Palo Alto committee backs more downtown cleaning, tighter parklet rules and pilot for pop-up storefronts

Palo Alto’s Retail Committee on Wednesday recommended that the City Council increase funding for downtown cleanliness efforts, revise the city’s parklet policy to require adjacent property‑owner consent before a parklet extends beyond a restaurant’s frontage, and direct staff to develop a streamlined temporary‑use (pop‑up) permitting program to encourage short‑term activations of vacant storefronts.

The recommendations, adopted by the committee in a single motion and approved unanimously, respond to concerns raised by business owners and residents that parklets can obscure retail storefronts and consume limited curb parking, and to requests from brokers and property owners for easier, faster ways to test new retail concepts in vacant spaces.

The committee heard extensive public comment from owners and tenants on both sides of the issue. Faith Bell of Bell’s Bookstore told the committee she was “nothing short of absolutely outraged” at the prospect that a parklet could be installed in front of her storefront without her permission, saying it would hide window displays and pull customer parking away from retailers. Several restaurant owners and other speakers urged the city to preserve outdoor dining opportunities and noted strong public demand for alfresco seating since the pandemic.

Staff framed the discussion around three topics: enhanced cleanliness and surface‑cleaning levels in the downtown commercial cores, potential revisions to the ongoing parklet program, and opportunities to better facilitate short‑term activations and pop‑ups. Steve Goggliardo, assistant to the city manager for economic development, told the committee the city currently spends about $94,000 per month on base cleaning across University Avenue and California Avenue (roughly $56,000 for contractors and $38,000 for in‑house staff). He said marginal or enhanced cleaning services that the city has provided since March run about $28,500 per month, of which about $25,100 is the incremental contractor cost to increase pressure washing on University Avenue from once to twice a month.

Holly Boyd, assistant director of Public Works, clarified the existing parklet rules: restaurants are allowed a full parklet platform, railing and roof in front of their own frontage but are limited to a platform and railing (no roof) when occupying frontage in front of an adjacent business. Boyd also confirmed that umbrellas and low‑level planters are permitted on adjacent frontage under the current program.

Committee members and staff agreed the temporary‑use permit (TUP) process—currently limited to 45 days and carrying an approximately $1,800 fee for the type of permit discussed—was not well aligned with the variety of short‑term activations stakeholders had described. Jonathan Laid, director of Planning and Development Services, said the city could develop a distinct, streamlined permit for pop‑ups that would be quicker and better matched to low‑intensity retail activations, while noting that food service, alcohol and other uses with higher life‑safety requirements would need additional review and possible building upgrades.

The committee’s motion asked three specific next steps: (1) recommend that the City Council revise the FY2025 budget to enhance cleanliness services in both downtowns consistent with the staff report; (2) recommend that the Council revise the ongoing parklet policy so parklets may extend into adjacent frontages only with the adjacent property owner’s consent; and (3) direct staff to develop revisions to temporary‑use rules to incentivize short‑term activation, including fee and duration options, building and safety code considerations, signage and aesthetics guidance, and a clear point of contact or “single point of entry” for prospective pop‑up operators and brokers.

Committee members also asked staff to explore other near‑ and medium‑term measures that had come up in the November study session, including temporary loading/parking zones to address deliveries, ride‑hail drop‑offs and curbside pickups; modest physical improvements to support public realm activation (for example, tree well and streetscape treatments); and promotion of University Avenue and California Avenue histories and walking tours to help attract visits.

Votes at a glance: The committee adopted the single combined motion on a voice vote. The recorded vote on the recommendation was Chair Kuo — yes; Council Member Burt — yes; Council Member Lythcott Haines — yes. Outcome: approved.

What happens next: Staff said the cleanliness funding and expanded service levels would be framed in upcoming budget deliberations. Revisions to the parklet policy would be brought to full Council for consideration. Staff also said they would develop options for a pop‑up pilot and return with proposed permit mechanics, likely including a customer‑facing point of contact and possible matchmaking support between landlords/brokers and prospective pop‑up operators.

Committee members thanked public speakers for attending and asked staff to return to Council with follow‑up items early in 2025, including a study session on California Avenue.