Sidewalk cafes as recession-avoidance tool

[Fat Guy]

I live in a neighborhood that is called, I think, in zoning parlance, the "Red Zone," which means you basically can't have a sidewalk cafe. Several bar/restaurant owners in the area have recently made the case to me that, with the recession and the smoking ban, they could really use a financial boost -- and that having sidewalk cafes set up for the summer could be just the thing. Now, of course, as a resident I'm not crazy about the idea -- sidewalk cafes can be loud and intrusive, especially if you live above them, and they cause pedestrian congestion. But they also add character to the neighborhood, and they're good for businesses and therefore employment, tax revenue, and the economy. I'd therefore be willing to support a broad-based increase in the number of sidewalk-cafe permits, and an expansion of the acceptable zones, in New York City. Anybody with me on that?

[rstarobi]

As a pedestrian, I love sidewalk cafes. There's something really wonderful about walking through the city, and past all these (sometimes) wonderful meals out on the streets. The smells get into the air and counteract the daily dose of air pollution, and the noises are not much worse than standard city chatter.

If I were a resident living above one of these places though, I can see that the noise might get truly annoying after a short time.

[Fat Guy]

The noise, and the smoking. It's definitely not 100% a good thing. But on balance I think it's a good thing. And you can bring your dog, which is nice.

[anil]

Any change has to begin wih your Community Board - All the reasons you give are valid in any neighborhood. Sidewalk cafes do not work in all conditions - i.e the width of the sidewald in relationship to the street and the height of the surrounding structures. High Volume vehicular traffic generally inhibit or hamper a successful outdoor cafe culture. Not every Ave or Street is bound to have the same degree of acceptibility.

I think it general it is good to allow, and then debate the specifics (i.e duke it out) in the community board hearings.

[glenn]

Considering it takes about 1 year to get an outdoor cafe license, forget this summer. In addition to the costs involved of simply applying for the license (primarily fees to an expediter) and the incredible hoops the city makes restaurants jump through to get a license, I wonder if the owners you refer to are aware of the new fee structure. I forget the formula (I think it's based on square feet, number of tables and number of chairs), but our renewal fee for this year was just over $20k for 18 tables and 48 chairs. Last year it was $6000. Your neighborhood is in the same zone as mine, the beet packing district, as far as fees go (highly unfair). I think we'll be lucky if we break even considering the wash out the spring has been.

[Fat Guy]

If Ken Aretsky's "92" paid $20,000 for a sidewalk cafe permit, I'm sure it would be no problem at all to recoup that amount many times over on 92nd and Madison. But I think they should give out the permits for free or for whatever they actually cost the city.

[JosephB]

I love sidewalk cafes, and dining al fresco, but would never eat outside at the expense of good food. I live on the Upper West Side, where there is a healthy outdoor cafe culture, but in my opinion the better (and few) restaurants in my neighborhood don't offer outdoor seating. I wonder why? We love taking our dog to dinner, but many of the outdoor cafes prohibit dogs, or require that dogs stay outside of the seating perimeter. Smoking outside has never really bothered me, but in any event, many of the cafes also prohibit smoking outside. I would love to see more outdoor places, but I agree that it doesn't work everywhere.

[Pan]

I live in a neighborhood that is called, I think, in zoning parlance, the "Red Zone," which means you basically can't have a sidewalk cafe. Several bar/restaurant owners in the area have recently made the case to me that, with the recession and the smoking ban, they could really use a financial boost -- and that having sidewalk cafes set up for the summer could be just the thing. Now, of course, as a resident I'm not crazy about the idea -- sidewalk cafes can be loud and intrusive, especially if you live above them, and they cause pedestrian congestion. But they also add character to the neighborhood, and they're good for businesses and therefore employment, tax revenue, and the economy. I'd therefore be willing to support a broad-based increase in the number of sidewalk-cafe permits, and an expansion of the acceptable zones, in New York City. Anybody with me on that?

Sure, as long as there's still plenty of room to pass by, as is the case outside of Haveli, for example. There are plenty of sidewalk cafes in the East Village, and on balance, I like them when I'm a pedestrian. My only problem is when people stand on the sidewalk and block it, but that seems to happen more on 1st Av. near 6th St. than anywhere else, and that's not because of sidewalk cafes but, rather, obliviousness on the part of (mostly) tourists.

Edited June 16, 2003 by Pan (log)

[alacarte]

I'm surprised that sidewalk cafes would be identified as an anti-recession tool. Yes, it will help keep more smokers patronizing an establishment. But it's highly subjective to the weather: few people want to eat outdoors in the winter months (which often extend into spring & fall in NY), and once it becomes blazing hot in July & August, I know I want all the comfort of enclosed air-conditioning. Plus, this spring it's rained nearly every day, which makes dining outdoors (even beneath an awning) a lot less desirable.

In sum -- dining outdoors is great, for maybe 15 days out of the year. Hardly a recession-buster.

We already have NY retailers blaming the weather for economic ups and downs. The proliferation of outdoor cafes means that more restaurateurs will do the same.

[Fat Guy]

In my neighborhood (Carnegie Hill) the really big issue is Sunday brunch. This is the one time of the week when pretty much every restaurant in the 90s on Madison Avenue is full. The extra seating capacity of an outdoor cafe would add a healthy dose of profitability at the margin. There are some other benefits as well: visibility, for one -- what restaurateurs are telling me is that the presence of a sidewalk cafe increases walk-in business. Another issue is the overall perception of a neighborhood -- like how people often say, "Let's just walk down Columbus Avenue and eat outside somewhere." They never say that about Madison Avenue up near where I live, even though we run directly parallel to Museum Mile and have plenty of foot traffic.

Weather: in a typical year, New York City has hospitable outdoor dining conditions on a significant number of days per month from early April through early November. This year has been one of the worst, weather-wise, in recent memory, but even so you can walk on Columbus Avenue or in SoHo and see people at the outdoor cafes on some pretty marginal days. Summer heat isn't as much of a problem as December-March weather -- even when it's hot, there's plenty of demand for outdoor seating on weekend mornings and on all evenings after the temperatures drop a bit. Especially when you start talking about smokers and people with dogs, the motivation becomes greatly enhanced.

Whether a given restaurant can make back $20,000 in permit fees is an open question. I'm pretty sure the places on Madison between 92nd and 93rd could -- that's already a bit of a restaurant destination block, and lining both sides of the avenue with sidewalk cafes could really put it over the top. Still, its silly for the city to charge so much for permits. Let the city recoup the direct costs -- inspection, sanitation, whatever -- of sidewalk cafes, and take whatever else it can get from an increased tax revenue base.

We were down at Avra last Thursday night and it was totally packed. We couldn't have been seated without the outdoor tables being available. It was drizzling. We took a table under a huge umbrella. Plenty of people were eating outside, oblivious of the precipitation. Two of us spent $164 on dinner and there were people waiting to take our table when we left.

[Bux]

As a tourist, I welcome outdoor cafes. I make no bones about it, I've spent so much time trying not to look like I'm a tourist when in foreign countries That I better understand what I tourist is and does as well and have come to the understanding that some cities cater to tourists and that tourists often have a better time than the natives. As a consequence, I am willing to allow myself, not only the opportunity to be a tourist abroad, but to act like one at home. Vive la vie du tourisme.

But the other day, I was strolling late in the evening in the south village (aka west SoHo) not far from where I live. There were few outdoor seating areas, but there were several bars and restaurants whose wall of windows was completely open to the street and it was like a band shell echoing the clatter of dishes and roar of the crowd out onto the street. Not on my block would be my response.

[SobaAddict70]

I live in east Midtown, a few blocks away from the United Nations.

My neighborhood could probably compete with Greenwich Village for the title of Bar Hell, so you can guess what my response would be with respect towards sidewalk cafes. (For the record, I live across the street from a rather busy French restaurant with an open bar that gets pretty rowdy on most weeknights...forget about the weekend. The one consolation is that a sort of ok live jazz band sets up shop on Sundays when the weather's nice.)

Soba

[glenn]

Whether a given restaurant can make back $20,000 in permit fees is an open question. I'm pretty sure the places on Madison between 92nd and 93rd could -- that's already a bit of a restaurant destination block, and lining both sides of the avenue with sidewalk cafes could really put it over the top. Still, its silly for the city to charge so much for permits. Let the city recoup the direct costs -- inspection, sanitation, whatever -- of sidewalk cafes, and take whatever else it can get from an increased tax revenue base.

Now you're getting me started :-). I can't think of ANY direct charges the city incurs as a result of sidewalk cafes. The only indirect costs I can think of are the result of the friggin' bureaucracy they've insidiously managed to assemble. You mentioned sanitation charges --- commercial establishments pay for their own cartage. I think the buidling department's philosophy is summed up by the fact they've got a large line item in their budget for fines to establishments operating an outdoor cafe without a license (because they couldn't afford it, or whatever). [as per our expediter, a reliable source.]

And I said it before, but it bears repeating. It's EXTREMELY unfair to charge all of NYC south of something like 96th St. the same rate. The hooker traffic we get doesn't exactly compare to the pedestrian traffic on Columbus Ave. (though that also brings in customers :-).

Good point about the visibility though. Sort of an intangible benefit. Whenever it's nice and we get people sitting outside, it makes our place looks more inviting.

[Aquitaine]

One big caveat for neighborhood residents: the music of so-called bar-restaurants with outside seating. I'm near Columbus Avenue on the Upper West Side, just in from an intersection where every viable business on the block deals with food (supermarket, deli, bar, pizza joint, and restaurants). On warm evenings (and until 4am on weekends) several establishments throw open their doors / windows (and entire storefronts in some cases). I understand the appeal to patrons and business owners, but to residents, having to get up out of bed to go ask for the music to be turned down and/or doors shut -- from around the corner, let alone from below your apartment -- doesn't quite cut it. (Yeah, I'm a morning person living in a night-owl town....But the neighborhood's changed a lot since I moved in.)

So my 2 cents is: If you lobby with your Community Board for more sidewalk cafes, make sure that there are restrictions on the granting of so-called cabaret licenses, or some other sort of restriction regarding music, or you may start walking around bleary-eyed and irritable....

[fresco]

Santa Monica has decided that their restaurant owners need all the help they can get:

http://www.smmirror.com/volume5/issue1/cou...l_gets_into.asp

[Elissa]

in chinatown one walks in the street to avoid the throngs shuffling on sidewalks. outdoor cafes here would be a welcome addition, esp. if in hammocks or tree houses. maybe a new hybrid of the car lift garage and outdoor cafe.

do you remember that just before sept 11 giuliani decided taxicabs should be bigger and charge more? a more recession-proof idea is to eliminate fuel-powered vechicles from manhattan, replace them with electric golf carts that you drive 'round town but don't own, just slip a debit card into while using. with saved space and new revenue, tree-line and build promenades down streets. more oxygen, less polution and prettier environs. also, it's easier to avoid a bad economy if things look nice

Edited June 19, 2003 by lissome (log)

[menton1]

We here in the US are light-years behind the Europeans as far as sidewalk dining is concerned; In Europe, many restos with 10 tables inside, spill out with 50 more tables outside. They are allowed to use the front of other stores after those stores close; in Paris they even use elegantly-styled pole heaters for all-year-round outdoor dining!! Long live "en plein air"!!

[Rail Paul]

Any change has to begin wih your Community Board - All the reasons you give are valid in any neighborhood. Sidewalk cafes do not work in all conditions - i.e the width of the sidewald in relationship to the street and the height of the surrounding structures. High Volume vehicular traffic generally inhibit or hamper a successful outdoor cafe culture. Not every Ave or Street is bound to have the same degree of acceptibility.

Good point.

The expansion of outdoor seating competes for sidewalk space with the news kiosks, sidewalk grates, and other pedestrian unfriendly intrusions. The city might be better off eliminating a lane of the avenue and expanding both sidewalks out another 8 feet.

Make the city more pedestrian friendly

[JosephB]

The city might be better off eliminating a lane of the avenue and expanding both sidewalks out another 8 feet.

One can dream.

[JosephB]

By next summer, the City is likely to see many new outdoor cafes. NYTimes Nov. 23, 2003.

I can't wait!

[robyn]

<<I live in a neighborhood that is called, I think, in zoning parlance, the "Red Zone," which means you basically can't have a sidewalk cafe. Several bar/restaurant owners in the area have recently made the case to me that, with the recession and the smoking ban, they could really use a financial boost -- and that having sidewalk cafes set up for the summer could be just the thing. Now, of course, as a resident I'm not crazy about the idea -- sidewalk cafes can be loud and intrusive, especially if you live above them, and they cause pedestrian congestion. But they also add character to the neighborhood, and they're good for businesses and therefore employment, tax revenue, and the economy. I'd therefore be willing to support a broad-based increase in the number of sidewalk-cafe permits, and an expansion of the acceptable zones, in New York City. Anybody with me on that?>>

I can't speak as a resident - just as a tourist who used to go to Manhattan every couple of years - spending thousands of dollars each trip on hotels, restaurants, theater, etc. I'm one of the 1/3 of adults in the US who smokes. Yes - I know it's not good for you - and it will probably kill me - but that's not the point of this thread. I never minded going to big deal restaurants like AD and the like where smoking is usually off limits. I do resent not being able to go a bar and not having a cigarette with my drink. So - until things change in New York - I'm spending my travel dollars elsewhere.

I will note that in places which have similar smoking bans - like Los Angeles and all of Florida now - well restaurants in places that are warm have simply moved parts (in some cases large parts) of their facilities outside. We were in LA a couple of years ago - and while the inside restaurant at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills was almost totally empty every night - the outside patio where people could smoke was always full. I didn't know the names of all the familiar movie star faces I saw - but they were all smoking. Where I live - in north Florida - there aren't as many outside dining facilities - and a lot of places are going out of business. Except for the normal chain garbage - the Ruby Tuesdays of the world - where people never wanted to spend more than 30 minutes or 30 dollars feeding a family of 4. And the steak house chains where large corporate groups tend to congregate.

I know that when Florida voters voted on the smoking ban - the dominant ad for the ban was an 11 year old saying she didn't like to eat in restaurants where people smoked. I hope she's spending the approximately $6,000 a year that I'm not spending now eating at local restaurants. I will be going to London in the spring - and I will be dropping a lot of money there at restaurants that I otherwise might be spending at home - or in New York. Robyn

Edited November 24, 2003 by robyn (log)

[Pan]

So New York is going to have more sidewalk cafes (and sidewalk bar tables) where you could smoke and you're picking this time to boycott?

Also, if you have any hard numbers to back your claims about restaurants in Florida failing because of a ban on smoking, rather than a generally weak economy, I'd like to see them, but please start a new thread in the appropriate board and post a link here if you like.

[Bux]

We were in LA a couple of years ago - and while the inside restaurant at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills was almost totally empty every night - the outside patio where people could smoke was always full. I didn't know the names of all the familiar movie star faces I saw - but they were all smoking.

...

I do resent not being able to go a bar and not having a cigarette with my drink. So - until things change in New York - I'm spending my travel dollars elsewhere.

...

I know that when Florida voters voted on the smoking ban - the dominant ad for the ban was an 11 year old saying she didn't like to eat in restaurants where people smoked. I hope she's spending the approximately $6,000 a year that I'm not spending now eating at local restaurants. I will be going to London in the spring - and I will be dropping a lot of money there at restaurants that I otherwise might be spending at home - or in New York. Robyn

I've no doubt the movie stars care more for smoking than the taste of food. I'm not sure of the point you're making there other than that one can make more money pandering to the tastes of smokers than of gastronomes. PT Barnum and HL Menken offered all the advice one needs if money is the goal.

I'm still getting used to the idea that I can have a drink at the bar without the annoyance of distasteful cigarette smoke. Not long ago, we walked into a popuar restaurant without a reservation and was told we could wait at the crowded bar for a table. We started to walk out, when we realized we could now enjoy a drink at a bar in NYC, not that it was easy to get near the bar in this very crowded smoke free atmosphere. From what I can see, it's still difficult to get a reservation in a good restaurant or a bar stool in a good bar in NYC, so there's little incentive for me to resent your threat to our economy.

I get a better picture of your values when you note the health concerns of, and for, an 11 year old should be discounted because of her lack of discretional funds.

[tommy]

i don't think, in the long run, new york needs anyone's couple of thousand dollars every couple of years. if you chose to stay away from the greatest city in the world because you can't have a cigarette with your drink, well then we NY'rs might just be better off.

Edited November 24, 2003 by tommy (log)

[hjshorter]

I get a better picture of your values when you note the health concerns of, and for, an 11 year old should be discounted because of her lack of discretional funds.

It would be her parent's discretional funds, wouldn't it? And I can't think of any reason why they should be discounted.

I'm all for sidewalk cafes.