user1111 wrote:
FYI this ordinance was in play way before Prato came to JC... I heard about it last year 2014 when a few businesses were trying to open up on Ocean ave at one of our Block Association meetings. This has very little to do with Prato I do understand why you are all think so.

Many business owners who wanted to open up a cafe were being treated as if they were opening up a restaurant which is quite different.

user1111 wrote:
FYI this ordinance was in play way before Prato came to JC... I heard about it last year 2014 when a few businesses were trying to open up on Ocean ave at one of our Block Association meetings. This has very little to do with Prato I do understand why you are all think so.

Many business owners who wanted to open up a cafe were being treated as if they were opening up a restaurant which is quite different.

Bamb00zle wrote:
For anyone interested:

The following item is listed on the Agenda for the Planning Board meeting today, July 21st, at City Hall, starting 5:30 pm.

?10. Review and discussion of proposed amendment to Land Development Ordinance Definitions for the addition of Cafes. Formal action may be taken.?



Here's a little background on finding these things for those who may not be familiar
Here's the link to the City's meeting Calendar:
http://jerseycitynj.gov/meetings-calendar.aspx

Not all public meetings are included. For example the Construction Board of Appeals, an open public meeting, does not appear. If you click on the name of the meeting you'll see the agendas and minutes and can open as interested.

And here's a little about Open Public Meetings:
http://hpcpsdi.rutgers.edu/NJHPg/downloads/sunshine%20Laws.pdf

The following item is listed on the Agenda for the Planning Board meeting today, July 21st, at City Hall, starting 5:30 pm.

?10. Review and discussion of proposed amendment to Land Development Ordinance Definitions for the addition of Cafes. Formal action may be taken.?

kencares wrote:
All backyards and courtyards should be banned for commercial use. It's a nightmare living above a bar or restaurant with patrons shouting and smoking and playing music all day and night. Keep it inside or out front. Give us some peace out back!

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:

elsquid wrote:

Quote:

...two, i'm gonna (mis)quote a line here. i am a simple man. explain this to me, in small words, how seating on a sidewalk does anything to car traffic? please cite your work.

Small words: Don't have a study handy, but they've done them. Sidewalk cafe seating signals to drivers that people hang out here, and it's not a racetrack. And drivers, being humans, slow down. Other things that send the same signal: Lush street trees, public benches, artsy decorations of various kinds. Anything that says "YO, THIS IS SOMEBODY'S NEIGHBORHOOD. PEOPLE LIVE HERE. MELLOW OUT."

Fair enough. Just to devil's advocate here, almost no one is speeding on Eerie to begin with, as it's a 1lane oneway street.

elsquid wrote:
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:

Fair enough. Just to devil's advocate here, almost no one is speeding on Eerie to begin with, as it's a 1lane oneway street.

Probably true, more or less; people go 30, and I want them to go 20. (That speed limit is becoming the standard for narrow neighborhood streets from NYC to London and elsewhere, as Vision Zero and similar safety campaigns take hold.)

But yeah, sidewalk cafe seating would likely be more effective at traffic calming on the bigger boulevards, where the sidewalks have more room for it anyway.

corybraiterman wrote:

Fair enough. Just to devil's advocate here, almost no one is speeding on Eerie to begin with, as it's a 1lane oneway street.

elsquid wrote:

Quote:

...two, i'm gonna (mis)quote a line here. i am a simple man. explain this to me, in small words, how seating on a sidewalk does anything to car traffic? please cite your work.

Small words: Don't have a study handy, but they've done them. Sidewalk cafe seating signals to drivers that people hang out here, and it's not a racetrack. And drivers, being humans, slow down. Other things that send the same signal: Lush street trees, public benches, artsy decorations of various kinds. Anything that says "YO, THIS IS SOMEBODY'S NEIGHBORHOOD. PEOPLE LIVE HERE. MELLOW OUT."

OneSkirt wrote:

Most people are saying that this needs to be refined, and not just automatically granted to ANY business out of the gate. ..let's say this new business under your windows over-packs its patio, plays loud music, keeps late hours..

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
I'm sorry, Squeeg - both as a homeowner and someone who enjoys outdoor cafes I have to support the new ordinance.

Living in the Heights, we don't have a lot of stylish dining spots - and the only ones with outdoor space I can think of are The Trolley Car and BBQ at Legal Beans (although that may actually be in the Village). The crowds outside on the patio are always pleasant and I've never heard it get so noisy as to be objectionable. These are wonderful amenities, that bring a nice, urbane vibe to the neighborhood - sidewalk and garden cafes, whether ritzy or down home, are super popular in cities all over the world, and I welcome more of it in JC. I'm sure if these businesses want to keep their licenses and the good will of the neighborhood, they will monitor their customers.

And not everyone has a house - you shouldn't assume we all have huge places and private backyards. I live in an apartment - our building has no outdoor space - so these places are where I can take friends and family in nice weather to enjoy a drink and food outside.

corybraiterman wrote:
couple things. one, keep in mind that many of the sidewalks in dtjc aren't that wide to begin with. talde/corrino's seems fine because that sidewalk is a good.... 15? feet. prato's is on a shorter block, but their front seating isn't that bad because their storefront is set in from their neighbors. that house on the corner has fences that reduce that sidewalk to like, 6 feet.

...two, i'm gonna (mis)quote a line here. i am a simple man. explain this to me, in small words, how seating on a sidewalk does anything to car traffic? please cite your work.

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
I'm sorry, Squeeg - both as a homeowner and someone who enjoys outdoor cafes I have to support the new ordinance.

Living in the Heights, we don't have a lot of stylish dining spots - and the only ones with outdoor space I can think of are The Trolley Car and BBQ at Legal Beans (although that may actually be in the Village). The crowds outside on the patio are always pleasant and I've never heard it get so noisy as to be objectionable. These are wonderful amenities, that bring a nice, urbane vibe to the neighborhood - sidewalk and garden cafes, whether ritzy or down home, are super popular in cities all over the world, and I welcome more of it in JC. I'm sure if these businesses want to keep their licenses and the good will of the neighborhood, they will monitor their customers.

And not everyone has a house - you shouldn't assume we all have huge places and private backyards. I live in an apartment - our building has no outdoor space - so these places are where I can take friends and family in nice weather to enjoy a drink and food outside.

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
The whining complaint about allowing cafe seating....

Hmm...

Although I like the idea of having quiet, neighborhood cafes available all over the City, this Ordinance needs improving. Much as I like Prato Bakery and think it's a great addition to Downtown, it concerns me that the Ordinance appears to have been introduced to ?fix? the mess they seem to be in with backyard seating. Without a thoughtful, considered approach, the risk of unintended and damaging consequences is too great.

The City needs a Cafe Use Ordinance. BUT, IMHO backyard seating should NOT be allowed. Inside, front yard and sidewalk (per current requirements) are OK. But backyard has too much risk of disturbing the quiet enjoyment people have a right to expect inside in their apartments and homes. Noise bouncing off backyard brick walls is very disturbing.

The ordinance should be carefully worded to prevent any use change by sleight of hand. For example, include a provision to automatically revoke the initial Cafe use approval if an application for another use is made. Require that any new application be posted prominently on the front of the Cafe for 30 days. The Cafe would have to close for at least 30 days, or until the review was completed, and everyone could see the new Use application. This would effectively discourage change of use ?creep.? I don't want a quiet cafe on my block turning into ?Talde.? The noise from that place is unbelievable.

corybraiterman wrote:

And to the person spouting nonsense about "walkable", you are aware that sidewalk seating actually makes sidewalks less walkable, right?

JcDevil wrote:
Or, we can continue to make our city more vibrant, walkable, and enjoyable to people who actually want to live in a city. Hopefully, those of us with half a brain will contact our elected officials to express how much we hope this ordinance passes.

Get the NIMBYs out of here.

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

kencares wrote:
All backyards and courtyards should be banned for commercial use. It's a nightmare living above a bar or restaurant with patrons shouting and smoking and playing music all day and night. Keep it inside or out front. Give us some peace out back!

i can see the rationale in not allowing backyard and courtyard use, but definitely cafes should be allowed to use frontyard, sidewalk

kencares wrote:
All backyards and courtyards should be banned for commercial use. It's a nightmare living above a bar or restaurant with patrons shouting and smoking and playing music all day and night. Keep it inside or out front. Give us some peace out back!