Much drama: How sidewalk seating affects public safety downtown
“Much” drama surrounds GPD’s enforcement of the City’s sidewalk cafe ordinance (Sec. 26-244.) Read the back story at the YES! Weekly blog here.
From a comment thread on at Ed’s:
“I’m still trying to understand the connection between cafe seating for paying customers, and latenight loitering.” — Ed Cone
and
“Only a bureaucrat at a nonprofit who gets paid for sitting at a desk would try to link crime and ’safety’ with putting a few tables out on a 20 foot wide sidewalk to make room for outdoor seating.” — Reader 100
For what it’s worth, here’s my understanding of the connection between sidewalk seating and public safety:
Late night (after midnight), the sidewalk cafe area of Much Restaurant & Bar becomes more of a bar and less of a restaurant, similar to Churchill’s. People are sitting or standing around the five or six tables in the roped-off sidewalk area, and there is alcohol served, but I don’t believe there’s much, if any, dining going on. (Not a judgment, just an observation about how the sidewalk cafe area is utilized late-night.)
The “N” Club is a couple of doors down from Much. Their capacity is about 800 and they’re usually full on weekends. Late night, there are usually 150+ people hanging out on the sidewalk downtown, and some of them stop to talk to those sitting or standing within Much’s sidewalk cafe area. I often stop to say “hello” to people I recognize. But the socializing between those on either side of the ropes can further impede traffic on the crowded sidewalk.
I don’t know the capacity of Much, Heaven and Carmine’s (all in the same building), but I’d estimate that between the three businesses, they have at least several hundred people on the weekends. There are a lot of people coming and going on this block after midnight (there are a number of other businesses in this same block), and when the bars close, there are at least 1000+ people on the sidewalk in one small area at the same time.
There’s about 3-5 feet of clearance between Much’s ropes and the trees planted by the street. When people can’t get through that small space because of the crowds on the sidewalk, they walk out into the street, which is also crowded with vehicles. I’ve had to stop and wait for people to pass by at this spot many times, and had to walk single file behind people, with a lot of “Excuse me,” and stepping to the side and trying to get out of people’s way — and this is a lot earlier in the evening, not late night. As it gets closer to closing time, police sometimes have to block the street off with police cars to keep pedestrians from being hit by vehicles. This happens on a regular basis on weekend nights. And keep in mind that not everyone walking around down there is sober, so it gets… interesting.
Much management notes that the sidewalk ordinance doesn’t say that chairs, tables and ropes have to removed from the sidewalk, so they stack their tables and chairs and slide them against the wall. But they leave their ropes in the same position, which means that pedestrian traffic continues to be obstructed in this area.
So what we have is a successful and crowded block of downtown which has led to some crowd control issues, which is exacerbated by having a substantial part of the sidewalk roped off. A crowded downtown is not a bad problem to have, really — success is a good thing — but it requires a creative and collaborative resolution.
Mr. Scarfone has a successful business and he wants to continue to be successful. Nothing wrong with that. GPD has a crowd of folks to protect and serve at night downtown, and they want to keep people safe while maintaining order. Nothing wrong with that, either. Council should work in cooperation with both the business owners and the police department (and residents) to find the best solution for everyone. I appreciate Council’s support for business owners. And I think they owe their officers the same level of support.
Final thought: I love downtown Greensboro at night — it’s a lot of fun and a little bit crazy. And I believe that business owners have a right to make a living. But bottom line: None of us has the right to ignore a law just because we don’t agree with it. Work on changing it? Yes, absolutely! But until that happens — obey it! Or wear the bracelets. 
August 16th, 2008 at 1:43 am
“I say that it would be a good thing to barricade one or two blocks for pedestrian/bicycle traffic late at night…”
I think that’s well worth considering as a policy. It is apparently already happening in practice, and on a recurring basis, as I understand it.
“A real city will have ALL TYPES of people walking around, not just the elite few!”
I think we do have all types of people downtown. That’s part of the appeal to me.
August 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
And I did forget to add this to the discussion:
Yes, the sidewalk ordinances should be updated and changed. Cars already rule Greensboro, so why should we not encourage more pedestrian-friendly movement Downtown? I say that it would be a good thing to barricade one or two blocks for pedestrian/bicycle traffic late at night: This would create a plaza-like feel, a practice that is commonly being done in many European cities. Instead of making lawbreakers out of enterprising business owners, the city should take the lead in helping them stimulate the central business district!
August 15th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Hello, Again! Apparently Greensboro will have to prepare for population growth, both in the city and downtown. Big cities like New York are used to heavy pedestrian traffic on their streets late at night, and this would be a minor thing for them. I like the idea of having the entire block barricaded after 10 p.m. or so to vehicular traffic (bicycles allowed), which would increase the safety factor for the drunk and sober walkers in that area. If city leaders would see the increased activity on the sidewalks not as a threat or nuisance, but rather a win-win situation for everyone involved, the future of the Gate City’s downtown nightlife would be golden, indeed! We need to think OUT of the box, and expand it even more. The more inviting Downtown can be to everyone who goes there, the more lucrative Downtown will get! A real city will have ALL TYPES of people walking around, not just the elite few!
August 9th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I don’t know Mr. Scarfone and I don’t want to cast aspersions on him. My assumption is that he’s a businessman trying to a living. I’ve never been a customer of Much, but I have had dinner in the sidewalk seating area of Metro, right across the street, and I really enjoyed the outside accommodations. (The wine was good, too. A zinfandel, I believe. Or maybe a merlot. I don’t recommend the soup or the hummus, however. Go to M’Coul’s or Liberty Oak if you want good hummus. Just good food in general. And good wine, too. Also outside seating. Not on the sidewalk. But still outside. End of segue.)
A few years ago, I had dinner at a restaurant in downtown Charlotte that had an interesting outside seating area. The entrance to the restaurant had been moved back, so that it made a large covered seating area in the front, just off the sidewalk. I believe that it was elevated a bit, too. I can’t remember the name of the restaurant, but the food was good and we really liked the outside seating, which was also protected from wind and rain. And all of it was under the restaurant’s roof, so it was on their property, not the City’s.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I know Scarfone. He comes from a family with a long history of skirting the law at every turn.
As for sidewalk seating: IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL, PERIOD. If a business wants to offer outdoor dining they have that right but outdoor dining should be contained to property owned or leased by that business.
Allowing sidewalk dining is another form of corporate welfare and businesses located outside of downtown are not allowed to conduct business on city owned property.
August 8th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Yeah, I’m disappointed in the way that Scarfone, Meekins, Matheny and Allen are handling this. Not that they disagree with the ordinance. They have a right to disagree with it and to seek a change in the ordinance. I’m disappointed that they think it’s OK for Much management to break laws they don’t agree with and to disrespect the officers who are paid to enforce the law. That’s real sad. Arrogance annoys and frustrates me. It destroys community.
August 8th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
CM, I couldn’t agree more. The police went above and beyond to give Scarfone and his manager numerous warnings and chances to do the right thing. There has been talk about Much being targeted for harrassment. If he has indeed been singled out, it’s because he is the only one who consistently chooses to ignore the law. I have no problem with the Council changing the ordinance to find a business-friendly yet SAFE solution. What I do have a problem with is Scarfone and Meekins (and even Councilman Matheny) trying to paint the officers in a negative light for doing their job.