By Gus Saltonstall
Changes are coming to outdoor dining in New York City.
On Thursday, the city released a draft of its new permanent outdoor dining rules, which launched a 30-day public comment period that puts the program on track to go live in the spring of 2024.
“Our vision for the program will be developed in close partnership with restaurant owners, diners, and communities, and I am confident it will be a win for our entire city,” Mayor Eric Adams said in a press release. “We are taking the lessons of the temporary pandemic-era program – what worked, what didn’t, and what we can improve – and assembling the ingredients for the nation’s largest and best outdoor dining program.”
Here are highlights from the new proposed outdoor dining rules:
- Outdoor dining structures cannot be fully enclosed.
- Outdoor dining structures have to be ADA accessible.
- NYC restaurants can serve food in sidewalk seating year-round, but only from April 1 until November 29 on roadbed outdoor dining setups.
- Outdoor dining structures on a roadbed cannot be longer than 40 feet or wider than eight feet.
- A four-year license for sidewalk outdoor dining seating would cost $1,050, and the roadbed seating fees would depend on location.
- Sidewalk and roadway cafes would be able to stay open until midnight from Sunday to Thursday, and until 1 a.m. on Friday and Saturday.
- There must be a clear path on the sidewalk or sidewalk widening for pedestrians that ranges from eight to 12 feet depending on the type of street.
The new rules get a 30-day public comment period in the run-up to a public hearing held by the city on November 20. You can submit comments on the new proposed outdoor dining rules and sign up to speak at the hearing by emailing rules@dot.gov or visiting the city’s dedicated dining-out website — HERE.
You can check out the complete new outdoor dining proposal from the city on the Department of Transportation website.
To receive WSR’s free email newsletter, click here.
It appears someone looked to Canada to see how they have been doing outdoor dining for the past decade.
This is a step in the right direction. I never understood why those things were allowed to be enclosed when their purpose was to prevent COVID transmission. Anyway, I hope the license fees will be high enough to drastically cut down the number of roadbed structures.
Looks like diners will be subject to rain and wind. FAILURE
These streeteries are meant to keep the lively aspect of seasonal outdoor dining that people liked. They aren’t meant to provide services for people who still are uncomfortable eating indoors or just to give restaurant owners additional relatively inexpensive additional space ( other businesses don’t get that option).
It can’t be everything for everyone but this is better than I expected.
My main hesitations are allowing up to 40 feet of curb space and not trusting restaurant owners to leave the proper amount of sidewalk clearance for pedestrians. We all know that some restaurants have really overstepped in these two areas
“They aren’t meant to provide services for people who still are uncomfortable eating indooors” Actually that =is= why these shelters were created and in fact covid is =still = here and is a threat, especially to the elderly and immune-compromised but also to the generat population so having year-round outdoor space at restaurants gives more people the chance to participate in normal life. Is there really a need to lump together the legitimate concerns about indoor dining with greedy restaurant owners? Covid is not over and I agree that outdoor dining can be fun too. So it’s good that NYC is not eliminating outdoor seating. These plans seem reasonable on a quick look, although not the date restrictions.
Outdoor dining in the shed was originally for covid avoidance, of course. I’m saying that these new versions are not intended for that.
Of course covid is here to stay and I act in my own best interests regarding restaurants and public spaces. But I don’t think that all public policy has to go according to my cautious standards when the vast majority of people and public health experts have determined a new normal.
Looks like the wind could blow off the awnings. Seems dangerous in a storm.
If its raining, why not sit inside?
They can always go inside…
Maybe not “always”
Eating at home is always a healthy option.
As are participants in other outdoor activities. Eating outside in a roadbed is not a necessity.
A step in the right direction. However, without the ability to close them off overnight, the homeless will begin to sleep there. I don’t agree with the commenter about the rain and wind. The original “sidewalk cafes” were only for good weather. We should be moving in the same direction by making them weather contingent, not a total all-weather expansion of the restaurant’s footprint. Perhaps they should be totally removeable during certain months in the winter.
The law, I believe, requires that. You can’t serve between Nov 30 and April 1 in a roadside shelter. It does not say so above, but I recall reading elsewhere that shelters must be dismantled during that time to allow for snow removal.
Searing on the sidewalk can be used all.year round
I believe I have seen some restaurants that have retractable gates to close their outdoor dining spaces overnight to prevent them from becoming homeless shelters. I assume this is OK based on the new rules.
Overall these rules seem pretty well thought out. Nothing is perfect but it seems like a step in the right direction. I’m not 100% clear what the cost is? It shouldn’t be overly burdensome but nor should it be trivial.
If the new structures do not have walls, just low barriers as in the pictures above, gates are irrelevant.
Removing outdoor dining in the winter means that those of us at high risk for conplications from covid will have no options for eating out with others in the winter, increasing our isolation from society. And yes, I do eat outdoors in partially open sheds during the winter, especially if they have heat. Covid is not actually over, no matter how much we wish it were.
Cook at home in the winter. It’s healthy and less expensive! Or order take out or have home delivery if you don’t like to cook.
The sidewalk seating can stay open, so there will be an option. Less enticing, perhaps, but also safer if your concern is transmission.
With respect….
Eating at a restaurant is not an entitlement.
Many people can’t afford to eat at restaurants and there is no “program” to allow them to eat for reduced cost or free.
Agree 100%
As much as I wish they would go away forever, I understand a compromise. My question is, why must the outside dining be opened to midnight/1 AM? By then, most restaurants have plenty of space inside. They are incredibly disrespectful to residence in the buildings they occupy. One of the other restaurant on the same black closes the outside at nine. The workers say they are a neighborhood establishment. “ It’s all about the neighbors.” Right!!
Totally agree.
These structures are meant for outdoor DINING. Most people finish dinner before 10:00 PM. Late diners should thus easily find a table inside the restaurant.
Leaving these sheds open till 1:00AM is an open door to noise and inconvenience from drinkers unable to control the decibels they produce after too many beverages. Let those people happily drink inside the establishment.
Perhaps there could be some compromise on the hours for outoor dining in consideration of the comfort of nearby residents. But the fact that there may be plenty of space indoors during the late evening is irrelevant: the original purpose of the sheds was to provide tables for Covid-conscious people, and there are still plenty of those around (including me).
These new guidelines are no longer about covid safety.
I too use outdoor dining almost exclusively for extra caution. But I realize that the time has come to change. I will not eat out as much and I accept that as my personal decision and cautious nature. But while there will always be immunocompromised people it isn’t fair to society as a whole to keep those guidelines in place indefinitely. Eating in a restaurant is not a right.
This all sounds very reasonable. I would appreciate enforcing these sidewalk rules, some restaurants leave only a few feet for pedestrians to get by, like Saba’s, competing for space with the bus stop, where pedestrians often have to walk between the tables to avoid bottlenecks.
You’d think that since the sheds have to be ADA compliant the sidewalk also needs to be ADA compliant. There needs to be space for a wheelchair to get through
And space for crowds to walk.
I am against all sidewalk dining. It is impossible to walk through some streets and the new rules will not change that. People move the chairs around and make walking through the streets a challenge. The sheds in the streets also need to go. Traffic is negatively impacted by all the double parking delivery trucks are forced into. Eat inside the darn restaurants. New York City isn’t designed for outdoor dining.
I agree. Walking along Amsterdam in the upper 70s and 80s is an obstacle course. Seems like we bent over backwards to make sure every restaurant/pizza cam make as much revenue as possible from the sidewalks and streets. Perhaps pedestrians ave some rights to walk along the sidewalk without obstructions at every turn. Funny thing is that the majority of these places serve mediocre food. Simply amazing!
Doesn’t make clear whether restaurants have to remove the roadbed outdoor dining structures from 11/30-3/31. The fees for roadbed seating will probably eliminate many of the structures.
The proposed barricade/fence does not look sturdy enough to protect diners from wayward vehicles, a big difference between sidewalk cafes and dining sheds in the roadbed.
Remembering this story where a Jeep hit a shed and the sturdy shed remained unscathed: https://www.westsiderag.com/2022/03/13/in-jeep-versus-outdoor-dining-shed-shed-wins
The roadside dining on the other side of bike lanes should be discontinued. They are dangerous for diners and waitstaff.
If they got rid of both the roadside dining and the bike lanes, that would truly be a victory for society!
Agreed, especially since bicycles zip
By in both directions while customers and staff remain at risk.
Accessible outdoor dining structures might be the only way for some disabled people to be able to visit certain restaurants, many of which are STILL not accessible 30 years after the passage of the ADA…in that way, they might represent a genuine improvement.
I’d rather see the money and enforcement go to proper ADA access. Maybe they can make getting these permits contingent on fixing access to the inside spaces?
I’d like to research who put these ideas together. Euro-style sidewalk cafe dining- YES, removable and set up with weather permitting. “Street” dining- taking up parking, causing double parked traffic, eating inhaling exhaust, frogging thru bike lanes- HARD NO.
If you don’t like the street dining setups, you can eat inside or at a sidewalk setup. Taking away parking spaces is not a valid argument. NYC is a transit-friendly, bike and pedestrian city. It should not be preferential for car owners over helping local businesses. Do you know how hard it is to keep a restaurant open, pay your staff an equitable salary, and provide quality food at a price people will actually pay? I imagine many restaurants will close with these new rules and the added fees (which I understand need to be charged). People complain about the empty storefront blight on the UWS — restaurants are one of the few businesses we have an ability to keep open. I’d like to support them.
Taking away parking spaces IS a valid argument because not all of NYC has subway access, you can’t easily get to the UWS from many parts of our metro area. The UWS is part of gentrified NYC and gentrified NYC is a bubble just like many college campuses with dorms, there’s more to NYC than the gentrified bubble and the rest of the metro area than this bubble and adequate parking spaces for motor vehicles ensures access. If this was 1973 or 1983 rather than 2023 when few wealthier people wanted to be on the UWS or Park Slope, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because no one wanted the UWS.
Restaurants have always had to apply and pay for sidewalk seating. I believe that was suspended during the Covid crisis so resuming those fees is reasonable.
Maybe restaurants should charge a fee to diners who choose to sit outside when inside tables are available. The roadbed dining sheds should have a fee structure higher than the sidewalk seating and those fees should be recouped from those dining there. I believe there already is a legal mechanism by which eateries are allowed to charge such fees. I recall paying a fee to eat in a shed in Chinatown years ago.
I hear that Mama’s Too is taking over the space that is/was the manicure salon between 105 and 106 on Broadway. Maybe that will free up the sidewalk for those of us who live nearby. Rude eaters block the walkway.
This touches on my big issue with the sheds. Restaurants were getting bonus real estate for free when there are tons of empty storefronts in NYC. I am glad to see a restaurant expanding the old fashioned way. Now that restaurants have to at least pay something for the sheds, which is a step in the right direction.
I understand that structures will not be fully enclosed, but there is no mention of air filtration systems.
Why would you need air filtration systems in a structure that is not enclosed? That’s equivalent to wearing a mask outdoors.
Depends on what “not fully enclosed” means and the size of the structure. A little off-topic, but I wonder why there aren’t requirements for indoor air quality.
There’s no confusion what enclosed means. It looks like the plan calls for no walls but only screening that allows air to flow through.
The rule you’re referring to about not being fully enclosed is to make clear that many of the fully enclosed structures we have now will not be permitted.
Why would you use air filtration systems on an unenclosed outdoor space?
When do the existing roadbed sheds need to be dismantled? Is is November 2023 or 2024?
Temporary sheds are here until Nov 2024, so one more year of this mess. You can thank Gale Brewer for that, as well as for permanent sheds.
what about protection from bikes that zoom up and down the bike lane?
Don’t walk in the bike lanes and look both ways before you cross. Stop jaywalking and standing in the street while waiting to cross the street. In other words, make an effort to protect yourself. How many avenues with bike lanes do you cross regularly that you’re at such high risk anyway?
So you are advocating defensive walking? I can’t count the number of times PER DAY that I don’t have to dodge a bike on Amsterdam Avenue.
If bikers observed stop lights, we wouldn’t have this problem.
You shouldn’t have to look both ways. I doubt most of us look to see of cars are coming the wrong way before crossing a street.
It has been taught generationally and is both the most basic of road rules and simple to follow.
“I have noticed that even those who assert that everything is predestined and that we can change nothing about it still look both ways before they cross the street.”
― Stephen Hawking, Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays
I mean, it is the bike lane…. onus is on you to look.
Are you kidding me??? Bikes have to observe the same signals as cars.
Rat infested shacks make the city look like a 3rd world country. Throw in unregistered scooters with their helmet less unlicensed riders who have zero respect for laws. And last but not least the stench of weed everywhere.
Blatantly absent from the entire conversation are sheds separated from sidewalks by a bike lane. Dangerous for servers and diners alike.
Dangerous for bikers too – trust me. I ride very slowly down columbus in the 70s/80s – views blocked by sheds and waiters/dinners
Amsterdam between 84th and 85th (west side of the street) is comically over-structured.
I feel like I’m walking through a stranger’s kitchen.
I don’t know who designed Old John’s outdoor shed (67th just east of Amsterdam). Individual booths, good cross draft from sash window and sliding doors in each for the fresh air /ventilation lovers, but with both heaters and a/c for those who want to be private and cozy. Bench seats. They are so cute and workable, even for wheelchair users (tho probably not full ADA). It will be sad to see them go. (Mind you, with a level of construction that looked like it could be housing for 10 people it is probably totally inappropriate. But still adorable and fun.)
There’s more to quality of life than cafe dining! I didn’t read any mention about the link between our huge rat infestation issue and outdoor dining program. I’ve noticed many food establishments have the new enclosed garbage containers yet neighboring residential buildings still pile up garbage bags many times right next to these containers. Those outdoor dining structures unfortunately attract rats and the homeless in our city, so I’ve never been a fan. Building and restaurant owners need to be made accountable.
One size does not fit all. Old John’s spent a lot of money to build an outdoor shed for dining, with individual areas for dining that are one of the best things to come out of COVID. Why not keep the good? The outdoor sheds add so much charm to New York, like the cafes add to Paris. Many of the dining sheds in Lincoln Square are so much nicer, at least a nice option, that we should be welcoming this bluebird that the pandemic brought with it.
You see Paris, I see Venezuela. Nothing charming about eating outdoors in what NYC has become.
There are 3 shacks on my block that I pass to get to the bus stop every morning. Delivery trucks have to park in the street (instead of next to the curb), which then forces the buses to stop in the middle of the street. Homeless men use the shacks for shelter and bathroom facilities, and well-meaning people leave bags of food for them, and this is all strewn across the sidewalk and into the street. I’ve lost count of how many photos of rats that I’ve sent to 311. I haven’t been to Paris but this isn’t exactly how I envisioned it. : (
No it’s not Paris- sheds and rats
Let’s get rid of roadside completely, it did its job in terms of covid and restaurants. Instead, letssomehow lower these rocketing commercial rents, and lets bring people back inside, where the true atmosphere of a restaurant comes alive.
Another “agreed”. If congestion is such a problem why add to the problem by taking up sidewalk and street space? It’s nothing more than a money-maker for the city.
Between usurious prices, the threaet to the public safety from delivery vehicles and this nonsense restaurants in the city are not worth supporting. Better and less expensive food is made in my kitchen and enjoyed by my friends.
The infestation of rats–I have seen some as large as overweight cats walking in and out of these structures–combined with barely any sidewalk space at all ,where these structures dominate on side streets and avenues alike. Risking your life walking around them, where bicycles zoom in every direction and never follow traffic laws make all of this unacceptable and disgusting. We all lived without them for decades. (And people had time to read BOOKS before the internet took over many people’s horizons with endless clutter.) Pedestrians deserve better!
These shacks do not represent progress. Eat in or eat at home.
I agree with outdoor dining, the main introduction to this was during COVID. While COVID still exists, we need to think of ways to make NYC more progressive. Outdoor cafes have been in existence for years in Europe. For all the negative comments, the rats didn’t just appear nor go away by eliminating outdoor dining. There should be more protests and expedient solutions to the garbage that lines our sidewalks. That is entirely different issue. Let’s bring NYC to the next century and make it more appealing for residents and tourists.
Not discussed is ongoing maintenance; keeping them clean and free of rats and other vermin (including the sides of the structures).
If restaurants don’t care about the cleanliness of their sidewalks, the could care less about a shed sitting on the street.
Not mentioned: Where in the road these can be located. IMO they should only occupy actual parking spots. Not the bike lane, not the diagonal white-lined no-parking parts of the street nor the same-lined buffer zone adjacent to the bike lanes and which are specifically designed to always be kept empty/clear to improve driver/biker/pedestrian safety and so that wide vehicles can enter for street cleaning, garbage pickup, emergency ambulance, etc,). The Consulate (85th and Columbus) for example built a too-deep shed that not only is in a no parking zone but also occupies 100% of the bike lane. Such construction largely contributes to shed-related safety and sanitation problems.
Regarding fees for dining sheds, I hope that the permit fee is at least the equivalent cost of parking in that spot. The spots are public space for rent, and the city needs all the money it can get.
Most current sheds have a roof and three walls with the side of the shed facing the restaurant being partially or fully open. This approach protects diners from the elements, making the sheds usable in the rain or other forms of inclement weather.
The new rules look like they were designed by a committee for use in southern California, by the beach.
Having no roof on the curb shed would be miserable with cars and trucks rushing by and rain and other inclement weather.
Many of current sheds are wonderful as they are because they make dining more pleasant, safer, and actually have a nice atmosphere. I’ve eaten in rain storms, cold weather, hot weather, windy days, and also with cars, trucks, and unruly groups of noisy dirt bikes thundering by. The current designs enable restaurants to stay open, serve more customers, employ more people, and pay more taxes.
Please keep adjust the rules to allow for fully covered structures that are only required to be partially open on one wall so that they protect diners for rain, trucks, wind, and other intrusions. We don’t live by the beach in California where an open design with a little sun cover might make sense.
For people unconcerned about noise/music levels from night-time outside street dining, might you indicate if you live above a restaurant?
Or indicate if, rather you live in a high-rise and far from restaurant street noise/music.
It seems to me that residents should be prioritized in a residential area.
Shouldn’t people be permitted to sleep?
What happens to the 8 foot clearance on the sidewalk when a tree bed or mail box is in the way?. On Columbus Avenue I have often seen places with less than 3 feet of clearance, You have to walk single file to pass. and God forbid if a dog is sitting on the sidewalk just outside the barricade.
Will share an op-ed excerpt posted in the Village Sun by Leslie Clark 7/31/23 because no one can say it better about “Dining In The Gutter”
“Open Plans co-director Sara Lind thanked all those who worked “diligently behind the scenes.” Keith Powers, the City Council Democratic majority leader, spoke of “months of tricky discussions.” Hospitality Alliance chief Andrew Rigie bragged about “two years of discussions and negotiations with the mayor’s administration and the City Council” led by Rigie’s chief legal counsel.
The result of these exclusive backroom deals? An “anywhere everywhere” piece of legislation that would allow any restaurant to open a sidewalk or roadway cafe anywhere and, therefore, everywhere. And no limits on how many outdoor dining setups can be on any block. No distinction drawn between commercial corridors and small residential side streets where people live and once tried to sleep at night.
Forget about sleeping when this legislation passes. Intro 31C contains no sound mitigation at all, nothing to prevent loudspeakers and televisions in the sidewalk cafes or roadway setups. And the noise will invade neighboring homes from 10 a.m. to midnight — by decree of this legislation. That’s 14 hours out of every 24-hour day. Who cares if kids, elders and working people can’t get a good night’s sleep? Not industry lobbyists and not our mayor.”
https://thevillagesun.com/opinion-dining-in-the-gutter-is-it-really-here-to-stay
As for my own comment-the DOT “managing’ oversight of these sheds when fixing potholes seems to be above their pay grade would be laughable were it not for the actual invasive health harm to residents who live adjacent and atop these sheds. Let’s also remember, NYC has become an anything goes place-just as swagger Adams likes it-where one is lucky not to be run over by scofflaw unlicensed bikers on sidewalks-where the disabled are illegally gated from equal access on “Open Streets”/CLOSED STREETS and where -like it or not-blasting, amplified noise aka “music” from within restaurants and bars rely on an arbitrary and often MIA 311 standard- residents are frankly trapped and screwed.
the City snd community boards have lost
their sense of logic and road safety rules
How many more things are you going to put
on our street!!!!
Enough already. Remove the dining sheds
remove all bikes motor bikes etc snd let’s return our street to the people who live here
It’s too much. Way too much!!!!
Between west 63rd and 64th street there is not a clear 8-12 feet of sidewalk left after the huge, enclosed structures were erected.
My anti-COVID invention received a US patent in December of 2022. In one of its formulations it would allow restaurant customers to enjoy their meal while breathing filtered and sanitized air that nobody else is breathing except for those at their table. Yet the restaurant staff could take away dirty dishes and pour a new glass of wine without exchanging air with those inside the invention’s enclosure. In essence, it’s use would make the use of outdoor sheds unnecessary. But every company I approach to make prototypes of my invention or take it on as a manufacturer of it in any and all of its formulations has told me COVID-19 is over. Nobody is even buying hand sanitizer these days. I am ready to make the invention available to help all of us be safer when away from our homes. If anyone knows of a company willing and able to get behind my anti-COVID invention please let someone at WSR know so they can share that information with me. Stay safe.
New Yorkers are being forced to subsidize “one private industry”, while we simultaneously lose our “essential roadways”. This program comes at our great expense – both monetarily and by way of quality of life. I don’t believe most New Yorkers understand the full realm of what this program “costs” us.
This is about subsidizing gentrification and wanting to drive out “unwanted” people from NYC. It’s very clear. When you want to override zoning in the suburbs but UWSers won’t look at how 71% of the neighborhood is a historic district, it’s clear.