West Side Rag
  • TOP NEWS
  • OPEN/CLOSED
  • FOOD
  • SCHOOLS
  • OUTDOORS
  • REAL ESTATE
  • ART & CULTURE
  • POLITICS
  • COLUMNS
  • CRIME
  • HISTORY
  • ABSURDITY
  • ABOUT US
    • OUR STORY
    • CONTRIBUTORS
    • CONTACT
West Side Rag
No Result
View All Result
SUPPORT THE RAG

Search the site

No Result
View All Result
Get WSR FREE in your inbox
SUPPORT THE RAG

The UWS Outdoor Dining Scene Is Changing: What Some Local Restaurant Owners Are Saying and Doing

August 7, 2024 | 4:55 PM - Updated on August 8, 2024 | 5:27 AM
in FOOD, NEWS
100
Playa Betty’s owner Robert Guarino, managing partner Todd Cederholm, and their roadway dining shed. Photos by Claire Davenport

By Claire Davenport

Even though it’s a Wednesday, Playa Betty’s on Amsterdam and West 75th Street is already bustling before dinnertime. The Mexican restaurant feels like a place you might wander into off a beach boardwalk, with surfboards hanging on the wall and colorful fairy lights draped over the bar. Customers stroll in, and a host asks, “inside or outside?”

During the pandemic, the restaurant set up palm tree decals on the sidewalk at six-foot intervals to encourage people waiting for their takeout orders to stand safely apart. Now, diners recline under the restaurant’s sidewalk awning or in their outdoor dining shed, which stands in the roadway separated from the curb by a bustling bike lane.

But under the city’s new permanent outdoor dining program “Dining Out NYC,” which went into effect on March 3, these outdoor dining structures will have to undergo a makeover.

For Playa Betty’s this will include replacing the top of their dining shed with a retractable roof, removing space heaters, and reducing the number of tables for streetside and roadway dining.

Businesses had until August 3rd to apply to the new program, and by November this year, all dining sheds that receive city licenses must comply with the new requirements, including taking down roadway sheds during the winter months. Those that didn’t apply must remove their structures permanently or risk fines.

Playa Betty’s owner Robert Guarino immediately applied for sidewalk dining but hesitated over whether to take on the financial burden of updating his roadway shed in line with the new regulations. Ultimately, he applied for roadway, too, though “it was an investment.”

Even before the pandemic, Playa Betty’s had outdoor seating as part of a city legacy program. Its roadway shed was added during the pandemic when outdoor dining structures became as familiar in the city as cats in bodega windows.

Outdoor dining on the UWS.

Boxy roadway structures, some spartan, others lavishly decorated, popped up in city streets everywhere in 2020. The number of city restaurants with outdoor dining setups jumped from 1,200 pre-pandemic to 12,000 by the end of 2022, according to data from the city Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Consumer and Work Protection. By the August 3 deadline, city officials said they had received fewer than 3,000 applications for the new licensing program, less than 25% of the number of outdoor dining establishments at the height of the pandemic. That means city restaurants will have far fewer outside options — including roadway sheds — before the end of 2024; 1,277 applied for sidewalk seating licenses, 681 said they wanted roadway licenses, and another 634 establishments requested both.

Those who did submit applications are seeking to keep their outdoor setups in use. But while many local owners say they are happy there is now a longer-term program in place, they feel that some of the new rules and regulations are onerous and expensive. These include restrictions against fixed roofs and propane heaters and, most controversially, a requirement that sheds must be disassembled between November 30 and March 31.

Of the 20 restaurant owners and managers West Side Rag spoke with who have establishments located on Amsterdam and Columbus avenues, 12 said they had applied for roadway dining. Six hadn’t applied or only applied for sidewalk dining. One hadn’t decided, and one was in the process of applying but wasn’t sure they would make the deadline.

Sidewalk dining at Fred’s.

Jeremy Wladis, who owns Fred’s, Good Enough to Eat, and the recently renamed Harvest American Bistro, among other Upper West Side restaurants, said that despite the complexity of the new rules, he applied for roadway dining at every restaurant he owns.

“Restaurants are suffering,” Wladis said. “We had a great year in 2023 with optimism coming out of COVID and pent-up demand. This year it’s been much more difficult, and these new restrictions will only make things harder.”

Although the city created step-by-step guides for complying, Wladis said his team struggled to navigate the application process and get all of the necessary paperwork in on time. “We’ll make it by deadline, but I have a feeling that a lot of people will not,” he said in an interview a few days before the August 3 deadline. Wladis estimated that most of his restaurants will lose roughly half of their seating capacity when the outside spaces are reconfigured to meet the new rules.

Luca Di Pietro, the owner of Tarallucci e Vino on Columbus and West 83rd Street, was among the owners who decided to apply for sidewalk dining, which can stay up year-round, but not a roadway dining shed, which would have to be dismantled half of the year. “It’s an extra burden on the staff. We can survive without it,” he said.

Owner Andrew Loscalzo at his restaurant Salumeria Rosi.

Andrew Loscalzo, the owner of Salumeria Rosi on Amsterdam and West 73rd Street, told the Rag that the price tag for complying with the new rules had given him some pause, “especially for the yearly demolition and rebuilding” of roadway sheds. In the end, though, he put in an application for both sidewalk and roadway dining.

Along with the costs of building, breaking down, and storing the curbside structures, which the city’s transportation department estimates could reach up to five figures, there are a number of fees for applying. And for those granted a four-year license, there is a $2,100 fee for both sidewalk and roadway seating.

“A lot of restaurants in New York are family-owned restaurants,” Loscalzo said. “These new costs can become somewhat of a burden.”

“Not having a year-round curbside option comes with high costs and is a real barrier to people,” said Jackson Chabot, director of advocacy and organizing at Open Plans, a nonprofit organization that advocates for making New York streets more pedestrian-friendly. Along with organizations such as the New York City Hospitality Alliance, Open Plans lobbied the city unsuccessfully to keep the roadway dining sheds year-round in the new program.

Chabot said he believes resistance came from city council members with a “windshield perspective.” There is, he said, “a whole host of city council members who prefer car parking over restaurants and outdoor dining structures, and the program is getting bottomed out because of it.”

Sidewalk dining and a roadway shed on Columbus Avenue.

West Side Rag reached out to city transportation officials for comment on the cost and complexity of the new program but did not hear back.

Since their genesis, the roadway sheds have spawned complaints, including on the Upper West Side, where residents say they have raised outdoor noise levels, increased rat populations, and in some cases have become eyesores. Some of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the city over the outdoor dining program were Upper West Siders, who charged that curbside dining had affected their safety and ruined their quality of life.

But for others, especially Upper West Siders who are still COVID-conscious, roadway dining has been a welcome option for enjoying the weather and some street watching while staying safe.

That’s why owners like Wladis, who were hesitant about the program, still decided to apply. “At the end of the day, you have to have options for people,” he said. “And sitting outdoors is a popular option.”

Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And check out the Support button below.

 

Share this article:
SUPPORT THE RAG
guest

guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

100 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ped Estrian
Ped Estrian
9 months ago

“Restaurants are suffering,” Wladis said. Well, maybe try stop charging $19 for a $7 hamburger?

41
Reply
Eric
Eric
9 months ago
Reply to  Ped Estrian

The wholesale price of 1 lb of ground beef in NYC is roughly $6. But you would like the restaurant to buy the beef, slice off a nice thick patty, serve it with a bun, lettuce, tomato, pickle and a side dish, pay the cook to cook it, pay the server to serve it, pay the dishwasher to clean your plate, pay to turn electric lights on in the restaurant, pay for gas to run the stove, pay to have a telephone, pay rent, pay taxes, and be so grateful for the profit they would make that they will greet you with a nice big smile for your lousy $7? With customers like you it’s a miracle any restaurant would ever open their doors.

46
Reply
Sal Bando
Sal Bando
9 months ago
Reply to  Eric

They can charge maybe $15 for it or they can go out of business. Their choice.

4
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  Eric

It’s almost as if you failed to read the part where the owner(and the commenter) said that “Restaurants are suffering.” Why else besides high food prices do you imagine they are suffering even with all that extra free outdoor space?

And no you don’t have to charge $7, that wasn’t the suggestion, but you know maybe $12 to $15? A burger meal with fries and a soda now costs close to $30 at many(most?) of these establishments and that’s before tip!

10
Reply
Ped Estrian
Ped Estrian
9 months ago
Reply to  Jeremy

It’s outta control

1
Reply
Lisa
Lisa
9 months ago
Reply to  Jeremy

Looking at the retailers that have gone out of business and who are not being replaced by other retailers, I’d say the restaurants are doing quite well.

3
Reply
Great Scott
Great Scott
9 months ago
Reply to  Ped Estrian

It was my understanding that if any restaurant that did not apply for the new “permit” and currently has a shed; the shed should have been removed by last weekend? Am I incorrect as I thought I read this fact on WSR at some point…oh yes… it is here: https://www.westsiderag.com/2024/07/30/most-temporary-outdoor-dining-sheds-must-come-down-by-saturday-including-on-uws

So, if this is the case, why in heaven’s name are there a million sheds still on the avenue? Seems to me that the following may be possible: A restaurant doesn’t have to take down the shed so long as they can show that they applied and the application is “being processed” and then once processed they can opt out and not pay but still get all the extra time and space for free.

Can the WSR actually do some investigative journalism and share with its readers exactly what the process is and what restaurants have not applied yet their sheds are still a blight on this neighborhood?

18
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  Great Scott

I believe it’s because they know there is and will be a lack of resources to actually enforce these rules. The DOT hasn’t been able to enforce these up until now and I think unfortunately that is unlikely to change.

8
Reply
Boris
Boris
9 months ago
Reply to  Great Scott

They have to pay the application fee which is non-refundable. Some restaurant owners have admitted that they are applying just to buy time until the end of November when all sheds have to come down. They get an additional four months’ use of their shed use for just $1,050. Unless they receive approval of their new shed before the end of October since they have to build the new shed within 30 days of approval.

2
Reply
Byrna West
Byrna West
9 months ago
Reply to  Great Scott

The fine of $500 is so low, it’s cheaper to keep them up.

6
Reply
Brandon
Brandon
9 months ago
Reply to  Byrna West

$500 for the first offence and $1000 after that. How often can they be fined? It should be daily. Just like you’d get a new ticket every day your car sat in an illegal spot.

8
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago

Sitting outdoors is a popular option when you take the people who use vehicles whether it be cars, vans or whatever to access the UWS for granted.

5
Reply
MLin
MLin
9 months ago

I hope they all disappear. If these restaurants thought they could make a go of things before the pandemic they should be able to make a go of it now.

39
Reply
Boris
Boris
9 months ago
Reply to  MLin

Exactly…they had a business model before the pandemic that should work now without having to serve food in the roadway. Sidewalk dining is another matter. The only major difference I see is that landlords might be raising rents on spaces that have ample frontage for roadway dining sheds whether restaurants install one or not.

5
Reply
Bill Williams
Bill Williams
9 months ago

It would be wonderful if the WSR reporters asked some pertinent questions to the stakeholders and included all the viewpoints including residents in their stories about community issues.

The purpose of the roadway sheds was actually to replace the indoor dining rooms especially during the cooler months because of the Covid restrictions. They were not to augment capacity. The irony of course was that many simply became additional enclosed dining rooms defeating the entire purpose of the Covid restriction. Don’t go inside to an enclosed space instead sit in this enclosed temporary shelter we built in the street.

According to the owners of Blossom interviewed in your previous piece, one of the factors in their closing was “customers dining out less often”. How does a roadway shed increase the number of customers? It doesn’t. It may increase the capacity of the restaurant but that does not translate necessarily into customers. This basic concept seems to be confirmed by the owner of Tarllucci in this piece and is evident to anyone walking by sheds that mostly sit empty

Any restaurant that had success pre-Covid had a business plan based on their existing capacity, meaning dining room, bar and perhaps outdoor cafe seating. Roadway sheds did not exist. Any new post-Covid restaurant would never have planned on the Roadway sheds being made permanent when it was always uncertain that they would remain an option. So Roadway sheds are not necessary for the success of these businesses.

Into this discussion enters the astroturfed Open Plans group funded by Mark Gorton. He is the same guy that has brought us Transportation Alternatives and with it all manner of chaos to our streets and sidewalks. The goal of both groups is to eliminate cars. They know absolutely nothing about restaurants.

Restaurants may have had a tough year but Roadway sheds are not a solution and communities all through the city are overwhelmingly against them. Restauranters should be looking for innovative solutions to increase business levels and should be listening the their neighbors who are after all their customers and not participate in the Roadway program.

63
Reply
Sam S
Sam S
9 months ago

In the meantime, the City has done zero for local retail and small businesses – which are really struggling due to high rent, ecommerce competition and shoplifting.

Do not understand why the restaurant sector has gotten so much help from the City?
And why the restaurant sector believes it should be prioritized over other businesses?

Also “street dining” isn’t even fair among restaurants.
For example one of our favorites is by a bus stop and a hydrant – so can’t have street or sidewalk seating.

If the City wanted to be fair, it could have given all businesses a tax break

28
Reply
lauren Lese
lauren Lese
9 months ago
Reply to  Sam S

Restaurants absolutely should be prioritized and receive all the help they need to survive. Restaurants are what make a neighborhood safe in the evenings. They make neighborhoods desirable to both young and older people. City neighborhoods without restaurants are unsafe neighborhoods.

9
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  lauren Lese

There is zero evidence that “Restaurants are what make a neighborhood safe in the evenings.” Sutton Place is probably one of the safest areas of Manhattan and there are zero restaurants there.

By you logic every neighborhood would become unsafe after closing time.

9
Reply
subway parent
subway parent
9 months ago
Reply to  lauren Lese

lauren,
So in your opinion the City should help restaurants?
But the City need not help stores, small shops, retail, other businesses?

4
Reply
UWS Resident
UWS Resident
9 months ago
Reply to  Sam S

You don’t understand why the restaurant sector has gotten so much help from the city? On a local level Sam, I suggest you attend a CB7 Manhattan community board meeting, where for example Andrew Rigie, chief advocate for the NYC Hospitality Alliance, sits on several committees. Rigie was a key player in forming the outdoor dining program and is strategically positioned not only here on UWS but throughout NYC to promote his agenda. New Yorker’s were never given the opportunity to vote on this permanent program, nor did the city do an environmental impact study prior to putting it in place. The public was completely put out of the process. In my opinion, it is our politicians who are responsible for this very large handout to the hospitality industry. So, for those concerned, be diligent when you cast your next City Council and Manhattan Borough President votes. In the meantime, it will certainly be nice come November when all the sheds are finally removed and our streets are cleaned and less congested.

30
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Resident

Yes, this exactly. Rigie is a lobbyist who represents The NYC Hospitality Alliance. Both are products of the pandemic.

9
Reply
Maxine DeSeta
Maxine DeSeta
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Resident

Thank you for this comment. CB7 is really a Chamber of Commerce whose members are appointed by Mark Levine, boro paresident, who also wants to privatize curb space for carshare companies and citibikes owned by Lyft. He is driven around in a chauffeured car at taxpayer expense. And, yes, our mom and pop stores are all but disappeared on the UWS because they can not afford the rents. We just lost Garden of Eden on Broadway and now have two “ghost” stores on W104 that cater that function to delivery groceries and other items.

14
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Resident

Because this is a culture war on cars that is why.

11
Reply
Ken
Ken
9 months ago
Reply to  Eugene Nickerson

No, it’s a war for the future of the planet, which cars are helping to destroy, and a war for streets that are safe.

7
Reply
Thomas Gulotta
Thomas Gulotta
9 months ago
Reply to  Ken

Whatever we do as Americans will not amount to much, even if you did COVID style lockdowns for climate change. It is China and India that will still keep doing what they are doing while the US loses its edge. All these urbanists who care about climate change will not want to give up air travel to exotic destinations or their favorite fruits which are imported by air.

Urbanists also showed their true colors on safe streets with e-bikes. Even if cars are bigger, urbanists showed that this was not about safety, but a zero sum game of dominance where they seek to be the arbiters of what people do.

3
Reply
Ulrika
Ulrika
9 months ago
Reply to  Thomas Gulotta

That is a not helpful way to reason: the United States has committed to bringing its carbon emissions to net-zero by 2050 as part of its obligations under the Paris Climate Accord. . What China and India does is beside the point.

0
Reply
Francis Purcell
Francis Purcell
9 months ago
Reply to  Ulrika

Commitments mean nothing, fat chances are that the commitment was made to look good politically without thinking about the amount of sacrifice people are willing to make to their lifestyle. Even in Europe, the whole green push is part of what is fueling the rise of right wing governments. What China and India are doing are absolutely important, there is a reason why people immigrate to America and it is to have a lifestyle and opportunities that is better than what China or India or some other rising power can offer.

0
Reply
RAL
RAL
9 months ago

Not sure which ones are suffering. When I go out they are usually packed. I dine out less now due to insanely high prices. I am over the $35 pasta. As to the sheds – most are ugly and the rows that were on Columbus in the 70s and 80s were a bike lane and pedestrian hazzard

37
Reply
aaron
aaron
9 months ago
Reply to  RAL

Thank you for saying this. Tried going out last Friday, in the rain mind you, and nearly every restaurant we tried to go to was at capacity, both inside and outside.

2
Reply
JAL
JAL
9 months ago

For background, it should be noted that Open Plans is an affiliate of the bicycle lobby Transportation Alternatives.

Also the head of the restaurant lobby, the Hospitality Alliance, is on Community Board 7.

24
Reply
UWS Resident
UWS Resident
9 months ago

So long sheds, you won’t be missed! We’ve had enough rats, noise and garbage! Wladis and all the other restaurant owners in NYC have had free public space for over 4 years, well past the pandemic year. No other businesses received the handout this industry was given, nor do other business now have the opportunity to expand, for permanent permit, onto public land. Stop all your whining restaurant owners, enough with the greed. Consider yourself lucky for the time being and pay up! Public space is not free real estate for the hospitality industry.

44
Reply
AnonUWSider
AnonUWSider
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Resident

Do you feel this strongly about giving away public space for free to park cars?

18
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  AnonUWSider

This is a false dichotomy that bizarrely is used over and over now. You can be for getting rid of these sheds AND against giving the space back to cars. Many people are for just giving this space back to the public for pedestrian use. You argument is one that sadly has been promoted Trans Alt. You might not even realize that.

11
Reply
AnonUWSider
AnonUWSider
9 months ago
Reply to  Jeremy

The pre-pandemic use for this space was for free car parking.
Spaces are reverting to this use once the sheds are removed and there are no concrete plans otherwise.

4
Reply
Maxine DeSeta
Maxine DeSeta
9 months ago
Reply to  AnonUWSider

The residents of New York City pay the highest taxes in the nation to maintain public space. Until we have a decent public transportation “alternative” to enter and leave the city particularly for familiies and workers, you bet we should be able to park at the curb, just as you have sidewalks to walk on and parks where you can bike.

13
Reply
AnonUWSider
AnonUWSider
9 months ago
Reply to  Maxine DeSeta

Last I checked, the LIRR, Metro-North, and New Jersey transit serve areas outside of NYC and the majority of New Yorkers do not own a car.

11
Reply
Ralph Caso
Ralph Caso
9 months ago
Reply to  AnonUWSider

Last I checked, the LIRR, Metro-North and New Jersey Transit do not directly serve the UWS, but also serve parts of NYC and NYS with limited transit options and by forcing people to use transit you are taking a one seat ride and making it at minimum a three to four seat ride when you include driving to a train station or a bus stop (or using a bus to get there), taking these options to Midtown and then making one or two additional transfers depending on whether you end up at Port Authority, Penn or GCT. Let’s face it the vast majority of UWS residents will barely venture out of gentrified NYC neighborhoods without a car. Oh wait, UWS residents will use an uber or lyft to get around within the UWS or to go crosstown or downtown at the expense of those who access Manhattan but cannot afford to live here.

3
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago
Reply to  AnonUWSider

Cars and other vehicles are the lifeblood of our society. We are in effect giving away public space not just to one industry, but to many different industries and supporting them more equitably since cars help people access things much easier than transit that people cannot or will not ride for some reason.

15
Reply
rteplow
rteplow
9 months ago
Reply to  Eugene Nickerson

Cars are the lifeblood of our society?! Really? Maybe on the highway but not in the middle of New York City.

I do wish that there was less traffic, that it would be easier for trucks to make deliveries, and above all that pedestrians were not endangered by cars and bikes. But the city does not exist to make it easy for car owners.

14
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago
Reply to  rteplow

Yes they are, if a city without cars existed here, you will quickly realize to what extent cars are being taken for granted even by urbanists.

6
Reply
L G
L G
9 months ago

While I support our local restaurant owners and enjoy al fresco dining as much as anyone, these are public spaces that serve multiple purposes and a much broader group than just their patrons – permitting fees and regulations are entirely needed to ensure the neighborhood stays clean and safe. The claim that the extra seats are ‘needed’ to stay in business seems like easy cover for a land grab to maximize profits at the expense of the neighborhood…

26
Reply
JAL
JAL
9 months ago

It is also important to note that there is actually an oversaturation of restaurants and food places on the Upper West Side and throughout Manhattan.
And of course food delivery.

They are cannibalizing each other.

Some are popular and some not so popular.

This really needs to be acknowledged in the discussion.

13
Reply
neighbor785
neighbor785
9 months ago

Before Covid, we went into restaurants and we loved it. Or, if the restaurant already had a patio, we could choose a table on the patio, and we loved it.

Why do we HAVE to have sheds in the street? The restaurants on Columbus that I frequent … they have plenty of room indoors.

23
Reply
Josh P.
Josh P.
9 months ago

Why was there no environmental review required to add a bunch of parking spots to our neighborhood? This will increase driving, air pollution, etc. What will the impact be on our community.

7
Reply
Vito Lopez
Vito Lopez
9 months ago
Reply to  Josh P.

The same reason why there was no environmental review to take away 400 parking spaces on Central Park West.

10
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago

Seems comments supportive of outdoor dining are being suppressed but let me give it another go…

Outdoor dining has been a dramatic success, you need only look at how many people are using them at all hours of the day. Licensing this extremely valuable public space to local restaurants is far more beneficial for the entire neighborhood, with 8-10 people at a time enjoying the space instead of 1-2 parked cars. Sadly thanks to mismanagement by city council, it will be restricted to free parking for the ~20% of residents who own cars.

29
Reply
Eric
Eric
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

Why do you say that pro-outdoor dining comments are being suppressed on WSR? Your proof?

2
Reply
Jeremy
Jeremy
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

Here’s a counter argument – look at how many of them are either sitting empty and abandoned or simply being used as outdoor storage. By that metric you could say that it is abject failure.

9
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  Jeremy

Nearly all that I’ve seen are pretty full – please name some that are abandoned? Obviously if they are not being used, fine to take down, this new set of rules mean even the very popular ones will be shut down.

3
Reply
subway parent
subway parent
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

UWS Dad,
Wondering if you are the same UWS Dad who a while back commented you favoured Open Streets on Columbus even though it meant buses had to be detoured?
Should streets be used to expand restaurant dining even if it impedes public transit?

3
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  subway parent

Probably me! It’s very simple – I’m a big fan of public transit, open streets and outdoor dining. The way to get more of all those things is to reallocate space away from private vehicles. As a bonus this would also reduce congestion and pollution.

10
Reply
subway parent
subway parent
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

UWS Dad,
I don’t mean to belabor this – but surely public transit MTA bus service should be more important than Open Streets for dining and chalk art on an avenue one block from Central Park?

Public transit must be accessible and reliable.
Public transit must come first – especially if, as you comment, the aim is to reduce the use of vehicles.

10
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  subway parent

Subway parent, you are surely aware the subway exists and continues to run during open streets? Buses are diverted but are still running. In short, I don’t think there is truly a conflict between public transit and open streets.

6
Reply
subway parent
subway parent
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

UWS Dad,
I guess you are not helping an older relative with a walker or walking with a 5 year old – and needing bus transit.

But who’d ever guess that the City of NY (which theoretically wants people to use public transit) would allow Open Streets for brunch – and thwart essential bus transit

4
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  subway parent

That’s just it – bus transit is not thwarted! I certainly am often taking the bus with my young kids and all for making investments in the bus and subway system, congestion pricing for example would dramatically have helped funding but also reduced congestion so buses are not caught in traffic.

3
Reply
Alisa
Alisa
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

UWS Dad:
As we all are aware, some people have health/mobility issues and cannot manage the subway or families with young children who rely on buses.
People are actually entitled to have regular, nearby buses – not ongoing confusion about routes and to have to walk far when they are not able.
There is something wrong when bus riders keep getting worse service but fares keep going up.

7
Reply
Ralph G. Caso
Ralph G. Caso
9 months ago
Reply to  Alisa

Wait until we have borough bus redesigns and bus stops are removed.

2
Reply
Robert
Robert
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

The buses are much safer than the subways & less likely to be stabbed & pushed on the subway tracks or pushed down the stairs or robbed & beaten up.

0
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert

All of those incidents are thankfully extremely rare & riding the subway is much safer than driving.

2
Reply
Thomas Gulotta
Thomas Gulotta
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

Easy to say when you can decide when to ride the subway and when to ride a citibike or use rideshare. Say what you want about driving, but at least driving is a one seat ride to go where you want when you want without having to have an MTA planner tell you to shut up when you dare criticize the system

1
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

Except the uber or lyft you use when transit somehow is inconvenient to use.

3
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  Eugene Nickerson

To be honest I can’t remember the last time I took an Uber or Lyft… far too expensive, I’d rather just pay $2.90 for the subway. Even so, at least they aren’t parked motionless 95% of the time on our streets like most cars on my block are.

6
Reply
Francis Purcell
Francis Purcell
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

The subway does not go everywhere and most cars are not motionless most of the time, the streets see good turnover for parking.

2
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  Francis Purcell

Good turnover?? Mad. Most of the cars parked I see are parked in the same spot all week, only moved for ASP, and then gone over the weekend when they are presumably driven to weekend homes…

4
Reply
Eugene Nickerson
Eugene Nickerson
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

I work on weekends on the UWS. People use the spots on the weekends too. Many people drive in to enjoy what the UWS has to offer or to move stuff in or out the UWS.

1
Reply
Robert Spire
Robert Spire
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

The article seems to be a puff piece for outdoor dining.

16
Reply
UWS Dad
UWS Dad
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Spire

Not sure how you get that impression – it’s the Rag talking to restaurant operators who actually understand the trade offs and requirements of applying for / running the outdoor dining space.

5
Reply
Ralph Caso
Ralph Caso
9 months ago
Reply to  UWS Dad

They could have talked to more people who are thrilled that outdoor dining will not be as prevalent as it used to.

5
Reply
Jose Habib
Jose Habib
9 months ago

I wish they’d ban them, but hopefully they’ll just fade away.

9
Reply
Sam
Sam
9 months ago

I can’t wait for Jacob’s Pickle to lose all the outdoor space that they have illegally taken over. I get upset every time I walk past the restaurant.

20
Reply
Ulrika
Ulrika
9 months ago
Reply to  Sam

I would be so much happier to see diners in that space, rather than just more parked cars with the blight and pollution they bring.

0
Reply
Joseph Margiotta
Joseph Margiotta
9 months ago
Reply to  Ulrika

Outdoor sheds bring rats, cars do not bring rats.

0
Reply
rteplow
rteplow
9 months ago
Reply to  Sam

I am sorry that Jacob’s Pickles is moving, and hope another restaurant takes its place that is equally popular. I enjoy walking on that block! Everyone is having a good time. I love the party lights. It’s not as though it’s full of obnoxious loud drunks misbehaving. If our neighborhood got rid of all of this it would be a very grim place.

8
Reply
Robert
Robert
9 months ago
Reply to  rteplow

Jacobs, ‘s Pickels is moving because they will be knocking down the buildings.

0
Reply
Sam
Sam
9 months ago
Reply to  rteplow

Jacob’s Pickle has illegally usurped half a block of public space. I would have no problem if they had used only what they are entitled to – i.e., the space outside their frontage.

9
Reply
Bill
Bill
9 months ago

I don’t mind outdoor tables, but please get rid of all the ugly, dirty outdoor dining sheds.

12
Reply
Cita
Cita
9 months ago

Looking forward to seeing all of these sheds off the street. Amsterdam is too chaotic as it is, ruined, for me, at least, by the delivery bikes who rule the road and have no respect for pedestrians.

15
Reply
Leslie
Leslie
9 months ago
Reply to  Cita

THANK you. Amsterdam Avenue has beome a safety hazard for pedestrians. It is narrow and clogged and the delivery bikes terrify me when I dare to cross the street, because not one of them obeys traffic rules. It is dangerous!

10
Reply
Lizzie
Lizzie
9 months ago

The new rules seem quite reasonable to me.

The $2100 fee for both permits is for four years. So, about $500 a year. Not onerous.

And the new regulations for street dining design — you can look online and see them — are complex but fair. They are less rat-friendly, and they are NOT rooms: they are seasonal dining areas. Removing them in winter makes sense, for cleanliness, snow removal, and safety.

I’m sure a new business will spring up: we will design, build install, dismantle and store your street dining set up for an annual fee. If a restaurant can’t make money with these new costs, so be it. They have their indoor seating, and their sidewalk, which is all they used to have.

8
Reply
Sam
Sam
9 months ago
Reply to  Lizzie

I believe there is an additional per sq footage charge

0
Reply
Josh P.
Josh P.
9 months ago

This whole thing was just an unbelievable bait and switch. The people lobbying for this law always insisted that they just wanted to get rid of bad sheds and reimagine this public space. If you asked CUEUP directly they always said this wasn’t about parking. https://www.cueupny.com/
The reality is that 100% of this space will be turned into parking. Nobody ever stood up and advocated for that and said explicitly “we want to replace dining sheds with parking” because there would have been massive pushback from the community. But here we are.

3
Reply
Boris
Boris
9 months ago
Reply to  Josh P.

What should replace the dining sheds besides parking? It still is a navigable street.

1
Reply
Brandon
Brandon
9 months ago
Reply to  Josh P.

I’m not sure they all will be turned into parking spots. There is the Smart Curb trial underway as reported by the Rag

https://www.westsiderag.com/2024/06/12/uws-smart-curb-pilot-program-proposal-details-revealed-loss-of-175-parking-spots-locations-for-new-parking-meters-and-loading-zones

We are getting new commercial laoding zones, new metered parking, new EV charging. Surely there must be some overlap between existing dining sheds and these new uses.

3
Reply
Boris
Boris
9 months ago
Reply to  Brandon

Loading zones create more free parking spots for placard parking. I see the same cars parked every day in the same spots that were designated for vehicles to unload in a way that they don’t hinder traffic.

2
Reply
Sandro
Sandro
9 months ago

One of the best things about the new rules is that it forced owners who were on the fence about their sheds, and had allowed them to dilapidate accordingly, are now getting rid of them entirely

5
Reply
Elgin
Elgin
9 months ago

Hate the cars and free parking SO MUCH. It makes the streets inhumane and unpleasant. I support anything that reclaims the streets for people, and I hope that we can not only find ways to support local restaurants, but also carve out more space for pedestrians, particularly pedestrians with strollers, wheelchairs, canes, or other mobility challenges.

11
Reply
caly
caly
9 months ago
Reply to  Elgin

I’ll will never understand this. We live in the city. The sidewalks are meant for pedestrians, and the street is meant for wheeled vehicles. We also have parks. If the sheds aren’t on the sidewalks or streets then both groups are accommodated. Everyone can go back to eating inside restaurants, and with any luck we’ll have safer/better bus service, and there will be more room for strollers, wheelchairs, etc. on the sidewalks.

Next issue, we need to get the delivery people and all wheeled vehicles OFF the sidewalks.

19
Reply
david natoli
david natoli
9 months ago
Reply to  caly

I agree completely. It’s a city. But many seem to want a more suburban experience. Closing Columbus Avenue so that children can draw on it with chalk is bizarre.

5
Reply
A Holly Patterson
A Holly Patterson
9 months ago
Reply to  Elgin

The people who hate cars and “free” parking so much want to fight a culture war so badly so they latch on to anything, I mean anything to get one over those who disagree with them. We see this now, we see this with e-bikes, we see this with how Uber and Lyft are magically okay in this culture war.

8
Reply
david natoli
david natoli
9 months ago
Reply to  A Holly Patterson

It is very strange to me that the huge influx of Uber/Lyft vehicles on our streets and the consequences from it are consistently ignored.

4
Reply
Gracie
Gracie
9 months ago

We understood that restaurant prices had to shoot up the way that they did during the pandemic. We paid those prices (as much as we could) because we understood the pressures of that unique set of circumstances. The problem is, the pandemic is over and they never came back down. The result for my family is that we have meals almost exclusively at home. Prior to the pandemic, we went out to brunch or dinner at least once a week, sometimes more. There were always at least a couple of low-cost items on a menu that I could choose if we were stretching our budget. Now? Special occasions like birthdays only. I miss it but we just can’t go on hemorrhaging the money.

10
Reply
Eric
Eric
9 months ago
Reply to  Gracie

Avoiding most restaurants these days (how much pasta can a human absorb?) and preparing meals at home is a much healthier option.

3
Reply
Walter
Walter
9 months ago

I would be all-in with the restaurant sheds if there was no cut-offs in our sidewalks and roads. Most of the time it seems where I live it is like single file sidewalks. Our roads are even more blocked with just two lanes, as they were cut because of the bus and bike lanes. Add double-parked trucks doing deliveries, no wonder emergency vehicles have difficulties getting through. So sirens have to be even louder.

2
Reply
DenaliBoy
DenaliBoy
9 months ago

There should be zero sheds. Since Covid is basically over, restaurants should simply proceed as they did in 2019–indoor seating, outdoor seating. If they were successful in 2019 they should be successful now. If not, they can close. Another restaurant will fill the space. It’s a restaurant- get over it. Many of these restaurants take up too much space on sidewalk and the eyesore of trashy sheds. My wife and I will not eat in any restaurant with a shed or outdoor seating

16
Reply
Christine E
Christine E
9 months ago

I don’t mind sheds that actually follow the law. But most do not and should be given no application or grace period. Take a look at the shed in the photo. Or the one at the Consulate. Or many others. The sheds are supposed to be only the depth of a parking space, i.e. the depth of a car, and to be only in parking spaces. Most of them are 1.5-2x deeper as they built on not only the parking space (delineated by 2 white lines) but also on the zebra buffer lane between the bike lane and the parking lane. The bike and buffer lanes are meant to be kept open at all times for emergency vehicles, sanitation trucks, and street cleaning. Any shed built on a buffer lane is jeopardizing public safety and hygiene. DOT needs to step up enforcement and tear them down asap.

5
Reply
Mark P
Mark P
9 months ago
Reply to  Christine E

Correct, as documented in #18 here: https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pedestrians/openrestaurants-faq.shtml

0
Reply
Eric
Eric
9 months ago
Reply to  Christine E

They seem to have no problem going after the fruit and vegetable stands, but the, they probably don’t have a lobbyist working on their behalf.

2
Reply
NYC Moxie
NYC Moxie
9 months ago

UWS resident makes the most accurate assessment of the political climate that clouds the waters regarding the public land giveaway to restaurants. Outdoor sidewalk seating was always difficult to navigate and get approved but the reckless abandonment of that program and in its place yielding unsanitary, vermin habitats with no boundaries (ie-doubling restaurant capacity or taking up not just frontage but down an entire block in front of a playground on both sides of the sidewalk) is overdue to be addressed. I can’t figure out how anyone eats on Amsterdam Avenue north of 79th as it is rat ridden, garbage filled and inhospitable to anyone trying to simply walk. And bless those who take their lives in their own hands by eating in a shed on the West Side of the street-it’s a frogger game in real life given the stealth silent electric bikes and deliveristas abandonment of traffic rules – biking both ways.
I have been utterly astonished at the lack of responsibility shown by the hosts of these shacks towards sanitation & cleanliness -where did the NYC health department go? (Probably the same place as the building department who shamelessly let the new restaurant in Coppola’s space use their shed as an open construction remodel zone-with sawdust paint and table saws not to mention hazardous construction debris).
The devil in the details & as many have mentioned, is that there will be little to no enforcement of the new rules thereby leaving unsightly sheds lingering and excessive space use unfettered.
The current situation of unchecked excessive land use and an environmentally hazardous crisis of vermin and filth (how long have some of the streets gone without cleaning) is the glaring insult to this giveaway that makes ending the sheds a priority given the lack of concern by those who directly benefit.

9
Reply
Alisa
Alisa
9 months ago

There may be interest in reading coverage and comments from the East Village in EV Grieve

https://evgrieve.com/2024/08/the-end-and-beginning-of-curbside-dining.html

1
Reply
Oh hey
Oh hey
9 months ago

It is interesting to see the level of entitlement of some restaurant owners who grabbed public areas during the pandemic and expanded their capacity for free (as someone else here noted, sheds were meant to replace indoor seating during COVID, not expand capacity). And Open Plans claims to advocate for more pedestrian-friendly streets… but most outdoor seating layouts these days restrict the flow of pedestrians in sidewalks, it can be hard to walk on certain parts of Amsterdam Ave

2
Reply

YOU MIGHT LIKE...

New Renderings Show More Details of the Park and Performance Space Planned for Lincoln Center’s West Side  
ART

New Renderings Show More Details of the Park and Performance Space Planned for Lincoln Center’s West Side  

May 19, 2025 | 12:02 PM
Here’s the UWS Dish: CASASALVO’s Cannoli and Maritozzo
COLUMNS

Here’s the UWS Dish: CASASALVO’s Cannoli and Maritozzo

May 19, 2025 | 8:09 AM
Previous Post

Openings & Closings: Blossom; Le Petit Parisien; Central Park Farm Stand; The Avenue; UpDog Studios; Alice’s Tea Cup

Next Post

UWS Smoke Shop Shut Down Had Secret Trap Door To Move Drugs: Sheriff

this week's events image
Next Post
UWS Smoke Shop Shut Down Had Secret Trap Door To Move Drugs: Sheriff

UWS Smoke Shop Shut Down Had Secret Trap Door To Move Drugs: Sheriff

It’s Time to Expect More from Senior Living

It’s Time to Expect More from Senior Living

West Side Canvas: ‘Come Fly With Me’ at Manny’s Bistro

West Side Canvas: 'Come Fly With Me' at Manny's Bistro

  • ABOUT US
  • CONTACT US
  • NEWSLETTER
  • WSR MERCH!
  • ADVERTISE
  • EVENTS
  • PRIVACY POLICY
  • TERMS OF USE
  • SITE MAP
Site design by RLDGROUP

© 2025 West Side Rag | All rights reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • TOP NEWS
  • THIS WEEK’S EVENTS
  • OPEN/CLOSED
  • FOOD
  • SCHOOLS
  • OUTDOORS
  • REAL ESTATE
  • ART & CULTURE
  • POLITICS
  • COLUMNS
  • CRIME
  • HISTORY
  • ABSURDITY
  • ABOUT
    • OUR STORY
    • CONTRIBUTORS
    • CONTACT US
  • WSR SHOP

© 2025 West Side Rag | All rights reserved.