CC 2021-11-23 Parklets Discussion_PP Presentation
STUDY SESSION ON THE CITY’S TEMPORARY PARKLET PROGRAM AND OPTIONS FOR POTENTIAL PERMANENT PARKLET PROGRAMS
11/23/2021
1
Goal of study session:
Provide introductory information about parklets and survey results
Obtain feedback prior to staff allocating significant time in the development of a parklet program
Short Street use and closure:
Separate/distinct Council item because it may be a construction project.
Development of a dedicated public outreach/ survey for Short Street plan.
11/23/2021
2
Background
COVID-19 Public Health Crisis
Economic Impacts to Local Businesses
Significant Challenge / Unique Opportunity
11/23/2021
3
Background
City Early COVID-19 Response:
Authorized waiving application fees for additional outdoor space
Facilitated installation of five temporary parklets in Village for eight businesses
Temporary encroachments
Concrete K-Rail
Business Assistance Grants – approx. $170,000
11/23/2021
4
Parklet - locations
11/23/2021
5
Parklets – sidewalk view
Rooster Creek
Café Andreini
11/23/2021
6
Parklets
Villa Cantina
Humdingers/Village Café
Doc Bernstein
11/23/2021
7
Parklets – street view samples
Approx. 50 feet long
Approx. 60 feet long
11/23/2021
8
Estimated Costs
Permits (applicant fees):
- MUP - $735.00 one time fee
- Typical Encroachment Permit - $698.00 per mo.
- Minor Encroachment Permit - $57.00 per mo.
Materials (undetermined how cost is paid):
- Concrete security planters
- 8’ long x 3’ high x 30” wide – 1720lbs
- $1,500.00 per unit
- 3 to 5 required for each parklet
- trellis and raised floor - currently owners expense
11/23/2021
9
Estimated Costs
Staff Time (maintenance and inspections) (applicant fees):
- $1,000 - $1,500 per year
Potential Annual Use Fee (undetermined)
An amount established by Council to compensate for the loss of public parking and private use of public property
11/23/2021
10
Public Outreach – Survey Questions
1. Throughout the pandemic, the City of Arroyo Grande has run a temporary parklet program, where some public street parking spaces have been converted to outdoor dining areas. Have you
used a parklet in Arroyo Grande?
2. The City is considering whether to make some of these parklets permanent. In general, how supportive are you of having permanent parklets in Arroyo Grande?
3. Are you a business owner, manager and/or decision-maker of a business in the City of Arroyo Grande?
4. Where is your business located?
5. Does your business currently use one of the parklets?
11/23/2021
11
Public Outreach – Survey Questions
6. Are you interested in participating in the parklet program if it becomes permanent?
7. The City has provided several parklets on public streets at no cost to local businesses. A parklet costs approximately $3,000-$5,000 for installation (traffic safety K-rail placement)
and approx. $1,000-$1,500/year for ongoing costs (maintenance, K-rail monthly rental fees, etc). If they become permanent, the City will look to share the expense with the businesses
that have them. As a business owner/representative, what is the maximum annual cost you would be willing to pay to have a parklet at your business?
8. What is your overall feeling toward parklets in the Village? (Comment Box)
9. Does having parklets makes you more likely to visit an outdoor dining establishment?
11/23/2021
12
Public Outreach - Survey
Results: Strong support for long-term permanent parklet program
Strongly Support
Somewhat Support
Neutral
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose
11/23/2021
13
Public Outreach - Survey
Support themes:
Energy and Ambiance
Aesthetics and Design
Community Interaction
Safety
Economic Activity and Recovery
11/23/2021
14
Public Outreach - Survey
Results: If an outdoor dining establishment included a parklet, more likely to visit by a margin of 68% to 26%, with 6% unsure.
YES
NO
Don’t Know / Unsure
11/23/2021
15
Public Outreach - Survey
Sample Support Comments:
“When we visit, we enjoy sitting outside, and was so excited to have so many choices, because so many restaurants di this. It allows more people, which in turn makes more money for these
restaurants and happier customers. They should absolutely stay!”
“As an immunocompromised person, I have greatly appreciated the use of parklets in the Village. Parklets have allowed me to spend time downtown and support local businesses in a safe
way. I hope the city keeps the parklets in AG.”
11/23/2021
16
Public Outreach - Survey
Business Respondents Results:
Small % of business use parklets (10%)
Interest in participating if permanent (20%)
Not interesting in participating if permanent (50%)
11/23/2021
17
Public Outreach - Survey
Results: What is the maximum annual costs you are willing to pay?
Up to $500/year
$500 - $1,000/year
$1,000 - $1,500/year
Not willing to pay any cost
Don’t Know/Unsure
11/23/2021
18
Public Outreach - Survey
Concern themes:
Parking
Aesthetics
Safety
Obstruction
Fairness
Timing and Necessity
11/23/2021
19
Public Outreach - Survey
Sample Concern Comments:
“They are taking up valuable street parking and benefiting only select businesses”
“It was nice the past year since there wasn’t the option of dining inside or limited seating. But with everything slowly going back to normal it seems safer to not have them. It also
leaves room for more parking. If business want a front patio area they should look for a building that actually has one.”
11/23/2021
20
Long-Term Parklet Program Options
Option 1: Return to pre-COVID policies, removing all parklets at conclusion of temporary program.
Option 2: Develop long-term parklet program.
11/23//2021
21
Long-Term Parklet Program Options
Option 1 (removal of parklets): Pros
Maximizes on-street parking supply
Eliminates risk of potential vehicle collisions with outdoor dining areas in parking lane
Requires no new staffing resources or capital expenditures on parklets beyond end of temporary program
11/23/2021
22
Long-Term Parklet Program Options
Option 1 (removal of parklets): Cons
Limits available space for outdoor dining activities, providing less opportunity to increase vibrancy of pedestrian environment.
Restricts ongoing flexibility for businesses as the pandemic continues.
Limits the options for businesses during economic recovery.
11/23/2021
23
Long-Term Parklet Program Options
Option 2 (development of a parklet program): Pros
Provides more opportunities for outdoor dining, which adds to vibrancy of the public realm.
Helps businesses with economic recovery.
Visually narrows the street, which can have a traffic calming effect.
Increases tax revenue to the City through the use of additional dining space and increased customer patronage.
11/23/2021
24
Long-Term Parklet Program Options
Option 2 (development of a parklet program): Cons
Reduces on-street parking supply.
Increases costs to the City to continue parklet program.
Parklets will need to be removed to facilitate roadway paving work, resulting in higher costs for work and direct temporary impacts to business that utilize parklets.
Parklets do not directly benefit all types of businesses.
Increased risk for vehicle collisions for anything located within the footprint of the roadway.
Additional staff time required.
11/23/2021
25
Next Steps for Permanent Program
Option 1: Remove Parklets after Temporary Program
No additional action needed. Remove parklets at end of temporary program (TBD).
11/23/2021
26
Next Steps for Permanent Program
Option 2: Develop Long-Term Parklet Program
Develop framework for long-term parklet program and policies.
Conduct a detailed cost analysis.
Conduct additional outreach to guide refinement of policies.
Present final parklet program and policy recommendations for advisory body and Council consideration for approval.
11/23/2021
27
If Recommend Option 2….
Include an appropriate permit process for future permanent parklets. Staff recommends an encroachment permit and Plot Plan/Minor Use Permit for each parklet, including approval by the
Community Development Director via Architectural Review Committee design review.
Develop detailed, but flexible, objective design standards for safety and aesthetics, with approval by the Community Development Director via Architectural Review Committee design review.
11/23/2021
28
If Recommend Option 2….
Develop appropriate permitting and annual user fees based on cost calculations and Council input.
Include a process for notification of adjacent properties and an opportunity to appeal new parklet proposals to the Planning Commission and City Council. Staff recommends notification
and appeal procedures consistent with a Plot Plan/Minor Use Permit.
11/23/2021
29
Alternatives
Direct staff to remove existing parklets and end the Temporary Parklet Program
Direct staff to develop a Long-Term Parklet Program:
Develop framework for long-term parklet program and policies, including developing the permit type, objective design guidelines, proposed fee schedules, and amendments to the City Municipal
Code required to continue with a permanent program.
Conduct a detailed cost analysis for materials (barriers), installation, staff time, outside services (trucking/delivery), ongoing maintenance, replacement of damaged barriers, etc.
Conduct additional outreach to guide refinement of proposed parklet policies.
Present final parklet program and policy recommendations for advisory body and Council consideration for approval.
11/23/2021
30
Alternatives
Direct staff to continue the existing Temporary Parklet Program, while gathering more information and detailed actual costs associated with a permanent parklet program; or
Provide other direction to staff.
11/23/2021
31
Questions?
11/23/2021
32
Study Session Framework for Feedback
Question 1: Does Council want to continue with a permanent parklet program?
Question 2: Does Council support stringent parklet design standards that encourage a uniform appearance, or more flexible design guidelines that still allow for unique designs, as long
as they meet objective minimum standards for safety and quality of appearance?
10/12/2021
33
Study Session Framework for Feedback
Question 3: Does Council support the requirement of permit processing fees as well as user fees that will fully cover the costs to the City for installing the parklet barriers and managing
the parklet program? If fees are adopted, should they be implemented gradually over the course of a few years?
Question 4: What level of notification and communication should be provided to adjacent businesses and property owners prior to approving new parklet applications?
10/12/2021
34
Parklets – closer aerial photos
10/12/2021
35
Parklets
10/12/2021
36
Environmental Review
Study Session itself does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA
Parklets in some form of long-term continuation would be categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the actions are limited to permitting,
leasing, and minor alteration of existing public facilities
Staff will carefully evaluate any activities considered for continuation and conduct the appropriate level of project specific CEQA review prior to returning to Council with any permanent
program or policy proposals.
10/12/2021
37