows the 56 out of the total available 517. Now, since the beginning of the program, we've had many opportunities to reach out to the public, reach out to businesses. And most recently, we reached out to the folks on Belmont Shore to have a community meeting. We've started public and business surveys. We've had multiple discussions with CD3 and we've had multiple field inspections and business visits where we talk really candidly with the business owners, talk about are they using the the parklets? Are there any problems? Do we need to make any adjustments? It's an ongoing thing and it's not going to stop. And we really think that that one on one conversation with the businesses is really a good, healthy conversation because the businesses need to understand how they're impacting not only the area, the residents, the street, but the city as a whole. Because, you know, Belmont sure is an important part of the city. So regarding our outreach, we have three parts. The first part of our outreach really was related to the business owners themselves. So we had a total of 584 total responses. And of those 584, there were 12 businesses that responded. Ten businesses are interested in keeping the temporary parklets through June of next year. Ten businesses are interested in applying for a permanent parklet. 83% agree that their temporary parklet helped their business recover amid health order and social distancing. And they also admitted that only 2% are staff to at least 95% of pre-COVID levels. One of the business owners said many guests still do not feel comfortable dining indoors but want to support local restaurants, etc.. The next step in our outreach was that we wanted to talk to residents and customers of the 584 responses. You can see on the on the pie charts a lot of the percentages. I won't go through all of the data, but you can see that, you know, in the center there, 30% of the customers never really use the parklets. 19% use them once a month, etc.. On the far right, you can see the chart that talks about neighborhood foot traffic, what kind of pedestrian activity is in the area, and 56% supply of the comment that there was really no change in pedestrian activity. I'll leave that there just for a second. If you want to take a quicker look. A longer look. Part three of the outreach. We again had 584 total responses and there were 572 customer or resident responses out of the 584. 38% support the program. 11% support but with restrictions. 12% are concerned about the parking. 6% traffic sightlines. 14% congestion and parking. And 9% were concerned about accessibility and esthetics. So on the right you'll see that the top concerns were the parking impacts, sidewalk access, esthetics, driver sightlines noise, especially on the side streets and quality of life issues . Quality of life issues could mean some of the patrons in the restaurants or bars maybe be loitering alongside the businesses or near the residents. Some of those quality of life issues could be excessive noise. There were a variety of other complaints, again, that we call quality of life that may not be directly attributable to the parties themselves . But nevertheless, the issue is there that needs to be addressed. And there's, again, a variety of positive feedback. Many folks value the outdoor dining option. It improves the walkability and enhances the experience. Character of Belmont Shore. Now, since the beginning of the program, we've always worked to do ongoing adjustments or improvements. We address each issue on a case by case basis. We remove temporary parklets by request. As I mentioned prior, we constantly look to make sure the departments are at the right footprint, in other words, in front of the business. There are many cases where over time the actual footprint or the perimeter of the park, this has been changed. You know, some of the business owners are kind of pushing out a little bit and expanding. So we want to make sure that people have the parklets where they're supposed to be. We're checking in and filling barricade water levels and we're making sure that businesses who are nearby are okay with any encroachment into their areas. And we continue inspections by staff regularly. Now after the Open Streets Initiative ends again, existing temporary parks are not approved or designed to be permanent. We have an existing permanent parklet guideline shown there on the left. That's the cover of it that's been used by the city since 2008. So it's nothing new. We already have that program in place. And if you're in the downtown area, you'll see many permanent parks already installed. On the right there, you'll see a poster board somebody created. And the first sentence says that the city of Long Beach is considering making outdoor dining parklets permanent. That is not true. We are not pushing to make temporary parklets permanent. Now moving forward on Second Street. We do already have guidelines in place for businesses who want to make permanent parklets. Here's a picture of a business the socialist that fought in Saint Louis. You'll see how the sidewalk pushes out or bulbs out away from the business a little bit further. And their they're of utilizing the hardscape to put their tables and chairs, etc.. So this is a standard that businesses who are near a corner could implement. Obviously, it's going to be for the business to install. They're going to have to pay for it. But this is an installation that we are already doing in the city, so it's nothing new. Next slide here. Again, this is what we would call a semi-permanent parklet. Again, this is an existing location, Berlin Bistro Fourth and Linden, where as part of the guideline on the right there, you'll see how we design this type of a parklet to be semi-permanent. If that business were to go away, we could technically remove that parklet and it would be a done deal. So ideally I mentioned earlier in the presentation that we had ten businesses who were interested in becoming permanent parklets. And really I think that that was sort of a knee jerk reaction to our last meeting back in September, where many businesses were probably unsure of the program, where it was going. A couple of those businesses who have applied to be permanent, we were already removed their temporary parklets. So but let's look at the worst case scenario. If those ten permanent parklet businesses who want permanent parklets were to actually get them go through the process. We're talking about a loss of approximately 20 stalls. The original total meet total needed spaces is 517. So we would only have to convert 4%, approximately 4% of the stalls to permanent parklets. And I want to point out that businesses need to understand that when it comes time to do a permanent parklet, not only do they have to go through the rigorous process that's already in place, but there will be a cost associated with that to design the installation, etc.. And I'm predicting those costs are in the neighborhood of 40 to $50000, depending on the the nature of the exact install. So again, this is not something that's just a slam dunk. There is a rigorous process already in place. So to wrap things up, we do have recommendations for Second Street, and I'll go through them slowly here. The first recommendation is to continue improvements, adjustments and inspections of existing temporary parklets. This is what we've been doing for the past 1820 months, making sure that the businesses are operating as they should be per their permits. We're going to coordinate with businesses, businesses to remove temporary parklets whenever possible. Again, I mentioned where it's an ongoing process. We're going to work with businesses not interested in the permanent parklet so that removal of the temporary parklet can take place as quickly as possible. We're going to check and refill all water filled barricades, maintain proper approvals and assurance documentation. Businesses have their insurances last quite frequently, so we have to make sure that we're on top of that. And again, anybody who's going to be interested in a permanent parklet, we're going to direct them to the existing sidewalk dining and park this handbook that is already in place since 2018. The next thing is Pakistan. Minor side streets will no longer be allowed in cases where there are multiple documented violations. The key here is multiple documented violations. Next. Businesses interested in a permanent Parklet must communicate in intent to apply for a permanent parklet by January 31st of next year. This will allow businesses to keep their temporary parklet until June 30th or 22 as they work through the process to finish their permanent parklet installations. We're going to organize a single effort to obtain local coastal zone approval for the businesses on Belmont Shore. We're going to facilitate permanent parklets that meet current construction and safety standards. And our overall goal is to allocate no more than 3 to 7% of stalls to permanent parklet installations. That concludes my presentation. And we are ready to field any questions that you may have. Thank you. There are two people queued up for public comment. Please come forward. And Jason Ileus and Brian Cochran. John, excuse me, John. I this is John here. Okay. Is Brian here? Okay, come forward. Brian. What was that? John? Okay. All right. Make your way to the front. Thank you. Good evening. My name is John Ayers. And I'm a property. Owner in Belmont Shore. As do parklets. Item 47 Parking in the short takes away needed parking as it was addressed and increases the occupancy levels for restaurants without providing adequate parking. Restaurants often have sidewalk dining as well as parklets for those who don't want to eat indoors. Today. Owners. Restaurants can select indoor dining as well as sidewalk dining. Again. I sent a. I had expressed my concerns a couple of months ago. At the at her. Council meeting. And I also sent a text to each council member in the past two months months expressing what I had just mentioned. Thank you. Thank you, Brian. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and city council members. I first like to thank Councilwoman Suzy Price and her team for continuing this important dialog on the park issue and for engaging our constituents in a robust, thoughtful manner. That's been very helpful. I'd like to urge the Council tonight to stop viewing and stop framing this issue as an either or situation that in order for businesses to survive, all considerations of residents, valid and exhaustive concerns must be secondary or worst ignored entirely. When the Council met on this issue in September. You heard from actual residents detailing both personally and on behalf of their neighbors the deep and detrimental impacts of these markets on their daily quality of life. 13 speakers addressed the council. All residents there urged a no vote on continuing the program. The other five speakers were all business owners, managers or employees of those businesses. Is it any surprise they urged continuing the program to their benefit. Similarly, with the Public Works surveys, which seem to gain the questions to get a desired outcome, what kind of a fair survey actually points out that a business owner in the district can fill out three surveys? Of course, they and their customers want to keep the parklets running. It benefits them directly. But after the vote of that September meetings concluded, only one one owner stuck around to talk with residents and expressed an interest in their needs as neighbors and to suggest he'd help with the quality of life issues. Just one owner. Since then, we've only seen abuses of these public spaces continue unabated and worsen. I walked Second Street again repeatedly since then on November 20th alone. I photographed vomit on a sidewalk next to a restaurant so much that a mom of a stroller had to skirt delicately around the stench near another restaurant. Piles of sawdust or judgment remains after some sort of food supply fallen in the street and occupied three or colleagues. Since the council turned to a lot of parklets, it's long overdue to enforce existing laws and rules and track every issue in a simple and transparent manner. City agencies and language police must be responsive to noise, traffic, trash and mobility complaints by the residents who encounter these abuses daily. This is not a new issue. It's not an either or. Since these businesses have been granted a lifeline by the city and its residents, it's essential that they act as good neighbors and accept responsibility for the impact of their moneymaking endeavors that have caused residents so much of their quality of life. Councilmembers Pleas and the Parking Program on Second Street in the Pier Arts Interchange. Please put some teeth into enforcing the abuses created by the program. Thank you very much. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Taking behind the dias, Councilwoman Fries. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. So I want to start by thanking our staff for your work on this. I know that beyond just the three gentlemen that are here tonight presenting, there is a team of people whose work who have worked very hard on this issue, and they've been engaged with my office throughout the entire few months that we've been studying this issue. And you've really taken their concerns to heart, and this report is fantastic. So thank you. I really, really appreciate that. I also want to thank the community members. We had so many community members volunteer to go door to door to pass out the cards for the surveys. And that was really important. And I think that's one of the reasons that we had about 584 responses. And and so I want to thank them both. The Belmont. Shore Residents Association and the and the Friends of Belmont Shore were two community. Organizations that worked very closely with me on this issue. It's interesting when you have an issue like this, because depending on who you talk to, they will swear that everyone they have talked to agrees with them on the issue. So over the last couple of months, I've gotten emails that say, you know, I have lived in the city in certain number of years and I everyone that I have talked to insert opposes or supports the PARKLETS and I just have gotten a ton of emails like that and there's absolutely no consensus by the residents entirely on the issue of Parklets on Second Street. And I will say that I suspect and there's probably some data to support that multiple people took that survey. The Baltimore people took the survey multiple times. And I don't know which side of whether they're supporting our opposing, but the survey is meant to be an outreach effort. It's not a scientific survey. It's an outreach effort to try to gauge interest. And I want to thank staff for putting it together. I also want to thank a staff for clarifying that. And I'm not sure where this confusion occurred, and I'm disappointed that it did. But the permanent PARKLET program is totally different from the Open Streets Initiative. We've had permanent parklet options available in the city forever. All of this in my district, the social list. These are all businesses that have gotten permanent parklets way before the COVID pandemic even hit. So to conflate those two is has has mixed up the message quite a bit. And in fact, I myself, when I was reading the presentation earlier, thought Slide 15 was relevant to our current situation and not the hypothetical situation of permanent parklets being issued. So there is a lot of confusion there, and I just want to thank staff for clarifying that. I do want to point out that some eight, I believe, is that current eight parklets were removed. Eight Parklets were removed as a result of our discussions and our efforts. And what we did was we went out and Mr. Cochrane talked about the business owners that were here last time. Both the Panama Joes owner, as well as the Georges Greek owner, stayed after the last council meeting, and the Panama Joes owner actually voluntarily removed their parklet. So we've had eight parklets removed, which to me is tremendous. If we're talking about parking spots lost, this huge number of parking spots gained. We also were able to remove some parklets. Some businesses had two parklets like fills, and we were able to remove that. I want to. Okay. So a couple of questions for staff. I think enforcement to me is the biggest key here. And I'm going to approve staff's recommendation. I'm going to ask I'm going to vote in favor of staff's recommendation and I'm going to ask my colleagues to do the same. But I do want to make a motion, and I know the city attorney's on the line. I'm going to turn over to him in just a minute for Art Sanchez. I'm not sure if he's in here or on the line, but I do want to talk a little bit about every Parklet permit committee has to follow certain guidelines and standards, and there are good neighbor policies that are outlined here that basically say any violations or the permit can be revised, the conditions can be revised if any complaints are received and the permit may be revoked. If there is a nuisance. Situation. So I want to turn it over to the city attorney, Mr. Sanchez, and ask him if you can explain to us what that process is, because I would like to have a report back within 30 days that highlights what that process is and what efforts we've made to outreach to the community, what that processes for a permanent revocation of a temporary parklet for a violator of the good neighbor policy. So, Mr. Sanchez, can I ask you to explain that? Certainly. Councilwoman Pryce. So what would happen is we would have to have documentation of whatever the violation is, and it would have to be it would be done by venue task force at this point. And once we receive the documentation of the violation, we would reach out to the business owner, have them make somewhat immediate corrections, and if those corrections aren't made, we would move forward with removal of the parklet. Now that's you know, it's kind of in general in terms of the removal, assuming that violations exist and violations aren't corrected in a timely manner. Then we would post a notice providing the business with 72 hours to basically remove all items that had been collected at the parklet. They have an opportunity from. I believe, five days after the posting of the notice to request a hearing to appeal the removal of the parklet, the parklet would still be removed. The appeal would occur after the fact, and then we would just have that hearing and make a determination about the removal. And that is generally the process. If you have any questions like I've tried, answer. Okay. So my time is up, so I'm going to. Take. You back up. For it. Okay. Thank you. So, Mr. Sanchez, is there any way that we can document that process so that residents are aware of it? Because I know that residents have called the police in regards to some parklets and feel like they haven't had much of a process. So is there any way to document that process and then outreach it? Um. Yes, I guess we could have it done through a combination of public works and the venue task force can come up with a written process that outlines that it can post it. I guess it would be on the Public Works website. Okay, that sounds great. And my office will also help in getting the process out to the community once we have a process. And I think within that write up, there should be some sort of clear identification of what that threshold is. Is it just a simple complaint is a sustained violation. You know, a lot of times neighbors will call, for example, of a good neighbor policies, talk a lot about noise and loitering. So what happens is when they call that in, oftentimes code enforcement is not in a position to respond at midnight or 11 p.m. or even 9:30 p.m.. That's just those are not hours that code enforcement is able to respond. So then the resident is really left without recourse. And so I'd like, you know, a call to the police department and a police response to to qualify as one of the documented complaints that was either substantiated or not. So just nothing. I'm not making a motion as to how you effectuate this this process, but just a suggestion for when you do write it up that it would be good for residents to have some clarity. So with that, I do want to highlight just a couple of things. Unless, Mr. Sanchez unless there's anything else you want to add. In response to the talking points that I just raised. But, yes, so in terms of the violations, there would have to be some investigation that would be conducted. That investigation would include reviewing whatever calls for service that are for that particular location. And so that information would be reviewed. That would be some of the things that we would look into to confirm that the activity or the violation is occurring at that particular business. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sanchez. And that takes me to slide number six. There's a bullet point that says Parklets on minor side streets will no longer be allowed in cases where there are multiple documented violations. So the attorney in me is reading this saying, what's the definition of minor and what is documented violations mean and what is the staff's recommendation as to this bullet? Are we going to be removing any parklets that currently exist on the side street? Yes. To answer your question, Councilwoman Price, the minor side street would be any of the streets that intersect Second Street perpendicular, so streets like Glendora, Saint Joseph Park, etc. those are the minor streets. Second Street is the major street. That's how we refer to it. And traffic engineering. And then when we talk about multiple documented violations, again, we're talking about what Mr. Sanchez referred to as when someone goes out and investigates, you know, did they hear a loud noise? Was there a health order violation? Was there some or some other kind of quality of life issue that was documented? And then when we have, depending on the severity of those issues that we that are documented, when we have a significant number of those that are documented, we can move to the next step to possibly start the removal process, the notification, working with the business owner to correct if possible or go straight to the notification and the posting of the notice to remove. Okay. And I assume that we're not pressing reset tonight as if no violations have already occurred, that what has occurred in the past that has been documented will be considered by staff moving forward? That is correct. And we are quite familiar with many of the so-called bad actors out there and what's been going on. Okay. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. And on behalf of the residents, I thank you for that process. And, you know, I do I will say that we talk a lot about the loss of parking. In fact, I was at a friend's apartment short meeting the other night and someone was talking about the loss of parking . It is an 11% loss of parking. And, you know, one of the speakers talked about when we occupy those parking spots, we're not filling them. And so we're under parked. But a lot of the parklets are filled mostly in the evenings and a lot of our retail shops and services are closed at those times. So the parking spots that would be allotted, let's say, for the large lounge as an example or any other business or even fills, those parking spots really aren't used at night. So people will go to the restaurants. At night and they'll have more parking available because so many of the service businesses and some of the retail shops and daytime businesses are closed. So. So I support staff's recommendation. I know. It's not going to make everyone happy. But I do appreciate that we are eight less as a result and that we're still working to reduce as business needs change for the restaurants. And yes, this is a business friendly initiative, but it's also an initiative that we're trying to make resident friendly as well. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. And thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor, for indulging me that few extra minutes. Sure thing. Thank you. Members, please cast your vote and then we'll go to 34. She miscarried. Item 34 Communication from Vice Mayor Richardson. Councilwoman Zendejas. Councilwoman Allen. Recommendations Direct City Manager to Sunset Long Beach Municipal Code. Chapter 5.535.55 and 8.110. No sooner than February 28th, 2022.