Patios Prevail; Fines Squashed

What about the city's lost permit and parking revenue from these scofflaws?

I'd like to congratulate this administration for fixing a problem completely of it's own making. Way to look like heroes and not zeroes for getting something so painfully obvious so very wrong and then undoing it before any damage was actually done. Way to be go getters.

I used to stop at Koffee in the morning but there's no where to park now. They have outdoor seating in the back. They have seating on the sidewalk. Why do they need seating in the street? Oh, because they can. That's the new rule - if you can then you should. Silly.

This is part of an overall plan to make downtown less congested with cars. The dreaded trolley car option will not happen and people who desire to practically drive into the places they wish to visit will have to find another way. Trolleys or other inter city transit might be the answer, if there were a remote, pay parking lot to leave their chariots!!! It could work. Make NH more green, clean, and safe!

Correct move. Thank you NHV.
I walk by here every day and counted that Koffee actually only takes 2 of 8 parking spaces. It just looks like more because they also have corrals on the curb bump out near Whitney. The massive end of day car pileups in n Audubon (for picking up the kiddies) will not be solved by two more spaces.

If this was in the hood they would have shut it down.

New Haven's downtown has too many vacant storefronts and more business continue to close. One reason for this is lack of convient parking for customers. I, along with many other people I know, try to avoid downtown because of the lack of convient parking and decreased retail offerings. When faced with a choice of shopping and dining out downtown or in one of the surrounding suburban towns, the choice becomes pretty clear in favor of the suburbs. Additionally, I am disabled, and require a vehicle to get around, but with almost no handicap parking on downtown streets, it becomes difficult. I used to frequent shops on lower Orange Street, but since it's been closed off and spaces taken for dining, I have not frequented any of my old haunts. Handicap parking is plentiful in the suburbs, and should be equally accessible in downtown New Haven. Removing valuable parking spaces and closing streets will just compound the problem of quality retailers and their customers fleeing downtown.

I love outdoor dining but do not feel safe sitting in spots on the road that are meant for parking cars. Flimsy lattice work panels will not protect me from a car's front end! Between the lack of parking, cost of parking and lack of public restrooms, I am visiting and shopping downtown less and less.

Dining patios provide a number of benefits for the city. But they are, in effect, an easement on public property. Participating restaurants should pay a reasonable fee for this right, reflecting lost parking meter revenue.

AS, the requirement to take down the patios in the winter makes sense. In a normal winter, they would impede snow plowing, particularly when located on one-way streets as is the case with Koffee (a great place, BTW). Obviously, this was not a normal winter, and the restaurants should not be fined.

Urbancarpenter, seating in the back of Koffee was removed in connection with work on the Farmington Canal Trail. Duncan has said that the area will be reopened and replacement trees planted when the project is completed, hopefully in a couple of months. And Robn is right about the congestion at the end of the day.

CY2, New Haven is not Bethany. It is as close as Connecticut comes to being a real city. In cities, you sometimes have to walk a block or two to your destination. Contrary to popular belief (held by wife, among others) people do not have a constitutional right to park for free in front of their destinations. As ALW notes, it is important to provide parking for people with mobility disabilities. But that is not what we are discussing here.

ThreeFifths, if I believe Sandra’s has a sidewalk (as distinct from a street) patio. Obviously, the same policies and practices should apply citywide.

I’m not a sit-in-the-corral-on-a-freezing-day-and-consume-(fill-in-your-favorite-food) type of person but apparently there are many because I see them all the time. I also notice that the number of people in the corrals routinely exceed displaced car capacities. To me that debunks the destroy business argument.

How is this fair? What about the businesses that did pay a $1,000 (or however much it cost) to remove their patios as per the agreed upon terms of the patio permit? They followed the rules and got short-changed on their ability to capitalize on outside dinners, but others ignored the agreed upon terms and it's OK, or even something to be proud of? How does this encourage citizens or businesses to follow the law? Instead of allowing people to do what they want, why doesn't the City think about the desired goal and shape permits/laws around those goals. Everyone should be treated fairly. Enforce the permits as written and change them next year.