Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAO-09-030 - Proposed Modifications to the Downtown Patio Encroachment Agreement REPORT REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: May 11, 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Silvia Wright, Manager of Downtown & Community Development PREPARED BY: Cory Bluhm, Urban Investment Advisor WARD(S) INVOLVED: Wards 1 and 6 DATE OF REPORT: April 30, 2009 REPORT NO.: CAO-09-030 SUBJECT: PROPOSED MODIFCATIONS TO THE DOWNTOWN PATIO ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT RECOMMENDATION: That the standard terms of the City’s Patio Encroachment Agreement be changed in accordance with Chief Administrator’s Office report CAO-09-030; and further, That Council Policy I-1205 (Outdoor Patios - Encroachment Agreement) be amended by deleting sections 2 and 3 in their entirety and replacing them with the following new sections: “2. That all applicants wishing to operate an outdoor patio on City property must submit, for approval by the City’s Finance and Corporate Services Committee, a complete patio sketch plan outlining the type, style, colour and materials of fencing and patio furniture (on the understanding that fencing or barriers must be in accordance with the terms of the patio encroachment agreement), as well as an outline of any proposed signage and landscaping, including flower beds and planters. 3. That a condition be included in said agreement that if patron behaviour is a problem, the licensee is responsible for hiring the necessary security personnel; 4. That the patio encroachment agreement may require on any outdoor patio located in the downtown and encroaching on City property, the installation of a sign which reads “No shirt, no shoes, no service” where the patio has not previously been operated under the same owner or where the City’s Manager of Licensing determines that past conduct of the operator creates a concern that the operator may not impose this dress code. 5. That alternatives to fencing may be considered by Council for patios not serving alcoholic beverages on a case by case basis provided; (a) the proposed alternative still acts as a physical barrier; (b) the proposed barrier is fixed or difficult to move; ïî ó ï (c) the proposed materials are approved by the City’s Manager of Downtown and Community Development; and (d) in the opinion of the City’s Director of Operations and Director of Transportation Planning (or delegates thereof), the proposed barrier does not create a hazard.” BACKGROUND: A key aspect of the King Street Master Plan is to create an environment that fosters new and larger outdoor patios and cafes. At least 9 of the existing downtown businesses have previously had outdoor patios on City sidewalks, 8 of which are located on King between Frederick and Francis. On the new streetscape alone, there are potentially 13 additional existing and prospective businesses that could make use of an outdoor patio. At the same time, the City should ensure such patios are attractively maintained, appropriately managed, and do not cause nuisance for other downtown patrons or businesses. As a result, the encroachment agreement process is the key mechanism for balancing business needs with community expectations. REPORT: Over the course of the last year, existing businesses identified a number of concerns with the City’s current encroachment agreement, and have asked staff to explore and evaluate. Recommendations are provided on how the City could best accommodate these requests, while balancing larger community needs and ensuring an appropriate level of control over activities on City sidewalks: stst 1. Currently the patio season is limited from May 1 to October 31. Can these dates be extended where weather permits? The primary reason for having a start and end date is to ensure snow clearing and seasonal maintenance can occur without physical impediments, such as patio fencing. The new streetscape will also require Operations staff to move the bollards on King Street once in the spring and once in the fall. However, as seasonal temperatures can vary from year to year, staff recommends modifying the standard Patio Encroachment Agreement (“Agreement”) to allow for a longer patio season. Any extension would be at the discretion of the City’s Manager of Maintenance and Operations. If necessary, the City could require businesses to remove all patio fencing and furniture within 24 hours, to accommodate any maintenance or snow clearing. 2. Currently only plastic/acrylic/paper dinnerware can be used. Can this be modified to allow china and glass? The purpose of requiring plastic dishware was to avoid injury from broken glass/china, or from bottles being thrown by unruly patrons. Restaurants in particular, however, have suggested that this clause can be detrimental to their service and overall restaurant image. To accommodate this request, staff recommends modifying the Agreement to permit businesses to use glass/china/metal as long as, in the opinion of the City’s Manager of Licensing, past performance has been good and does not raise any grounds for concern in this respect. If concerns are raised, the City could require the particular business to reinstate the restriction at any time. ïî ó î 3. Currently each patio must include a “no shirt, no shoes, no service” sign and a “what do you think of my patio” sign. Can these be eliminated or modified? The purpose of these requirements is twofold: they ensure appropriate behaviour while allowing concerned pedestrians the ability to notify the City of any issues. The businesses, however, find the signs can be detracting to their overall image, and can be disrespectful to their clientele. Staff recommend continuing to require a “what do you think of my patio” sign, but recommend only requiring the “no shirt, no shoes, no service” sign if the City’s Manager of Licensing determines the dress code standard has not been appropriately imposed. If the business has a track record for such incidents, the requirement could be reinstated at any time. 4. Currently the business must keep the patio area free from refuse and must immediately clean up any spills. In addition, the business must keep a refuse container in a clearly visible area. Can the refuse container requirement be eliminated? Businesses where table service is offered have noted that a refuse container is unnecessary, and can often be unsightly and odorous for patrons. Staff recommends modifying this requirement, by taking a similar approach as was noted in items 2 and 3 above, whereby the need for a container will be performance based. If the City’s Manager of Licensing determines the business has not kept the patio free from refuse, the City could then require the placement of a container. 5. Liquor licensing requires a fence to delineate the extent of the patio. The City currently requires this fence for all patios. Could non-alcohol serving patios be exempted? While fence-free patios are common, particularly in Europe, the benefit of the fencing on non- alcoholic patios is to prevent patrons from blocking pedestrian flow on the sidewalks. The City standard is 1.8 metres (~6 feet) of unobstructed sidewalk space, allowing pedestrian traffic and street cleaning machinery to pass. Without clear delineation, it is possible that tables and chairs could be dragged into the sidewalk space. While at this point, staff is not prepared to recommend fence-free patios, staff is prepared to consider similar alternatives for patios not serving alcohol, such as the use of planter pots instead of fencing. Any alternative barrier would need to be fixed or difficult to move, would have to clearly identify the limits of the patio, and would not cause any operational hazards. Any alternative barriers would be considered on a case-by-case basis. The City’s Downtown Community Development staff could provide an assessment of whether or not the visual appearance of the proposed barriers are appropriate. As such, staff recommends Agreement modifications to allow alternative barriers for non-alcohol serving patios in cases specifically approved by Council. Like the previous items, if any business fails to keep its patrons within the predetermined patio limits, the City could require the erection of a fence. The following is a list of additional modifications staff are recommending for inclusion in the encroachment agreement, to enhance the visual appeal of the patios: 6. Fence Design Currently the only fences not permitted are chain link. To ensure design cohesion with existing and future streetscapes elements (such as with light posts and benches), staff recommend ïî ó í modifying the Agreement to i) encourage the use of stainless steel or silver painted fencing on King between Frederick and Francis; ii) encourage the use of black painted fencing on King between Frederick and Cedar; and iii) limit the colour of any patio fence to stainless steel, black or a colour that matches the colour scheme of the business. Fences for existing patios would be grandfathered. 7. Umbrella Advertising Although historically not enforced, umbrellas in public right-of-ways which carry advertising are in contravention of the City’s Sign Bylaw. Umbrellas using solid neutral colours, or colours which match the colour scheme of the business, help reduce visual clutter. As such, staff recommend modifying the Agreement to prevent the use of umbrellas with advertising. 8. Insurance Currently, the City requires patio operators to maintain a minimum of $2 million liability insurance. Staff recommends that, for patios serving alcohol, that the minimum liability be increased to $5 million. It is the opinion of the City’s Legal staff that this is appropriate given the increased risk of incidents where alcohol is being served. COMMUNICATIONS: All 2008 patio licensee’s were mailed a copy of this report and notified of the date for the committee meeting. This report has been discussed with the Manager of the Downtown Kitchener BIA. The BIA is in support of this report, with the exception of the recommended increase in liability insurance to $5 million. It is their opinion that the increased insurance rates may discourage certain businesses from operating a patio. They have not documented any instance of injury or damage that would facilitate an increase in insurance coverage. They have requested that the liability insurance remain at $2 million at this time. CONCLUSION: It is the opinion of staff that the proposed changes are in the spirit of developing a pedestrian- first, vibrant place for people. It provides businesses with the opportunity to offer high quality outdoor patios, but also allows the City to react to patios where inappropriate activity is occurring. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Rod Regier, Executive Director of Economic Development ïî ó ì