Proposed Laws to Encourage Outdoor Dining Would Have Disproportionate Impact on Lower Manhattan
A trio of proposed laws now before the City Council is facing local pushback. The first of these, Intro 1421, would allow restaurants to operate roadway cafés (seating areas in streets, as opposed to on sidewalks) 12 months of the year rather than the current nine, reduce the minimum distance between such seating and the nearest crosswalk to eight feet rather than 20, and allow retailers other than restaurants (such as grocery stores) to offer roadway dining. The second bill, Intro 1444, would reduce the minimum required width of a clear sidewalk path next to sidewalk cafés to eight feet from the current 12 feet. And the third measure, Intro 1446, would compel the City to open at least one physical office location where applicants for sidewalk and roadway cafés can obtain in-person assistance to complete paperwork. Community Board 1 has enacted resolutions opposing the first two measures and expressing concerns about the third.
In its resolution on Intro 1421, CB1 says, “there is no available data or environmental impact study that indicates the reduction of the distance of siting a roadway cafe to the nearest cross walk to eight feet is sufficient for safe and unobstructive pedestrian circulations,” and notes, “during Covid and since that time, many roadway dining installations were abandoned, leading to garbage, rat infestation, drug use, homeless use, and blight on the neighborhood.”
CB1’s response to Intro 1444 says, “there has been a diversity of competing uses allowed on our sidewalks, further restricting accessibility and clear paths, including scaffolding, battery charging stations, and vending. Increased street vending permits and year-round outdoor sidewalk dining will further limit space when more space is needed for safe and unobstructed pedestrian circulation.” The same resolution says that adding more seating to restaurants should be accompanied with requirements for bathroom access for patrons and the public.
The Board’s reply to Intro 1446 argues that it is not clear how the bill adds value, since two City agencies – Small Business Services and the Department of Transportation – already provide assistance to businesses through existing offices, hotlines, and online portals. The measure says, “agencies already report being under-resourced for enforcement, inspections, and timely processing of permits so adding another obligation, and not a clearly needed one, seems fiscally unwise.”
In addition to these three resolutions enacted at CB1’s November 25 meeting, Board chair Tammy Meltzer testified to the City Council on November 28 that Intro 1421 “does not provide clear operational standards for winter months, nor workable enforcement mechanisms – especially since DOT currently lacks the staff needed for robust inspection and enforcement.”
“Our community has learned from experience,” she said, in a reference to the fact that during the pandemic, the eight residential zip codes of Lower Manhattan hosted 582 outdoor dining facilities. This situation caused the Coalition United for Equitable Urban Policy, which lobbies to limit outdoor dining, to characterize Lower Manhattan as “saturated beyond endurance.”
“In summary,” Ms. Meltzer concluded, “Intros 1421 and 1444 fail to protect pedestrian safety, ignore environmental and operational impacts, burden our community with quality-of-life problems, and lack enforceable standards. Intro 1446 is a misguided and duplicative use of funds. For these reasons, Manhattan Community Board 1 strongly opposes Intro 1421 and 1444 in their entirety, and [might support] Intro 1446 only with changes.”