5-8-25
WE ARE APERLiNg THiS
PROPOSTON. TO REMNE THE
PARKLET OUTSiDE THE WAY UNDER
Sea pay
2025 MAY - 8 PM 3:23 CITY OF RICHMONU CHY CLERAS UFFICE RECEIVED anus floor agry
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Cavoi
hichamon
April 24, 2025
Nathan Trivers
2 W RICHMOND AVE
Richmond, CA, 94801
Subject: EN23-00746 Denial of Encroachment Permit Application for Patio-Parklet Dear Mr. Trivers,
We are in receipt of encroachment permit application EN23-00746, which was submitted on September 19, 2023, requesting "renewal of encroachment permit for patio-parklet at 2 W Richmond Ave, Richmond, CA 94801" ("Application"'). This Application appears to seek a permit to allow the existing "patio-parklet" to remain on the street adjacent to Up & Under Pub & Grill ("Up and Under"), located at 2 W. Richmond Avenue in Richmond, California.
As you know, on November 5, 2020, the City of Richmond ("City") issued encroachment permit No.
EN20-00883 to allow a "patio-parklet" in the street in front of 2 W. Richmond Avenue in Richmond, CA ("2020 Encroachment Permit"). The 2020 Encroachment Permit expired on December 31, 2021, and our recorus do not show any attempt to renew it until this Application was received almost two years after the 2020 Encroachment Permit expired. The City advised you numerous times about its concerns over this "patio-parklet" after the expiration of the 2020 Encroachment Permit over the past several years, but the structure has remained in place without correction.
Additionally, while this Application was pending, the City also considered and denied encroachment permit application EN24-000843 to place a bbq grill/smoker on the street or sidewalk adjacent to Up & Under. At the hearing, on September 24, 2024, before the City Council regarding the bbq grill/smoker, the City Council expressed interest in resolving all issues relating to Up and Under, including but not limited to this exact "patio-parklet." In letters dated October 7, 2024 and October 29, 2024, the City attempted to follow up. Specifically, the letter dated October 29, 2024 outlined suggested corrective action for you to consider regarding the "patio-parklet" and provided contact information for staff as quoted, in relevant part, below:
2. PARKLET LOCATED ON W. RICHMOND AVENUE
Suggested Corrective Action for Your Consideration:
(1) Submit an encroachment agreement application and parklet application consistent with Richmond Municipal Code sections 12.30.180 and 14.46.090 and the City's prior correspondence(s) with you, including, in particular, the letter dated January 22, 2024. These applications should reflect a plan to bring the parklet into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. (2) If the parklet is to be used as an additional outdoor dining area, obtain approval of an amendment of the existing Conditional Use Permit (PLN 08-044) to allow for the expansion.
450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Telephone: (510) 620-5478 Fax: (510) 307-8195 www.ci.richmond.ca.us DocID #41462v4
(3) Alternatively, the City remains willing to consider entering into a compliance agreement, which was previously proposed.
City Staff Contacts:
• For the encroachment agreement and permit: Robert Armijo, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer: [email protected]; (510) 620-5477
• For the parklet application: LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager - Community Services: lashonda white @ci.richmond.ca.us; 510-620-6512 • For amending the conditional use permit: Avery Stark, Acting Planning Manager; [email protected]; (510) 620-6714
We have no record of you completing any of the suggested corrective actions.
Additionally, we conducted a field inspection on April 23, 2025 and took measurements of the "patio- parklet" as it existed on that day.
Considering this history, and after careful consideration and review of applicable city codes, we regret to inform you that your Application has been denied because I am unable to make the requisite findings under Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Section 12.30.070(f)(1) to grant the Application in addition to the other concerns outlined below.
The primary reasons for this decision are as follows:
1. Incomplete Application: The Engineering Division has not received a complete application as required by RMC Section 12.30.050(a). Specifically, the Application is missing required supporting documentation including detailed site plans, proof of public notification to affected residents, and a traffic control and safety plan. These omissions prevent the City from fully evaluating the parklet's structural safety, accessibility compliance, and potential impacts on adjacent uses. However, based on the information provided, the recent field inspection, and previously known information relating to the "patio-parklet," I have sufficient details to make the determination to deny the Application.
2. Safety Concerns: RMC 14.64.050 prohibits obstructions at intersections higher than three feet six inches above the level of the center of the adjacent intersection within that triangular area between the property line and a diagonal line joining points on property lines twenty-five feet from the point of their intersection, or in the case of rounded corners, the triangular area between the tangents to the curve and a diagonal line joining points on said tangent twenty-five feet from the point of their intersection. The tangents referred to are those at the beginning and at the end of the curve at the corner. The parklet includes a corner railing that exceeds five feet in height, which is about two feet taller than the three foot maximum permitted by the City's Parklet Guidelines. The current parklet rail at the south corner stands over five feet tall. Additionally, the parklet is located within the triangular area defined by the tangent to the curve and the diagonal line connecting two points on the tangent, each set 25 feet away from their intersection. The combination of excessive height and location within this restricted zone impairs visibility for motorists and pedestrians, creating a potential traffic hazard.
3. Impact on Right of Way: The City previously provided you with parklet design guidance, most recently on January 22, 2024. Our field inspection revealed the current parklet-patio does not comply with these guidelines and thus, fails to minimize adverse impacts on the use of the public right-of- way. Specifically:
DocID #41462v4
2. Length exceeds two parking spaces (approximately 36 feet): Field measurements taken on April 23, 2025 indicate that the current "parklet-patio" is approximately 40 feet in length, exceeding the allowable length by four feet and occupying more than two standard parking spaces.
b. Width exceeds six feet: The parklet deck width measures over eight feet, which exceeds the maximum allowable width of six feet and encroaches further into the public right-of-way than permitted.
Lack of ADA-compliant access: Parklet decking is required to be flush with the curb (within ½ inch) or otherwise meet ADA accessibility standards. Field findings from April 23, 2025 indicate the parklet platform is elevated at least 12 inches above the adjacent sidewalk, and access is only provided via a stairway consisting of two steps on the western end and three steps on the eastern end, which does not comply with accessibility requirements. d. Insufficient 18-inch clear zone from the travel lane: City guidelines require that the outer edge of the parklet maintain an 18-inch clear buffer from the adjacent travel lane. Photos observations from the April 23, 2025 field investigation show that the parklet is slightly skewed with the parking strip and projects an estimated six inches or more into the travel lane, particularly near the intersection of West Richmond Avenue and Tunnel Avenue, posing a hazard to traffic flow and public safety.
Excessive wall and railing height: Per the guidelines, walls or railings may not exceed three feet in height. Field findings indicate that the parklet railing exceeds this limit, with the tallest corner section measuring over five feet.
The above-described dimensions do not reflect reasonable efforts to reduce the visual or physical impact of the facility on the right-of-way. Moreover, the parklet is in a high-visibility corner where it impedes sightlines, as noted above, and reduces public access to curbside space needed for circulation, visibility, and municipal operations during posted no-parking hours. Its siting removes more than two public parking spaces and physically encroaches into areas needed for routine public maintenance and circulation, thereby reducing the functionality and safety of the right-of-way.
4. Community Concerns: The City has received numerous complaints and expressions of concern from members of the public, including representatives of the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council, regarding the continued presence and configuration of the parklet. These concerns include obstructed visibility at the corner, loss of public parking, and lack of ADA accessibility. Collectively, these issues raise valid and ongoing concerns related to public safety, equitable access, and the appropriate use of the public right-of-way.
5. Prior Compliance Failure. Based on the information available, you are not in compliance with the 2020 Encroachment Permit because it expired on December 31, 2021, over three years ago. We also understand that you have not diligently attempted to comply with the City's prior requests to address the concerns regarding the parklet-patio, including the concerns of the City Council, despite receiving explicit suggestive corrective action from City staff. Consequently, you have not demonstrated that you have complied or are in compliance with any current permit or its conditions.
DocID #41462v4
6. Planning Requirements: We previously informed you that if the "patio-parklet" will be used as an additional outdoor dining area, approval of an amendment of the existing Conditional Use Permit (PLN 08-044) was required to allow for the expansion. We are unaware of any attempt to obtain approval of an amendment.
7. Building Code Compliance: The existing structure does not appear to comply with the accessibility requirements of the California Building Code (CBC 11B). To allow renewal, construction drawings by licensed design professionals per CBC 107 are required, demonstrating compliance with structural, accessibility, and other applicable Building Code provisions.
Under Richmond Municipal Code section 12.30.280, you may appeal this decision by submitting a written appeal to the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of the decision. An appeal fee of $150 shall be remitted as listed in the City's Master Fee Schedule at the time of appeal submission.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact our office at 510) 307-8091.
Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely,
Pat lu
Robert Armijo, PE
eputy Director of Public Works) City Enginer
City of Richmond, CA
DocID #41462v4
NOTES
RECEIPT
DATE -
RECEIVED FROM NDE NO. 15664
ADDRESS.
FOR ST 00 OT ENC
ACCOUNT
AMT. OF HOW PAID EN
ACCOUNT
CASH
AMT.
PAID
CHECK
BALANCE 36
DUE MONEY
ORDER
BY
©2001 REDIFORM. ® 8L817
3058
UP & UNDER PUB AND GRILL
2W RICHMOND AVE
RICHMOND, CA 94801
(510) 778-1313 THEUPANDUNDER.COM 5/8/25 90-203/1211
DATE
ORDER OF City ct Ricomano 1$150.00
One hundred fifty dulla 7+00/100
DOLLARS
& Mechanics Bank
FoR Parkluf Appeal Fee