Speaker 0: Motion carries. Item 32 Report from Public Works. Recommendation to adopt resolution to set operating days and hours for parking meter zones 31 and 32 to Monday through Sunday District three.
Speaker 1: Okay, great. And we're and I believe this is also the item that we were going to have a broader conversation around from the fee schedule as well that we discussed earlier. Councilman, do you want to hear a staff report first or do you have comments first?
Speaker 0: I'd like a staff report and then I'll have some comments.
Speaker 1: Okay. Mr. West, Craig Beck, our director of Public Works.
Speaker 7: Yes, ma'am. Member City Council. Thank you. Tonight, you have before you an opportunity to move forward with adding parking meters in what is called zone 31 and Zone 32. The way the municipal code is set up, we need to establish a parking meter zone before parking meters can be implemented. The action before you this evening would not only establish those zones, but allow for enforcement of parking meters from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. for a maximum of 2 hours at a rate of $0.75 per hour. With that concludes my report, and I stand ready to answer any questions.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Price So I've had the opportunity to talk with public works on this and, and I have some recommendations, recommended changes I want to make. But I'd like to hear from the public first if there's any public comment and then we'll move forward.
Speaker 1: As a public comment on this item. Please come forward. Good evening. It's nice and late. My name is Kurt Schneider. I own the majority of the block that will be surrounded by these new parking meters. I recently renovated that building. Most of the block spent millions of dollars improving that area. Saving your city hundreds of thousands of dollars in just police calls. Because when Yankee Doodle was there, it was an eyesore. It was a problem not just for Susy Price, but for the previous three council people. It was terrible for Frank Alona drama and for Gary. Too long we've cleaned up those problems and after we got this project up and running, now we have something. Not that we're not looking forward to. I was a part of Commissioner and Chair for over 12 years and understand Belmont Shaw's parking issues pretty well. I don't think there's anybody else I know nobody else has ever served longer than I have. This proposal does not address a parking issue, as no resident has ever asked for this proposed change. This is something the government has brought forward. Sometimes you've got to wonder when the government comes in and says, I'm here to help. This is one of those times we didn't ask for help. Our parking is working. We currently have 2 hours parking. That creates plenty of parking turnover due to aggressive chalking. Your parking meter people are doing a great job. They're on top of it. Those $49 tickets scare the hell out of people. So they rotate. They move. No one wants that ticket. It works. If it ain't broken, why are we trying to fix it? So we had no public notice for public meetings. Here's a notice I received today for zoning admin for overnight permitted parking, Alamitos Bay and many of the others. I understand you don't have to have public hearings for this, but in Belmont. Sure, in the fragility of this area, you should have it. It has not happened. I know it's not necessary per government purview, but it is necessary for this neighborhood. This is a very active neighborhood. I think it's very important to have the locals get involved and voice their concerns. In just one day, we had over 400 responses by putting it out on an email, 400 responses. That tells you this community is worried. Parking meters were created originally to help businesses not generate revenue. They create turnover, but so does enforcement at time limits. Look at the study of one versus the other. There are solutions to our parking issues down there, but most of the community is not willing to do these things. I very much like you to vote this down for this specific location. The revenue is not going to make a change. We are saving you way more money than this through our efforts to improve this neighborhood. Everybody here that has been down there knows we've been effective. We police the homeless. We help with the homeless. We've also taken care of a lot of the drug issues down there. I hope you have a chance to come down and visit. I think we've done a great job. You will be doing a disservice to Belmont Shore, in my opinion, by metering that area at this point in time. In a few years, it probably will work fine. Thank you, Mr. Hunter. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Speaker, please. Hi. My name's Tui. I'm a partner to the business and oversee all operations of Olympics fitness firm the fitness industry for 14 years. So I'm pretty aware of parking and the severity of what happens with fitness clubs. It's a major issue. You look at any social media, you'll see that parking is one of most common things that a consumer looks at. And so specifically, we have a high residential traffic that goes in the facility where 93% of the traffic is just from Long Beach. Very seldom you see commuter traffic, people from Lakewood or different communities, they're joining our club. As far as our hiring, we're we're approaching about 80 employees, 95% of all local Long Beach. So this is a high residential area. We look at this area. I think the major thing with this parking meter is going to impact our residents. So what's going to happen is we have a fit group. They don't mind walking one block, so they'll park over in the residence area across the street. It's going to create a bottleneck of traffic. And what you're going to get is empty parking spots in front of facility with no revenue whatsoever, very little. The other thing is our reputation as a small business. We're trying to do a lot for the community, clean it up. This proposed parking is going to be in front of our facility on Ocean Boulevard and then also on Olympic and not in front of Apple's lot, in front of Vons or any of those other commercial businesses just in front of the Olympics. So our member is going to look at that and say, okay, to join or be a member, you're going to pay for parking or a park across the street. The other thing is that we've had a diverse group, just like our community, that's talking to a young member that signed up. And he said he's a real estate agent, Strava and finding success. He said his first month he sold his first house and has been six months in his own house. So the community inside the club helped see him build success. So it really affects as the young member, the athlete, the college student, they can't afford the extra 30 bucks a month or $360 a year to be a member of Park. So what, you take the kids consideration these things and please don't go through this. Thank you. Thank you. Next week, a piece.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor and city council members. My name is Lucy Johnson and I was made aware of the situation yesterday. This is a really small issue compared to most of the things you guys face, especially tonight and most of the other hours and hours that you spend at council. However, the question why is before you at all. I regularly frequent the gym because I have an annual parking pass for the beach.
Speaker 1: Parking lasts another issue.
Speaker 3: But suddenly how hard it is to get that every year. I generally park on the east side of the Belmont Pool and walk to the gym primarily, so I don't take a parking space on the ocean or Olympic Plaza that could be used by someone who does not have an annual past based on what I've been able to determine in the past two days. It appears that there are really only two points for you to consider. One public works would have you believe that approval of this item will allow for more rapid turnover of cars using those estimated 80 parking spaces, claiming that faster turnover will benefit the customers of the five businesses affected. There's only five businesses in that section.
Speaker 1: And she made.
Speaker 3: The discussion per the first paragraph under discussion on your council letter. That's the claim that it'll help with the better get better access to customers of those businesses. However, the area is already posted with signs limiting parking in those spaces to 2 hours. The meters would have the same time limit. How would that increase turnover in those spaces? Which brings me to the second point. What will this really accomplish other than to add minimal additional revenue to the city's general fund at the expense of the patrons of those five businesses? Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Josiah Whipkey. I live in Beaumont Shaw, so I live in the third district. I used to work with Postmates, which is a delivery service, and they actually let all their local managers go a year ago. So it's been kind of a struggle for me this last year. But thankfully with me joining the gym, I've been able to get a great job and a sales job and also just making ends meet and I know obviously live in I'm sure. So rent's not cheap, but I think for me, the struggle with parking now at the gym is it's it's kind of going to take my wind out of my sails because I just know that getting to the gym can be a big kind of stress relief for relief. And I can just get in there and get a workout in and leave and not, you know, just be overwhelmed with everything else that's going on. So I think just for me to to see the meters going into play, you know, I obviously will just park in the neighborhood and I just don't think that's going to help the residents in that area. So I just just request that this get pushed out for for further discussion later down the road. And like Curt said, you know, I think in the years to come, possibly put in meters is going to be smarter. But right now, with the parking situation at hand, I don't think putting meters just around the block is going to solve anything. Thank you. See no other public comment. I'll take this back to Councilman Price.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Okay. So a couple of comments here. I appreciate everyone who stayed as late as you all did. I have a tremendous amount of respect for all of you personally and professionally. And I know that sitting through a council meeting where you had no idea when your item was going to come up was terribly frustrating. And I appreciate you being here. I am listening and I am hearing you. First of all, let me start by saying the business owners of the particular business that was represented tonight have done amazing work, wonderful improvements to the area. No quarrel whatsoever in my mind that that has happened. We have not as good but other business leaders throughout the city that have done amazing things for the community. And we try to be very consistent in our application of our our our efforts. You know, we don't we don't pick and choose what business owners we like more or how much more they've contributed to the community. You know, certainly none have contributed as much to the local area as the business owners in this situation have. And I'm grateful for it. But we're talking about a commercial area. And in the four years that I've been in office, I've never once had a business owner call me and say, can you please help me charge my patients for parking? Can you please help me figure out a way to put a meter in front of my business so that people will have. To pay to come and visit my business. That's just that's just not a conversation that we ever have, because, as any business owner would do, they're going to want to advocate for their customers to have free access to parking. So as. As unpopular as the statement may be, we don't impose fees, taxes and other assessments based on democracy because no one would ever raise their hands and say, I would like to be charged extra for things. It just doesn't work that way. Having said that, I work.
Speaker 3: Very closely with our public works.
Speaker 0: Department. I've talked with our public works director, Craig Beck, about Ocean Boulevard and the reconfiguration of that road.
Speaker 3: I've been very clear.
Speaker 0: In public meetings that I would not support putting meters in the residential areas, but that I would be open to considering meters in the commercial zones, much like we have in every other part of the city. I do think that it's important for us as a city council to support efforts by staff to create revenue generating opportunities . While I understand that to the folks who spoke at the podium, a $100,000 possible revenue opportunity is insignificant to this council. That may be a significant revenue generating opportunity when we look at it around the whole city. Certainly if the director came forward and offered us or recommended to us $900,000 different, $100,000 revenue generating opportunities, and each of us were to pick a business owner that we really like and say, you know what, we're going to reject that because we really like the business owner. The city would lose out on potential opportunities to collect revenue, and we're not going to do that and we shouldn't do that. I think it's important when we're talking about this particular zone in this area to highlight a few things which, you know, we sent an email out to 5000 people and we got 19 responses in opposition. Over half of them either worked at the gym or were contacted by the gym owner to contact our office. So the fact that you received 400 posts is interesting to me or 400 replies because when I reviewed the messaging, I think there are a few things that were misleading. One, there's no implementation timeline whatsoever on this program yet. Two, as I've indicated to the business owner and was not reflected in any of the marketing and advocacy, is that we're completely open to setting a fee that is reasonable and something that we can all agree is mitigated, and that the hours of operation for the meters are something that we're open to discussing. None of that was really mentioned in any of the marketing that went out, and I understand advocacy and wanting to get a big turnout at a council meeting, but I think it's important that we highlight that those are offers that were made that I think make the situation a much more mitigated. So I choose to focus on how we mitigate concerns that a business owner has regarding impacts to their business. So with that in mind, there's a couple of amendments I'd like to make to this. I'd like to reduce the rate of parking in this commercial area to $0.50 for an hour, as opposed to the proposed $0.75 an hour for the first year and one year after implementation. I'd like us to look at the data, see what the costs of operating the meters was, and whether that 50 cent amount is something we can continue doing because as the report indicates, there are some operating costs associated with this. And if the fee that we're charging is too low to justify the operating costs that we have to commit to, then, then we might have to consider raising it. But I agree, and this is something the business owner pointed out to me, that it's not as robust as a commercial zone yet as Second Street is. However, this is an area that was recently slotted for additional opportunities pursuant to the land use element. So this this is, we hope, an area that will continue to become more and more frequented and thriving. But I agree that right now it's not at the place where Second Street is. So $0.50 per hour, I think is justified. I think we should keep the hours as is, because my offer to adjust the hours wasn't met with any sort of positive response. So if there is an opportunity to adjust the hours in the future, I'd like to hear about it. But that offer didn't really go anywhere. I'd like to ensure that a significant portion of the revenue that's collected from this area will be spent in the immediate area for cleanup and beautification efforts. I know we talk a lot. I mean, we sit here at council meetings and we'll, you know, we'll allocate $100,000 for this or $200,000 for that. I can tell you that $50,000 a year, $60,000 a year spent in this area will make a difference, whether it's us purchasing big bellied trash cans, whether it's us repainting dilapidated areas, whether it's as fixing potholes, whatever the case is, I think that we should be able to spend this money back in this area to continue the work that the property owners have done, which has been very beneficial for the city. And then the final thing that I'd like to suggest is I know that our smart meters have courtesy chimes on them that allow for 5 minutes courtesy time. I'd like to explore the feasibility of allowing a 15 minute courtesy time for this area, because I know at least one of the businesses there has a smoothie shop or coffee shop and people can run in and purchase items on the go or there's a daycare center there. If parents want to drop their kids off, we certainly don't want them to pay $0.50 to drop their kids off. They should have a little bit more than 5 minutes. So those are some of the changes that I have that I'd like staff to make.
Speaker 1: Mr. Beck, do you want to respond to those or any response to that?
Speaker 7: Certainly. I think part of what we're here tonight is to have a conversation about the hours of operation and certainly the raid. So if it is the desire of the council to set that at $0.50, we can move that forward without problem and then we can look at it in a year. I think that's a good idea and really evaluate what the costs are for the operation and what revenue is being generated. With regard to utilizing revenue generated from that parking area to do infrastructure improvements in those areas, that is a policy that the Council has adopted previously. It's something we do in the downtown and we installed our downtown smart meters. So I do believe that that is good policy to utilize that revenue to beautify and or put back into the district. And in reality, that is how we were able to fund the improvements of the Second Street median project that came out of parking revenues that were generated in Belmont Shore. So it is something that that does provide a benefit for those that are that are paying to park there. I think one of the challenges I would ask council to strongly consider is is the courtesy time. So currently we are doing 5 minutes. I think consistency is important that no matter where you are as a resident of the city and you're utilizing our parking meters, consistency in in how you experience those meters is what I would recommend. So if it is the desire to move from 5 minutes and extend that time, I think we should consider that across the board. That would have a revenue impact. I would caution Council to consider that revenue impact and we can provide more data on that if that's a policy direction you'd like to go.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I think if we could study that, I'd appreciate that because I just have no idea what the impact would be. Maybe it's not 15 minutes, maybe it's ten, and maybe that is something that we across we apply citywide. But obviously I want to hear from my colleagues on that because it's not just my district that would be impacted by that, but I think residents might use that courtesy feature more if they had a little bit more time. Okay. Thanks.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And just also, I'm assuming that that's all, is that if you change the most the staff recommendation yet, or are you waiting to hear more feedback first before?
Speaker 3: No, those.
Speaker 0: Would be my recommended changes.
Speaker 1: Okay. As part of the. As part of the motion.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. And so. Councilman Austin. Thank you. I just had a few questions.
Speaker 8: How many parking spots are we talking about?
Speaker 1: Roughly 80.
Speaker 8: 880800. Okay. And to the to the point about the grace period, the 5 minutes, we don't have any parking meters and my my area of town, and I'm sure we may explore doing that at some point in the future. But in terms of the revenue impact that I guess you wouldn't have anything off your off the top of your head, but. In terms of grace periods. Two other cities offer that. And have we studied that chasm?
Speaker 7: We don't have that data now, whether cities have studied that or not. It in my experience, there is some level of grace period that can be 3 minutes, 5 minutes. I think it depends on the jurisdiction, but certainly staff can do research on that. Pull together information and provide counsel an update to inform you on how to move forward.
Speaker 1: And I had a little bit here that was something pretty unique that we did. We had looked around and people had thought about it, but it was really kind of a Long Beach thing. We haven't seen it in too many other areas. Sometimes it's just a courtesy, but you actually get 5 minutes when you press the green button here. So we can certainly look at the data. It was, if I remember, around 100,000 or something back then, but that was just an estimate. So we need to look at it now to see, you know, what is it actually costing us, how much is getting used and can we move that up to 10 minutes or something? Yeah, I thought that was pretty.
Speaker 8: Unique to it. To us. I want to commend our Councilmember Price for her for her flexibility on this and working with the businesses and weighing out all of the the different challenges that that that have come with this issue. I certainly support this, but I would ask that that, you know, I'm interested for four reasons related to my district as to how this will play out. I think this is an important issue. And yes, revenue is important. We need to look at ways to generate revenue. I think this is a creative way to do so, particularly in a area that that is a parking challenge. I understand the business owners of their interest here as well, protecting their their interest in their investments. But I think there's a balance here, and I think a good compromise has been been struck here. So I'll be supporting this item.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Next up is Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 3: I yes. Thank you.
Speaker 0: I'll support my council colleagues. These are eight meters in her district.
Speaker 3: But I do have a lot of comments and questions. So in my district, to your comment that nobody's going to say yes, put a meter up. I want to thank Craig back and his team for working with the Fourth Street bid. And really we have had probably four or five meetings with our bid members with residents. We do an online survey. We really engaged everybody from a place where they were divided and not wanting to do meters to a place where we are now on track to.
Speaker 0: Install meters on Fourth Street.
Speaker 3: And so that we were able to get to that place because we did that work with them, we set the rates with them, we set the hours with them, we set a timeline for when we would reevaluate those. So I think that, you know, in certain areas, you can.
Speaker 0: Definitely.
Speaker 3: Get that into the point of the different rates. I'm curious, what are the various rates that we have across the city? Are we as a pretty standard, are each are the bed setting a different rate like Dubay versus Fourth Street versus second Street councilmember?
Speaker 7: We are working to try to standardize what those rates are, but currently they do vary. I mean, they even vary in in the same parking districts. A good example of that is Belmont Shore, where you have on street rates that are different than the off the parking lots off the street. We're working to standardize that many times when we we do try to work with the business districts. It's a lot of times the business districts that will bring forward a recommendation to to install parking meters. And I think a lot of that depends on the business districts desire for rates. And I think if you look at some of the parking studies that we've done recently, there's a new trend in how you move forward with setting parking rates, and that is time of use. So while we haven't implemented time abuse rates in our city, that is something that staff has been looking at and strongly considering and we think would would be an important next step for us to consider.
Speaker 0: Great.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I just was thinking about the fact that we have some meters, I believe, like around central Long Beach and outside of the downtown area that aren't tied to a bed, but their rates might be higher. And just trying to think of that, again, that equity issue, whereas if you're visiting a nice place, I like to eat breakfast right next to your place. I am probably once a week visiting a nice part of town by the beach versus needing to run an errand at a courthouse. Just trying to think equitably about how our how we are deciding those rates across the board. So, you know, I'll support this item. I just ask that we definitely talk about process as you guys move forward so that we can include a process. Across the board that our residents can can look forward to as we make these decisions. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Councilman Ringa. Well, I have to look at this from a different perspective. And one question that I have about this is, is this within the coastal zone? And what should we have addressed this issue with the Coastal Commission in regards to changing parking because of the fact that if it was a free before and now you're going to be putting in meters, that changes a person's experience going to the beach. So has that come into play at all? The staff consider that and they do.
Speaker 7: Councilmember To my knowledge, I think the city manages on street parking and has the ability to set the rates and the times for enforcement. The Coastal Commission is involved in our beach lots and the cost and timing for parking rates in our beach lots.
Speaker 1: Well, the the issue that I have it is that it's removing 80 parking spots that people have pre access to, to not only visit the businesses there, but also go to the beach. And that would have a negative effect for individuals who want to park there, who might not necessarily go to the business or might even go to a business and then go to the beach and take their food and go out, go have a nice day in the beach and and the other activities such as that. So I'm having I'm conflicted with this because of that. It's removing well, it's it's dealing with access access to the beach that I think is is very important and very important for me, especially in my role as a Coastal Commissioner, when we're looking at increasing access and not removing access. So I'm having an issue with this in regards to whether we should proceed with putting in meters. And I can see the city's need to raise revenue. And I'm not you know, I'm not against raising revenue, of course, but I am concerned about the impact it would have on the public who want to enjoy the beach. So, Councilmember.
Speaker 7: One of the things that I would like to point out is that we we kind of look at this as an overall project where we recently had completed a road diet on ocean that has added in excess well over 100 additional spaces that are right adjacent to our growing out of parking lot. 156 Thank you, Councilmember for the accurate number. So I think we are conscious about creating new parking opportunities. I think in many districts that are parking challenged, you can all attest that we've looked at diagonal parking, we've looked at beyond diagonal parking to maximize parking opportunities, including our coastal zones.
Speaker 1: Well, again, like I'm saying, this is the removal of 83 slots into creating some revenue for the city. So I'm conflicted with this. I'm not I'm not I'm not in total agreement with it.
Speaker 7: And if I could, Mayor, just add one more thing. I probably should have done this in my opening remarks, but one of the things that we have moved towards are smart meters. And the one of the benefits of our smart meter technology is it ties into our Easy Park LP application and that Easy Park will be app will give you indications of where there are parking opportunities and where there aren't parking opportunities. So anybody that utilizes that app can see where there's open spaces to park.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Beck. And next up is Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Yes, thank you. I you know, I think I just want to reiterate a lot of what the my colleagues had mentioned and being a councilmember for downtown, we've been through this quite some time and a lot of outreach, I will say, has had been done. We increased, I believe, you know, we're up to a dollar 50 per hour in downtown and we don't even have all of our storefronts. You know, we're doing a good job a lot better than we were seven years ago. But we're you know, we're pretty impacted with high rates. But we did a ton of outreach prior to to ensure that employees and also businesses understood where the parking meter rate would go to and just the adjustment from going to traditional meters to smart meters. And I know, Tom, you were there at many of her meetings and, you know, sometimes they weren't happy meetings, but at least it gave the opportunity for businesses, small businesses especially, to talk through some of these issues. So I would just say, you know, and I know Council Member Price has done a lot of work on this , but I would say outreach definitely needs to be consistent to all of our business improvement areas all over the city. And then knowing the 15 minute I should mention, the 15 minute kind of grace period, I would just ask that we keep that consistent as well. We have 5 minutes in downtown. I think that worked very well. Gives you 5 minutes to go in and out of the dry cleaner. Kind of dropped something off what have you. But that also just I would just ask because that will create a big drama in downtown if that I'm not sure is going to give in 15 minutes and we're given 5 minutes and not to pin anything against each other, but I just think we should be consistent across the board. But perhaps and I don't know if there's additional, because I also have sort of the concern of the going from free parking to parking that will now you will have to pay for in this sort of beach community. And I'm wondering, is there going to be additional I don't know if there's an additional outreach that we will do. I mean, we can certainly pass this tonight, but what does that mean for additional outreach for people other than who we're seeing here? And it's already 1030. Are we planning for additional outreach?
Speaker 1: Mr.. Mr.. MARKER Someone. Mr.. BECK So.
Speaker 7: Council member certainly we can do additional outreach. I think the.
Speaker 1: Idea would be.
Speaker 7: How we enforce the parking. And typically whenever we install a new zone, we provide a grace period similar to some of the policy decisions that the council's made. For example, an RV ban that will move forward from an enforcement perspective with a grace period when we did street sweeping time changes that moved forward with a grace period . So for X number of weeks we provide warning notices to advise anybody that are not following the particular policy. They aren't ticketed during that grace period.
Speaker 0: So what would the grace period be?
Speaker 7: We can set that typically two weeks is what we utilize.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 0: Two weeks and then are the adjacent businesses. I'm just really I mean, we know that parking is a major issue and no matter what part of the area it is, it's just a huge issue. So I just want to make sure we get the process right as well. Will everyone be notified or how will they understand that this is going to be changing? Will they receive something in the mail or will there be signs posted in addition to that?
Speaker 7: Certainly whenever we do any new parking meter installation, you have to install the meter, post the meter heads, signage, talking about the fact that it is a metered area, what the times of the the enforcement periods are. We can certainly, in addition to that, do a mailer if that's the desire of the council.
Speaker 0: Okay. And I know this is mundane stuff, but it needs to be said on the dais because we've you know, it's very important. So. Okay. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: I thank you, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 0: So a couple of things in response to Councilman Urunga. So one of the things that we that we've been told from Coastal Commission is they actually like right now, our residents can't park in the beach lots for free. The Coastal Commission requires us to pay for parking, to encourage turnover and the availability of spaces. So we actually wanted to do free parking along the coast in the parking lots, and we were told that Coastal Commission was requiring us to charge a fee to encourage those spots turning over so that residents don't. Pakenham Because there's a whole bunch of apartment complexes there. So by adding these new 156 new spots, we've created 156 new spots for residents to park and the commitment that I made.
Speaker 3: At multiple.
Speaker 0: Meetings. So I appreciate the suggestions my colleagues have given regarding outreach. I'm always open to hearing how I could do a better job, but I will tell you, we've communicated repeatedly at community meetings that we wouldn't charge the residents, we wouldn't put meters in front of the residential spots. But this is actually a commercial. You know, we just went through the land use element. This is actually a commercial zone. And so we've told people that we wouldn't charge the residents, but when the residents park in the commercial zone, then we don't get the turnover because they can stay there for hours. And we've even had situations where residents have said that. And I don't I don't really want to get into the back and forth, but that that people were removing chalk lines off of tire so that they can park longer and just not having as much turnover. And I know Director Beck knows about that because we have.
Speaker 3: Fielded a.
Speaker 0: Lot of complaints about that. So we're trying to strike a balance because it's a very sensitive commercial zone and that's abuts a residential neighborhood. And so, you know, I get it and I appreciate the comments. I really take them to heart. I appreciate the suggestions from my colleagues on better outreach, just so you know, in terms of the outreach that's going to come with us, we have a newsletter and an email system, so we did send a notice to about 5000 residents on Sunday night, letting them know this item was coming with a link to the agenda item . We've notified the presidents of the residents the two residential associations that cover Belmont Shore. We'll be talking about it at our monthly community meeting and we will talk about it before, at their meetings, before it's rolled out. We do that regularly. We have a staff member or I attend the community association meetings every month. And so we'll be talking about this before.
Speaker 3: We roll.
Speaker 0: Out. I think it's really, really important that we highlight that what we're doing tonight is just setting the zone where meters would go. We have no implementation schedule, so there's really nothing to outreach at this time in regards to when it will happen. But according to what Public Works has told me and really this is something that was brought to me by public works, I know they feel strongly that this will produce better turnover in the area and provide better access to the beach. We have a commercial zone that's located within blocks, within steps to the beach. $0.50 an hour for a commercial zone that's located this close to the sand is a really reasonable amount of money, considering how much every other community charges for their commercial zones on the water. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Shoup and I thank you. Like the eighth District, we don't have any parking meters in the fourth district, so I'll have to defer to my colleagues expertize in that area. But one of the speakers mentioned transferring the problem to the neighborhood, and that's because I represent the area north of Cal State, Long Beach. That's where my expertize lies. So I'll ask staff, do we have any plan in place where this won't happen? To put it in perspective, the area on the north side of the pyramid, along Atherton, every single street, 15 streets between Palo Verde and Bellflower require preferential parking. So how do we stop that from happening on the north side of ocean?
Speaker 7: Councilmember. I think similar to areas in the city that have parking impacts. We evaluate the situation in that given neighborhood and we try to address an appropriate response to that particular challenge. As you mentioned, in the Los Altos neighborhood in city of Long Beach, there's had to be a number of different preferential parking streets implemented that in concert with looking to the university to add some additional parking. They did add a couple structures. It is not adequate enough for the number of students that utilize the university. I think from a mobility perspective, from a from a city perspective, we've been trying to enhance bicycle connectivity to the university. We've implemented a bike share program in the university, and we're trying to encourage students to look at alternatives other than driving a vehicle.
Speaker 1: Adam, thanks for that. And I realize this is not a fair comparison because the numbers just aren't the same and not even close. We have a lot of students going to the university every day. But still, if it's 80 spots, I would just think Public Works would want to keep an eye on that. If that is a phenomenon that happens, it's my residents wouldn't forgive me for not bringing that up because it's a tremendous impact to them. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Constable Dillingham. Thank you. And I, in response to my colleague from the third district, I appreciate all comments that she made. She makes a compelling argument and no distress in the aspirations met. But like I think I would like to see a letter because I've dealt with parking issues up and down the coast in different beaches and in different communities where this is an issue where parking is either being removed or where parking is being addressed in terms of charging parking for people to to visit the beach. And they're being charged. And in my experience with the Coastal Commission, they they frown upon that. So if you're saying that the Coastal Commission has already said that they're encouraging meters to have turnover, I'd like to direct staff to maybe address that with the Coastal Commission and maybe get a formal response from them that that in fact, is what they what they want to recommend for that area. Because like I say, in my experience in other areas up and down the coast, this is not that. In fact, it's it's the opposite is to make it more accessible and more accommodating for people to visit the beach. Mr. Beck as a response to that council member.
Speaker 7: Certainly we will confirm jurisdiction on this. As I mentioned earlier, I believe this is under city's jurisdiction for review.
Speaker 1: Okay. So there is a public comment, there's a motion and a second. And as a reminder, the up. Now, let me actually go back, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 3: It is.
Speaker 0: Definitely the city's jurisdiction, but I'm wondering if Mr. Mays or someone else could comment on the idea of charging for parking in the lots that they actually have jurisdiction in and the public access.
Speaker 3: Being.
Speaker 0: Encouraged because there's turnover.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's always been my understanding in the coastal jurisdictions. I know in Huntington Beach, SEAL Beach, they have pretty hefty parking meter.
Speaker 1: Charges right on. I mean.
Speaker 3: Immediately adjacent to their ocean areas. And it's always been my understanding that the Coastal Commission encourages that because it encourages turnover and basically prohibits, as you said, people that maybe live in adjacent neighborhoods or people that are working at adjacent businesses from kind of locking up those parking places all day long at no cost. So I may be wrong. Commissioner or council member you Ranga, but I don't know. We could check with cost of it.
Speaker 0: Is that something that following tonight's item that staff could directly provide to Councilman Urunga, so that if he wants to reevaluate the item tonight, he can in light of what he hears from coastal, in terms of just the philosophy of charging for parking to increase turnover.
Speaker 1: Certainly that's something that we can follow up with the staff on. We'll have that high level discussion. I think both the attorney I think a lot of a lot of things have said at the dias are true and that their main goal is to have the ability for people to come down and enjoy the beach. And so there's a number of strategies to do that. If you had all the parking in the world and you had free parking, that's one way to do it. They definitely encourage us to put in policies and practices, to not allow residents to basically be in spots that are available for people to come down to the beach . And so that's where the charges come in so that we make sure that we do have it available for people coming down. And meters have been an acceptable use to be able to manage some of that. So we can certainly have that discussion with Coastal and we'll follow up with the commissioner and his.
Speaker 3: Staff and mayor before we vote on the motion, I need clarification on the 15 minute grace period because I'm not sure if that is still on the table or.
Speaker 0: No, I'm going to take it off the table. In light of Councilwoman Gonzales, his comments, I think she makes a really good point. Perhaps at some point in the future, staff can come back and let us know what the impact would be if we changed it citywide. But I'm certainly not asking for any sort of exception in the third district that wouldn't be open for other districts.
Speaker 3: So 5 minutes is part of the motion then?
Speaker 0: Yes, I believe that's a consistent measure. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Great. But the other parts of Councilman Price's motion would be included in there in that in this original motion.
Speaker 3: Yes. Which is to basically establish the amount of $0.50 per hour as opposed to.
Speaker 1: Right. Okay, great. Let me go. I will add Councilwoman Price back to Councilmember Ranga on one more thing. I mean, at this point, we're looking at a two hour maximum length of time. I'd also like to if we're looking at we're comparing ourselves to other cities like Manhattan Beach and Beach, what is their maximum hours that they have when they charge meters? They might charge more than we do, but that might be because they have more hours. So I would like to see that with that comparison as well in terms of encouraging turnover. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. I think we did, Councilman Price. So did you call you up again or.
Speaker 0: Yeah, I just wanted to make.
Speaker 1: I think that's why Councilman Price.
Speaker 0: I didn't.
Speaker 1: Okay. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: I just wanted to make sure that the information from Coastal because I myself and I don't know, I know Councilmember Arango is interested in it if it came back to the full council, if that was okay. Because I think that's an important. Note that we should all be privy to councilmembers.
Speaker 7: Certainly any data we pull together will share with the entire council.
Speaker 1: Okay. I think that's all the speakers here. So we have a motion in a second on the motion by Councilwoman Price. Members, please go ahead and cast your vote.
Speaker 3: Council member, Your Honor. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Motion carries six one. We'll move on to the next item, which is item 35. I'm sorry. Item 33.
Recommendation to adopt resolution in accordance with Section 10.28.130 of the Long Beach Municipal Code to set operating days and hours for Parking Meter Zones 31 and 32 to Monday through Sunday, excluding holidays, during the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., for a maximum of 2 hours and at a rate of $0.75 per hour.  (District 3)