Chair Brooks-Powers and Robert Bookman Discuss Recommendations for Program Accessibility

We've we've got nothing but a positive working relationship with DOT from day one through yesterday.

Um again, when it's it's not a finger pointing issue.

Part of the problem is, you know, we've we've we stated it needs to be an in-person, you know, that is something that could be corrected right away.

There needs to be an in-person place where people can have their papers reviewed and either accepted in in multiple languages with people there with multiple languages like they used to be a consumer affairs.

Uh that's something that could be done right away.

Um they could start taking the annual fees quarterly that used to be done for 40 years.

That's something they could start doing right away.

Those are policies.

They could start uh complying, you know, with the clear intent of the statute that five days they review the application.

If all the papers are there, it's complete.

Send it on to the next part of the process, then do their review while the other while the community board is doing their review, you know, as well.

That always went on simultaneously.

Those are quick things that could be done.

Some things they have no control over.

The fact that there is a revocable consent, which makes the process complicated because it's not just a license going to a licensing agency and getting a license.

There's this consent.

This consent has multiple steps, it has a contract, it has fees associated with it, you know, annual rent.

They're just administering that.

They that's something you've got to change.

And uh, and that would also make the process a lot faster if there was no consent.

So that's something that needs to be considered.

I will say in the negotiation of all this, that was something that council staff was very much open to, getting rid of the consent for for outdoor dining, just like these other commercial uses of the public sidewalk.

It didn't happen.

But that's something that needs to be revisited.

So some things you can do, some things they can do, you know, some things they can't do.

The enclosure is obviously very important as well because it gives them more time to monetize, you know, that space and pay for the fees.

They're paying again a year-round uh uh license.

They should be able to really use that space year-round, um, in addition to some of the other uh issues we mentioned as well.

That's a rule, you know, that that could be changed by rule or a statute could over overrule that rule.

The other important thing is the clearances.

The people have touched on it.

For 40 years, the clearances on sidewalk cafes was very simple.

You didn't need to be a lawyer to understand it.

50% of the sidewalk width or eight feet, whichever was greater.

Everybody could figure out right away how much space they can occupy for their cafe, and you know, they all know what the size tables and chairs are, they could pretty much figure it out before they even applied.

DOT and came up with a very complicated map where every street in the city was color-coded.

And you now now it wasn't eight feet or 50% of the sidewalk, it was eight feet or ten feet or twelve feet, depending on which street you are on this color-coded map.

And then the way they measured the clearances changed dramatically.

Consumer affairs from the edge of the cafe to the curb.

You know, here and there, you know, some other, you know, if it was a fire hydrogen, he measures the fire hydrant.

They had all kinds of measurements to the complicated zone, anything in the in the zone you're measuring to that.

The bottom line is it not only made it more complicated, but that's what you're hearing from Mr.

Guarino and you know and and from uh some Sylvia's, is restaurants that had approved sidewalk cafes under those old rules for decades with no community problems, no passage problems on the sidewalk renewed every two, four years, all of a sudden had to shrink their sidewalk cafes and change the dot change the not only shrink the number of tables and chairs, but rather than having a nice clean line, they had to go in and out now, in and out, you know, to because of these crazy ways they decided to do clearances.

That's something that's in their rules that has to change because that made it so confusing and it made it so unaffordable for some people to lose those tables and chairs that they just didn't apply.

So you're really seeing the decimation in the boroughs.

And roadway, so I would just add on the roadway, that sidewalk, but on the roadway cafes, obviously, you know, the seasonality is the problem.

But there's also clearance requirements there as well that don't always make sense.

In certain cases, based on where a restaurant is located on a corner, they sometimes have to provide, I believe, in certain cases, 50 feet, meaning that if you're located on one of these areas where you have to have 50 feet from a sign or a light before you can start your roadway cafe, you're basically cutting it into half or not having it at all.

I think daylighting, and I know there's some folks is more of a 10 or 15 foot.

So I think if you're looking for safety measures, which we would support, uh, you could still give restaurants back more of the space and keep it safe with daylighting or other street safety features as well.

But that's one of the things we're hearing about.

Also, certain no-standing zones or other types of signs and obstructions are also limiting restaurants' abilities.

Uh obviously, if you need to have space for a specific reason, you need to have it.

But we found throughout the pandemic and now today, there's certain street signs or other obstructions that don't make much sense but are limiting the ability of a restaurant to have outdoor dining.

And again, not their fault, but the administration, and they work for the administration, so they had to listen, got other agencies involved that were not in the statute.

Everybody threw in their two cents when they were doing their rules, which created a hodgepodge of rules and regulations.

Thank you for that.

Next, we have a couple of members that have questions for this panel.

We'll start with Councilmember Brewer, followed by Council Member Narcis.

Thank you for such an informed panel.

You could run the city, all of you.