North Berkeley merchants want parklets for the people

A parklet in San Francisco’s Noe Valley neighborhood. Photo: San Francisco Pavement to Parks

Businesses in the Gourmet Ghetto are keen to jump on the parklet bandwagon — bringing outdoor seating to the streets for espresso sippers, pizza eaters, and world watchers in lieu of parking spots — but must first wait for the city to come up with a process for making the spaces available.

So-called parklets — slivers of open space sprouting in cities around the globe — are a big trend in urban design, with San Francisco’s Pavement to Parks leading the way locally, and Oakland following suit (a pilot program is under review there.) Berkeley is a little late to the take-back-the-public-space movement but eager to come up with its own ideas to beautify public areas where community members can congregate. Leading the charge is the North Shattuck Association, which is helping businesses in its café- and restaurant-heavy district organize around the concept.

“The parklets pilot project was conceived by the association based on our experience with hosting temporary parklets during past years on Park(ing) Day and the Spice of Life Festival,” said Heather Hensley, executive director of the association.

Park(ing) Day is an international movement conceived to help city residents around the world reimagine the humble parking space. One day each fall, D.I.Y., creative urbanistas are encouraged to transform parking spots into parks, playgrounds, pop-up cafés — anything other than a lowly (though coveted) place for cars. Park(ing) Day parklets have sprouted in Berkeley in past years in front of the Cheese Board Collective and the late Amanda’s Feel Good Fresh Food.

A parklet on San Francisco’s Divisadero Street. Photo: San Francisco Pavement to Parks

The original Park(ing) Day idea, dreamed up by the San Francisco-based urban design studio Rebar, went on to become a model, modern urban prototype. Hensley added that the successful San Francisco program has “enlivened the pedestrian environment in neighborhood business districts” and the association approached its own membership with a view to doing something similar here.

To date, the Cheese Board Collective has developed its own parklet concept, and Guerilla Café/Philz Coffee and Masse’s Pastries/Saul’s Restaurant and Delicatessen have come up with plans for parklets, in consultation with a volunteer designer using San Francisco guidelines.

Typically, parklets feature a wooden or metal structure designed to encompass one or two parking spaces and a platform, making it wheelchair-accessible from the curb. Some include permanent seating like benches or fold-up tables and chairs, and some have space for bike parking. Most include landscaping such as plants and flowers and unique design features.

Who would pay for parklets here? Current thinking is the association would handle the insurance requirements and permit process, Hensley said, while the businesses would agree to help monitor and maintain the parklets and pay some portion of the fees associated with the projects, as well as their construction costs, which might also be covered by community groups or Kickstarter-like campaigns. But those details are all yet to be determined because, while several Berkeley food establishments are gung-ho on building parklets, the city has no approval process in place as yet to consider such plans.

City Councilmember Laurie Capitelli brought the idea of a two-parklet pilot program to the City Council in July. The item was postponed because the city did not have a permitting process in place yet. Several city agencies — including public works, engineering, and transportation — would need to weigh in on parklet approval, noted Eric Angstadt, the city’s director of planning and development, who is now drafting an approval process. Angstadt couldn’t say how long it might take for the city to be in a position to consider parklet proposals.

Benches and bike parking feature in this parklet in San Francisco. Photo: City of Oakland website

While the planning department is unlikely to be the agency that approves or denies proposals (though they may chime in on design elements), Angstadt encountered the approval process for these urban innovations in his former job as planning director in Oakland. “There’s a lot of interest from the community around this, but we’re just now starting to put together options around an application process and it’s unclear as yet which board or commission would be charged with making policy on parklets,” he said.

One of the potentially major obstacles — lost revenue from parking meters — was resolved relatively easily in Oakland, he said, by simply adding a metered parking space in another city location for each slot taken away by a parklet. That city initially approved seven such structures.

Hensley said that a plan to reconfigure parking in the block north of Vine Street (in the area used by the Farmers’ Market), from parallel parking to diagonal parking would add 10 spaces, including one disabled slot, which would offset the loss of parking meter revenue from the addition of parklets in the area.

The Cheese Board Collective parklet would be designed and built by members of the collective with community input, and likely include planter boxes and a mosaic element, said the co-operative’s spokesperson, Cathy Goldsmith. “We’re poised and ready to go, we think this will add color and ambiance in our community, and we’re just waiting on the city to get its act together,” she said. Goldsmith added that businesses approached city officials about the idea some six months ago. A Cheeseboard parklet might alleviate the hazard created by customers sitting on the median in the middle of busy Shattuck Avenue – a practice that is illegal but widely ignored by the pizzeria’s customers.

San Francisco’s Guerrero Park. Photo: San Francisco Pavement to Parks

San Francisco’s parklets are an eclectic mix — some exude European chic with café tables and chairs and tidy planter boxes, some are simply green oases in an otherwise barren landscape, others just open-air nooks that are easy on the eye. All offer a welcome counterpoint to the typical cityscape. In the past two years more than 30 parklets have been built in San Francisco, with dozens more working their way through the permit process and design review. (Initial permits there cost $750 and installation costs runs from $5,000 to $15,000 per parklet, according to a New York Times article.) For a relatively small fee, the city, say some, has inspired a national movement against asphalt.

These experiments in urban beautification offer a place for city folk to pause, sit down, and enjoy a neighborhood’s street life. Still, other challenges to the popular trend include keeping seats open to the public — not just the café-frequenting crowd — and ensuring parklets feel like a tiny public plaza, not glorified overfill seating for the eating establishments they’re in front of.  Such seating could also attract homeless people seeking a place to rest and party people who want to congregate. But design features, such as surfaces that discourage lying down and modular furniture — can go a long way to discourage loitering, said Hensley.

Whether or not the addition of parklets would prevent the long-time practice of Cheese Board pizza customers enjoying a slice in the median strip on Shattuck Avenue (despite a sign banning such activities), remains to be seen.

Sarah Henry is the voice behind Lettuce Eat Kale. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Related:
Oakland’s Angstadt to be Berkeley’s new planning director [03.12.12]
Cheese Board Collective: 40 years in the Gourmet Ghetto [07.08.11]
Food takes to the streets, literally, on Park(ing) Day [09.17.10]
Keba Konte, Guerilla Café [04.09.10]

Want to get a recap of all the day’s Berkeley news in your email inbox at the end of your working day? Click here to subscribe to Berkeleyside’s free Daily Briefing.

Print Friendly
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
  • Guest

    “Parklets are not funded by the city.  They are paid for by the merchants.”

    1.  But exist on public property?  Specifically on sidewalks and in parking spaces that I prefer to use for walking and parking.
    2.  Wait.  This reminds me of something, but what?  Oh yes.  Chez Panisse which has its own outdoor seating/waiting area that it created and maintains on its own property.  Then there’s Epicurious Garden which includes, well, a garden.  You know, it’s an outdoor space for its patrons that the owners of the facility presumably built and maintain for themselves on property that it owns.

  • Foo

     Right, that’s why I said the “wood alone”. The labor, I don’t even want to think about that. We’re getting into the thousands by that point.

  • guest

    I think the city contributed some of the funding for the first few parklets.  A lot of them have been funded through kickstarter campaigns, merchant/neighborhood organizations, donations, etc.

    Parklets are specifically intended to be public spaces, open to all, at all times.  They’re sponsored by neighboring property/business owners, but they are expressly *not* supposed to be extensions of the businesses, although this has been abused by a some of the restaurants in SF.  This isn’t the same as what you’re talking about at all.

  • guest

     The city makes a small amount of money from permit fees (about $1400-$1800 in sf), and pays nothing for construction and maintenance (it costs about $5000-$20000 for a typical parklet, usually paid through donations from nearby merchants and community groups).  They’re frequently built using volunteer labor.

  • Charles_Siegel

     If you were really motivated by fiscal concerns (pension obligations and street paving), as you claimed, you would be glad to have the parklets because:

    — they cost the city nothing.

    — they generate added sales taxes for the city. The merchants are willing to pay for them because they think they will generate more sales.

    I see that the fiscal concerns were just a dishonest talking point, and that you are actually willing to invent any excuse to be against parklets.

    Yes, they are on public property, and they are used by the public. There are hundreds of customers at the Cheese Board who would be happy to have added seating.  You might prefer to use the space for parking, but I don’t see why you, one person, think that you count more than all the people who would enjoy the parklet and count more than all the people like me who would enjoy having a more pleasant, lively city.

    You write: “But exist on public property?  Specifically on sidewalks and in parking spaces that I prefer to use for walking and parking.”

    If you really believe this statement, then you would be against any sidewalk seating – against the seating on Center St, against the bulb-out in front of the French Hotel, against all the sidewalk cafes of Paris.  Do you really believe that seating should never be allowed on sidewalks, and that sidewalks should never be widened?  That is an extreme, lunatic-fringe position.

    Maybe you should go to Paris and try to convince them that they should eliminate their sidewalk cafes, because they are on “public property that I prefer to use for walking and parking.” You would be laughed out of town.

  • Mbfarrel

    Welcome to the LOCCNA teapot.

  • guest

     They’re business model seems to have been fairly successful at their present location…

  • guest

    Unless someone builds a subway line under Shattuck (which I would be ecstatic about), narrowing the street would just make life harder for everyone who has to pass through this neighborhood on a daily basis, especially transit users, who can’t just switch to a parallel street.

  • Bill N

    I hate to break it to you but the 3 or 4 times a week i walk up there there are people panhandling (2 to 3 in a block depending on the block) without the “parklets.”  You can just say no of course.

    Regarding the parklets, I’m not sure I’m for them or against them but they might help or might add to sidewalk congestion on the side walk in some places and, of course, they may help the merchants who should be responsible for keeping them clean.  I’m certainly not opposed to helping local merchants.  Finally, it is something that should be openly discussed at council as they would be giving up income generating parking used by local business’ customers.

  • The Sharkey

    The BART plaza is nasty because of the street people who loiter in and use it as a toilet  it day in and day out.

    Support the Civil Sidewalks measure and that might change.

  • Guest

     So…we’ve met?  I don’t recall it.

  • Guest

    “You might prefer to use the space for parking, but I don’t see why you,
    one person, think that you count more than all the people who would
    enjoy the parklet and count more than all the people like me who would
    enjoy having a more pleasant, lively city.”

    Have a lovely day.

  • Mbfarrel

    So true. Even the panhandlers don’t come around when the Cheeseboard and Pizza are closed on Monday. And Emilia’s flower stand is closed as well. Perfect for all those who dislike active street life to come and park their cars.

  • Bill

    I was just up there again today and have decided that and would certainly support a study of the issue to see which business’ would support and even want this sort of thing.  Because Shattuck from Hearst to Rose is really a mix of eating establishments and non-eating establishments it’s not clear to me that there would be that much support or that there would be more than 1 or two.  The block just south of Cedar and the part of the block near The Cheeseboard would be possible locations but some of these establishments have outside seating already or, as in the case of Cha-Am, are perched high up.  Of course a similar idea was floated a few years ago up at Shattuck and Rose and was shot down.  

    All in all this seems like a tempest in a tea pot for something that was on the consent calendar, was pulled and is nowhere right now (I guess) and even then may have minimal impact on anyone.  113 comments on this and 98 or so on the new School Superintendent may show where our priorities.

  • 10

     snarky!

  • justin

    “A Cheeseboard parklet might alleviate the hazard created by customers sitting on the median in the middle of busy Shattuck Avenue”
    who exactly is causing this hazard?

  • renapo

    How come nobody–so far as I’ve read–has mentioned that removing parking spots creates problems for those of us who are old and/or disabled? The East Bay’s lamentably inadequate public transportation system makes cars a necessity for many of us who can’t ride bikes or walk miles to where we’re going. The “parklet” scheme is just another extension of Berkeley’s car-hostile stance.