Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-04-13 City CouncilTO: City City of Palo Alto Manager’s Report HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: POLICE DATE:APRIL 13, 1999 CMR:201:99 SUBJECT:RECOMMENDATION REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE REGULATING SOLICITATION FROM STREETS,MEDIANS,DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES, SIDEWALKS, AND PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS REPORT IN BRIEF The City Council directed staff to develop policy recommendations and a draft ordinance regarding soliciting from streets, street medians and driveway entrances. The Council also requested information regarding the extent of the problem; what people would be impacted by an ordinance and whether enforcement of such an ordinance would move the problem onto private property. This report provides accident information from selected locations in the City of Palo Alto during 1998, anecdotal information from interviews with business people located near those sites and descriptions of responses to this issue by several other California cities. Attached to the report is a draft of a proposed ordinance, similar to those adopted by the neighboring cities of Santa Clara, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. CMR:201:99 Page 1 of 5 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council consider the adoption the attached ordinance regulating solicitation from streets, medians, sidewalks, driveway entrances, and other public -right-of- ways. BACKGROUND In January 1999, the City Council directed staff to develop policy recommendations and to draft an ordinance for Council consideration that would prohibit soliciting on streets, street medians and driveway entrances. Council members expressed concern about the safety of motorists and those people who sold items or solicited donations while standing on medians or on sidewalks adjacent to driveways. Staff has reviewed information to determine if any automobile accidents have recently been caused by this type of behavior. Staff contacted a number of merchants at Town and County Village and Stanford Shopping Center to ascertain the extent of the problem. Police staff also made personal observations at three different locations in the City where soliciting normally occurs. Additionally, staff has contacted other cities who have adopted similar ordinances. DISCUSSION Accident Information Staff has reviewed accident information for four locations in the City where soliciting from medians and/or driveway entrances frequently occurs. The locations are: 1) E1 Camino Real and Palo Alto Avenue; 2) E1 Camino Real at the entrance to Stanford Shopping Center; 3) E1 Camino Real a’t the entrance to Town and Country; and 4) E1 Camino Real and University Avenue. During 1998, a total of 88 accidents were reported at those locations. The accident rates at these intersections were not substantially different from rates at other comparable intersections (El Camino Real and Page Mill Road; E1 Camino Real and Arastradero Road; Middlefield Road and University Avenue; Middlefield Road intersections - 101 accidents), nor were major variations seen in the severity of collisions. Staff read each of the 88 accident reports and determined that the primary collision factors for any of the accidents did not involve solicitation. However, the fact that soliciting on medians was not listed as a primary cause should not be viewed as a determination that the CMR:201:99 Page 2 of 5 distraction caused by solicitors at a median or driveway entrance was not a contributing factor. For example, generally speaking, if a car slowed or stopped in a traffic lane as a result of solicitation on an adjacent median and was rear-ended, the primary cause of the collision would be recorded as unsafe speed or inattention. Unless details about a solicitor is provided to the officer by the involved parties of an accident at the time the accident report is made, there is currently no method to collect that information. Anecdotal Information Staff also conducted informal interviews with business people located near sites where soliciting from medians or at driveways commonly occurs. Specifically, seven businesses located near the entrance to Town and Country and six retailers near the entrance to Stanford Shopping Center were contacted. Merchants at Stanford Shopping Center indicated that they have received complaints from their customers about people soliciting at the entrance and on medians, but because the solicitors have been there for so long, they are basically ignored. They reported that it becomes hazardous when motorists throw money out the windows of their cars as they drive off. Those people interviewed at Town and Country Shopping Center, however, reported that solicitors would often block drivers’ view of oncoming traffic, making left-hand turns onto southbound E1 Camino Real hazardous. Several employees reported that they have almost hit solicitors at night. Others report feeling intimidated by occasional verbally aggressive solicitors. Soliciting activities usually occur during commute hours when traffic is the heaviest. Officers videotaped solicitors at the two locations and at the intersection of E1 Camino Real and Palo Alto Avenue. During the 40-minute video, no behavior on the part of the solicitor that would constitute a traffic hazard was observed and only two incidents of the solicitors receiving any contributions were recorded. It should also be noted that occasionally, staff receives phone calls or letters from members of the public complaining about "near miss" situations involving solicitors on medians, but this information has not been tracked. As a result, actual numbers of complaints are not available. Experience of Other Cities Several cities, including Santa Clara, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Anaheim, San Jose and Malibu have adopted ordinances prohibiting solicitation on medians, streets, sidewalks and entrances to driveways. At least four of the cities adopted their ordinances in efforts to deal CMR:201:99 Page 3 of 5 with traffic hazards pres.ented by day laborers soliciting jobs. Another city was concerned about the hazards presented by newspaper and hot dog vendors. The definition of solicitation for most cities with ordinances includes any request, offer or enticement which announces availability for employment, sales of goods, requests for food or other items of value, or to seek contributions of money. Some cities have patterned their legislative responses to this issue after the City of Agoura Hills. Agoura Hills’ ordinance has been challenged and upheld in the Appellate Court. A rehearing to contest this Appellate Court ruling was later sought and denied at the Supreme Court level. Attachment A provides detailed information about other cities’ ordinances. Some cities prohibit occupants of motor vehicles from soliciting from pedestrians on streets, driveways and medians. In some cases, (Anaheim and Santa Clara) the behavior of the solicitor or seller of goods must be aggressive before enforcement can be taken. Based upon their ordinances, passive soliciting (e.g., someone only standing with a sign) would not be considered a violation. Some cities (Sunnyvale and Mountain View) have included prohibitions against loitering or lingering on medians as part of their legislation. Five of the cities have included prohibitions against soliciting from motorists in commercial parking lots. These provisions were added in attempts to prevent solicitors and sellers of goods from moving off the public right of ways and into private commercial parking lots. It is interesting to note, that none of the cities who were contacted regarding similar ordinances had any specific incidents that prompted the legislation, but initiated legislation based upon complaints from citizens. Based upon this information, it is clear that ordinances of this nature preclude any person from soliciting, selling items, distributing literature, etc., from medians, streets, driveways, and other public right of ways if they pose a traffic hazard regardless, of whether the action is panhandling, requesting donations for nonprofit organizations, or selling goods such as flowers, cookies, or other items. The attached draft ordinance, which staff recommends, is similar to the Agoura Hills ordinance with respect to the specific traffic safety issues associated with soliciting from medians, driveway entrances, streets, sidewalks, and other public right, of ways. It does not address the separate issues of"aggressive panhandling" or "soliciting in a parking structure or commercial parking lot," which several cities have addressed in their ordinances. CMR:201:99 Page 4 of 5 POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed ordinance is consistent with a previously adopted provision in the Municipal Code ( 9.44.010) prohibiting solicitation from any pedestrian or occupant of a vehicle located in public parking lots. RESOURCE IMPACT Enforcement of the proposed ordinance would be handled by existing Police Department staff and no additional resources would be needed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Matrix of Other Cities’ Ordinances Draft Ordinance PREPARED BY: Patrick Dwyer, Chief of Police DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: ’,f of Police CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: er CMR:201:99 Page 5 of 5 o o o oZ>~Z Z o -~~o ORDINAI~CE~NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 9.45 OF TITLE 9 (PEACE, MORALS, AND SAFETY) TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING SOLICITATION IN STREETS AND IN AND ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION I. The Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The activity of soliciting employment, business or contributions from occupants of vehicles distracts drivers from their primary duty to watch traffic and be alert for possible traffic or pedestrian hazards, to observe all traffic control signals, signs, or warnings, and to avoid unnecessary obstruction or congestion of traffic. (b) Distracted drivers are more prone to automobile accidents and pose a substantial traffic safety hazard potential. (c) The Council’s study and consideration of the hazards presented by solicitation of employment, business or contributions from occupants of vehicles in streets and in and adjacent to driveway approaches to streets confirms that there are ample alternative locations and means for communication by those persons who wish to solicit for these purposes, upon both public and private property throughout the city, and that the restrictions adopted by this ordinance provide a fair balance of the public interest in traffic safety and private interests in solicitation. SECTION 2. Chapter 9.45 is hereby added to Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows: CHAPTER 9.45 SOLICITATION IN STREETS AND IN ANDADJACENT TO DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES 9.45.010 Definitions. (a) ~Solicit" shall mean and include any request, offer, enticement, or action which announces the availability of a person to engage in an emp!oyment transaction, to engage in a business transaction, or to engage in the contribution of money or other property. Solicitation shall be deemed complete when made whether or not an actual employment relationship is created, a business transaction is completed, or a contribution of money or other property takes place as a result of a solicitation. (b) "Business" shall mean and include any type of product, performance, or activity which is provided or performed, 990408 syn 0043675 or offered to be provided or performed, in exchange for money, labor, goods, or any other form of consideration. (c) ~Employment" shall mean and include the provision of services, industry, or labor performed by a person for wages or other compensation or under any contract of hire, written or oral, expressed or implied. (d) "Contribution" shall mean and include any donation of money, goods, or other things of value. (e) ~Street" means and includes the paved portion of any public street, highway, expressway, or alley within the city (including the vehicular travel lanes, ~parking areas, bicycle lanes), as well as the.medians thereof (whether paved or planted or marked with striping) and any sidewalks in the public right of way. (f) "Driveway approach" means any portion of the public sidewalk which is utilized for vehicular access from private property to any public street, highway, expressway or alley. 9.45.020 Solicitation in streets prohibited. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, while that person is located on a street, to solicit emp!oyment, business, or contributions from occupants of other vehicles on that street. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person, while occupying any vehicle on a street, to solicit employment, business, or. contributions from pedestrians or from occupants of other vehicles on that street. 9.45.030 Solicitation in prohibited. driveway approaches (a) -It shall be unlawful for any person, while located on or occupying any vehicle on a public street, sidewalk, or planter area within or adjacent to anydriveway approach (i.e. within fifty feet of a driveway approach) to solicit employment, business, or contributions from occupants of vehicles transiting or occupying that driveway approach. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person, while located on or occupying any vehicle on a public street, sidewalk, or planter area within any driveway approach to solicit employment, business, or contributions from pedestrians transiting or occupying that driveway approach. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shal! not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof, 990408 syn 0043675 2 irrespective of whether any one or more section(s), subsection(s), sentences(s), clause(s), phrase(s), or word(s) is invalid or invalidated. SECTION 4. This ordinance does not constitute a project having potential effects upon the environment and therefore does not require environmenta! review under the California Environmental Quality Act. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Mayor City Manager Police Chief 990408 syn 0043675