Recommendation to request City Manager to prepare an update on the temporary parklet program and return to council prior to the June 30 sunset date for the program.
All right. So we're going out of order here again. We're going to take item number 22 next. Item 22. Communication from Councilwoman Allen. Recommendation to prepare an update on the temporary PARKLET program and return to council prior to the June 30th sunset date for the program. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Councilmember Mongo. Thank you. Councilman Allen asked that I read a short statement on her behalf. This item is about increasing public information and clarity about the effects of this program and getting more information about how it will wind down. I've heard comments from residents in my district who live near Parklets sharing concerns about ADA accessibility, noise and uncertainty about whether specific Parklets are applying for permanence or not. Councilman Allen supports flexible public spaces and initiatives that support small businesses and also supports attractive and vibrant business corridors and community centers. She thinks the staff for their hard work on this. Throughout the program. Thank you. Councilman Rosindell has any comment. Supportive of this item. Great. Is there any public comment on this particular item? We have six on the list Alex Sheeran, Ceren Gold Snake and FE, Brian Cochrane, Estella Tjader and Julie Deane. Please approach the podium. Great. Great. Thank you, Councilman Austin. And on behalf of the Long Beach Restaurant Association, we want to thank Councilwoman Allen for bringing this item forward. Elvira sent a letter to the mayor and city council members and staff earlier this month expressing our support for continuing the Parklet program. Elvira serves as a resource to you and to staff. We want to make sure that the PARKLET program is made permanent, but in a responsible manner with consistent desired guidelines. Feedback from the Restaurant Community. An overwhelming majority of our members all support the program, and we thank you very much for your engagement. I know Karen Ga, the president of the library, is here to give some comments on behalf of the association as well. So thank you. Thank you and welcome. Hey, everybody. My name's Karen Goff. I'm a partner in the 908 over L.B. Zozo Automotive Pizzeria over in Stacey's district. I'm also the president of the Long Beach Restaurant Association Association that was born in the pandemic. So a lot of it was Stacey and Susie's guidance on how to get together as an organization. As restaurateurs, you're usually pretty singular in how you think. But the pandemic brought us all together, and it's been a great resource for all of us. I want to add a little bit of color to how the restaurant industry is doing. Like currently, since about middle of January, sales have definitely come back in almost every district, which has been great. There has been a lot of headwinds that come with that minimum wage increases, shortages of a lot of product. Everybody's dealing with it. Commodities going up significantly. Forks are the bane of my life right now. At four different forks in my restaurant. I only want one, but you've got to go on the open market when your vendors can't get them, and quite often you're paying double and triple the price. So there's a lot of different things that we're dealing with and all of that can get captured and price. The guests just aren't going to pay it. So although sales are good, it's it's a struggle right now. Why should we extend parklets? People still want to sit outside. So that's I would tell you that most our patios fill up first, whether it's an actual parklet or your actual patio, that's even when the weather's not great. So there's still a demand for that. State of California is still in an emergency situation, so that shouldn't really change. A lot of you guys have been super supportive of having Parklets, which we greatly appreciate. If you didn't have that feeling, a lot of restaurants would go out of business. That's just the reality of it. For a lot of them, it's added to their seating and there's no doubt about it. That's absolutely helped, but it still is. If they don't have that seating, they're not going to make it. We know there's a lot of pushback as well on having parklets and there's a lot of things we need to work on esthetically, how they look, whether they are safe, all of those things. What we're asking for is the opportunity to help improve some of that and that we can work together with the city in order to make those parklets permanent. The parking the permanent parking process is challenging for a lot of restaurateurs. I think we're asking for the opportunity to work on that as well, because right now you need architects to be able to draw all of those, which is expensive. A lot of restaurants can't afford that. And you also need to have a Ph.D. in how to fill out the paperwork. So if we could get some help on that, that would be awesome as well. And that is about it. I appreciate everybody's time. Great. Thank you so much. Welcome. Before I begin, Chairman Austin, I wanted to ask if I might be able to cede any leftover time I have to the following speakers. We're going to give everybody 3 minutes. Understood. Thank you. Good evening, council members. And thank you, Chairman Austin. My neighbors and I are here on behalf of hundreds, likely thousands, of similarly concerned residents of Beaumont Shaw across the city who feel it's time and vital for you to understand and appreciate the data, observations and insights gathered around the issue of Parklets APIs and APIs . You are here in a moment of time. Try striving to make the best decisions on behalf of your residents and the city as a whole. But none of you were in these roles when the Parklets issue first arose almost a decade ago. There were the conditions that arose at the time have not been met or mitigated at all in the time since then. The concerns are even exasperated, especially in Belmont, Shaw and the pier areas. You have before you a detailed presentation encompassing many of the facets that our group has gathered over time. We're going to spotlight just a few of those for you tonight. During COVID, the need for a lifeline for businesses was very clear and supported by everyone. It's been two years plus and that time has passed. Not one restaurant or bar in Belmont Shaw has closed due to the pandemic. Historically, you should be aware of that. Georges Greek Cafe in 2012 applied for and sought a parklet. At the time they were denied flatly, citing parking concerns, loss of meter revenue, safety concerns, walkability along the shore. Similarly, on that same front, many business owners at the time even weighed in, quote, You're taking a public space and making it private. That was a business owner on Second Street at the time. Quote, I would never want to take parking spaces away. I can just not imagine carrying food across the sidewalk of a restaurant owner. I don't see it because of safety concerns, movement of traffic and even a greater sense of parking. Curt Schneider, business owner of multiple properties on Second Street. In 2010, the Belmont Shore Athletic Club was denied a simple parklet like space to put a bike rack. Similar similar needs were cited for that. The unique geography, the unique character of Belmont Shore and the Pier makes it a unique area that is not possible to sustain parklets on a permanent basis in any form. The congestion, the geography mitigate against that, and nothing has been done to alleviate those concerns from 2010 to now. One thing that's that's cited often by business owners and residents and desiring to go to a parklet is that they want the feel of an outside outdoor dining opportunity like Europe. This is not close to that. European dining opportunities are based around plazas and street walks and simple things that are isolated from vehicles and hazards of those sorts. Finally, I just want to underscore the key stakeholders in this. The actual residents of Bar Shaw in the Pier were never effectively involved in the input of city leaders from 2020 on the November 2021 survey started with and focused on input from businesses and their customers. Outreach to actual residents was minimal and so many of our fellow residents have engaged since then and to say that the program is not a fit for the area. I thank you for your consideration. Cynic can say. Estella and Julie. Yeah. Well. Hi. I'm still a hider. This is a re. Tabulation of a. Survey that was undertaken by public works at the end of last year and presented to City Council December 7th. The survey was poorly constructed with unclear objectives, and the only meaningful inquiry was one open ended question. Regrettably, this was used as an indication of the public's interest in permanent parklets, although the specific question was never asked. So lucky for me, I had a market research class in grad school, so I requested the raw data. All 584 responses to start. The original survey included responses from several districts, not just Belmont Shore, as was presented. There were 130 responses from other districts with comments pertaining to parklets in those areas, namely downtown Bixby and Fourth Street . The re tabulated data shows a 37% support for parklets by respondents in the third District, and one fifth of those respondents support with restrictions that may or may not be addressed in a permanent parklet program. This is much lower than the 49% that was presented by public works. The city's presentation stated that those who opposed the parklets had, quote, concerns. This is not accurate. Comments against the Parklets expressed very strong opposition. There's a marked vigor, a marked difference in the vigor of responses regarding the parklets. Those that support the Parklets had short answers. Those who oppose had lengthy, detailed explanations for the opposition. Although the city attributed one reason for each respondent who opposed the Parklets, the reality is that those who opposed the parklets cited several reasons for not wanting them. So let me summarize the notable conclusions. The majority of respondents, 61%, do not want parklets. Those who oppose have strong feelings against the Parklets and they have multiple, multiple reasons for not wanting the parklets. I'd like to read a verbatim. Reduced safety pedestrian visibility. Lost increased traffic. Parking impacts. Vermin increase difficult to walk second street now tables patrons servers block pedestrians ADA issues lost parking for residents. Businesses already had sidewalk dining. In my opinion, this is the very opposite of Open Street. And one more thing that came forward is lack of utilization. The parklets are utilized mostly on warm weekend evenings, but otherwise they are empty. The impact on parking and traffic is 24 seven. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I'm going to try and stand. What? Hi, my name is Julie Deane and I've been a resident in Beaumont, Shaw for 25 years and I've been on the board of the Belmont Shore Residents Association for 13 years, and I'm currently the President. So lack of suitability Belmont Shores population density is not conducive to parklets or laps. The shore has only 2% of the city's population, yet 37% of the city's Parklets statistics show that traffic accidents with injuries increased on Second Street between Bayshore and Livingston from the year prior to the installation of Parklets to the first year of Parklets from 18.9% to 47.8%. So who gains a couple dozen bars and restaurants and who loses next door businesses that are hidden behind umbrellas and parklet walls that are topped with planters and their customers and residents who cannot find parking parklets are very busy for a very short period of time and they're extremely underutilized. The vast majority of the time. Parking has been an issue in the shore for many, many years. In fact, we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on parking studies that now we are sorry on parking studies, but now we are okay with eliminating 50, 60, 100 spaces. That doesn't make sense. Turning right from Second Street onto a side street where there's a parklet near the corner is quite dangerous. Anyone with a low profile, including children, are in danger. A friend of mine with cerebral palsy asked me when the last time was that I saw someone in a wheelchair on Second Street, she explained. They don't come because it's no longer welcoming to them. They've been shut out. If permanent Parklets were to move forward and make sure parts of the main public thoroughfare would be given to the to the for profit businesses. And that just doesn't seem right. Residents quality of life has been impacted with increased trash, noise, vermin destroyed, parklet walls that stay that way for months and standing water moving to the pier area. There are three businesses in the pier area that are extensively encroaching on public space within the coastal zone against their permit, Belmont Brewing Company put in permanent anchors and railings to create an additional outdoor dining space. Iconix Fitness got a public street turned into a one way street for their OSP, with an elimination of 21 beach and business parking spaces, which goes against Coastal Commission rather than parking in their own parking space. Primal Alchemy Catering often parks in the public plaza, blocking pedestrian access. So what is our goal? What's our ask? What's the necessity? Belmont Shore is not fit for parklets apps or apps, whether temporary or permanent, whether at the pier or on Second Street. Our large group of residents cares about our quality of life and our community and wants our quaint, safer neighborhood back. Thank you. Thank you. The 1966 residents speaking as a small business owner. I manage a storefront on Fourth Street just adjacent to a restaurant, and I would have to say that that has. A parklet in. It probably has been one of the worst experiences as a business owner. We've essentially lost three parking spots because of the congestion that ensues with the Parklet being there. You know, it's completely recalibrated the delivery time and system of all the other businesses in the area because the parklet that's connected to my shop, there's an alley that runs in between it. So now everyone is incapable of getting their mail. You know, there's always it's not just with the parklets. What I've noticed is that because people aren't coming in and I don't necessarily want to blame restaurants for this, but because there's a preponderance of people in these restaurants now, a lot of people are doing delivery. So that means that the alley which connects to the parking behind for my shop is always being blocked by some delivery ubereats or whatever. And, you know, it's just I feel like as someone who has proximity to a restaurant, that I run a business that's not a restaurant. I'm getting the short end of the stick. So if this was ever to come up on a ballot, I would definitely vote against making this permanent. I think that if they want to pay more money with their business license in order to make it permanent, I still wouldn't agree with that. But I think that that would be more equitable because at the end of the day, all of the other businesses on the street have to realign how we do business because of the parklet. And so, you know, it gets tagged up a lot and there's the homeless people who sleep in it when it's not being maintained. And there's a lot of residue from the people who are eating it. You know, these are the creature comforts that I think some of the previous speakers were describing that we didn't necessarily sign up for when we wanted to help our local restaurants survive this epidemic and so pandemic. And so, yeah, as a ten, 20, 94th Street, you know, you can fairly see that there's a next to impossible amount of people coming in and out of the restaurant in the Parklet area. And I just don't really agree to continue on that. So I hope it sunsets. Thank you. That concludes the public comment. Okay. That concludes public comment. Councilmember Supernova. Thank you, chair Austin. I would like to request a friendly to the motion and that is I'm assuming public works is not here tonight to respond to some of the statements made by the speakers. So I'd like to ask that we add to this a report from Public Works to address the suggestion that the the data do not sync with the presentation. So I'd like it public works a chance to either alter their presentation or tell us how they arrived at their conclusions. Well, except. Okay. So the friendly has been accepted. Councilmember Price. Yeah. And along those lines, the data that was cited tonight is from a very long time ago, a lot of circumstances have changed. I know it's probably not. Reasonable within the short turnaround time of this to have any new surveys done. But I know that I had requested the last time this item came to the council that we have an exception for Belmont Shore so that we could do a survey and a further audit. And to me, when this item does come back, I'd like to know kind of where we are point in time now. So I know, for example, we've closed down a lot of Parklets in Belmont Shore because they just weren't being used. And what we did was have staff go and ask the owners whether or not they wanted to continue their parklets and many did not. So I think we need to incorporate that into the analysis as well, so that the data that we're relying on or we get feedback on is based on the information and the status of the situation now as opposed to when we first passed the Open Streets Initiative and when we chose to extend it the first time. I think it's really important that we have up to date information. So things. Thank you. And I'll just add, I think, you know, I think it was a good presentation, very, very enlightening from public comment. When we passed the Open Streets Initiative, we were under emergency kind of orders and doing all we could to support small businesses who were who were really dying on the vine. And not all parklets or business corridors were were the same. Right? I mean, we had k rails and and stanchions and you know, ah in Bixby, those in my in my district did look like some some folks said it looked like a controlled construction zone. Right. We went through great measures to to make sure that restaurants were surviving, but also that people were safe. And so, um, I do like your suggestion of, of getting a point in time, kind of. Information back because when this survey was taken, I believe a lot of those structures were still up across the city. And so. Duly noted. Great comments tonight. Look forward to getting this item back. Members, please vote. Motion is. Carried. Okay. We're going to go back to our normal order. Item 20, please.