Outdoor Dining Areas

Online comments: 16

• Daniel Bersohn

  This is badly drafted. A reference is proposed to 6 RCNY 2-55(a). This was repealed in 2024 and replaced by 34 RCNY 5-11. 34 RCNY 5-11 makes no reference to a 36″ aisle requirement within the sidewalk cafe. In fact 34 RCNY 5 makes broad and generic references to other rules/laws but does not specifically reference the ADA, for example, where a 36″ clear path requirement could be found.

  On the merits and putting aside issues of sloppy drafting, dogs are non-permanent fixtures. The rule should require patrons to cooperate to move their dog to facilitate access and provision of a 36″ clear path just as someone who’s got their chair too far from the table needs to scoot in to let someone by. The proposed rule creates a discretionary, probabilistic, and potentially retaliatory enforcement nexus for restaurant operators that seems unacceptable by failing to assign responsibility to clear obstruction of the path to the dog owner. The rule is also in that part or all of a dog may encroach into a required access aisle at times, but can be readily relocated as needed. So if a DOHMH inspector were having a bad day and threw down a tap measure to the tip of a dog’s tail and found 30″ clear they could issue a violation, when the solution would just be to say “Hey Fido, come here!” and the dog would move out of the way.

  Comment added June 23, 2025 12:39pm

• Nose to the ground-Paw on the hypocrisy!

  Ah yes, finally — the Department of Health has unleashed its regulatory might… on dogs in cafes. Because when it comes to ensuring 36 inches of clear passage, it’s clearly the Labradors and poodles of New York who are the real menace to public access. Meanwhile, elderly residents and disabled New Yorkers are left sniffing around for their long-forgotten ADA rights as city agencies (looking at you, DOT) continue to block curb access, eliminate street parking, and ignore the basic requirements of Access-A-Ride users in the reprehensible and ILLEGAL “Open Streets” program.
  This amendment pretends the city cares about “unobstructed space” — but only when it’s a terrier in the way of a waiter, not a restaurant shed, bike lane bollard, or an entire café blocking what used to be a sidewalk, curb cut, or legal drop-off zone.
  If only Access-a-Ride vans could bark, maybe then they’d get a real 36-inch clearance too.
  Let’s not pretend this rule is about safety or access. It’s about optics — a tail-wagging gesture while the real issues of mobility, equity, and ADA compliance are treated like a chew toy. Dogs might block an aisle for a second, but the City has been blocking human beings with disabilities for years, and no one’s writing up new rules for that.
  Pretending that 36 inches of clear space is a matter of public concern is laughable- unless you’re finally ready to fetch those same rights for the New Yorkers who’ve been disenfranchised from their equal rights.

  Comment added June 23, 2025 4:50pm

• Dudley Stewart

  To whom it may concern, as a restaurant owner who relies on my outdoor dining to stop my restaurant from having to close and get rid of all the jobs I’ve created, I feel that this rule would place undue strain on me, my business and pretty much all business owners.

  Can’t you just let us work out these situations ourselves? If someone doesn’t like a screaming baby should we have to come up with rules to ensure the right distance exists between tables to reduce the sound of the baby?

  Having to create 3 feet of space between tables will limit how many tables we can put outside, which limits how much money we can make. Maybe we’re not saying it loudly enough, but the restaurant industry is suffering. Business is down across the board for everyone, we need every help we can get. We need support, and breaks, and incentives. We need the city to have our backs.

  At least just leave us alone to try and survive while following the existing rules.

  Also, 3 feet between tables, or between the chairs on each table? Who will come measure this? I guarantee you that one inspector will let it slide, another will measure between the tables and yet another will measure between the corners of the chairs, and all of them will find a way to fine us regardless.

  Please don’t do this, please just help us, we need it.

  Comment added June 24, 2025 11:43pm

• Paul D'Avino

  Dogs should not be allowed in any restaurant, whether diners are inside or outside. It is disgusting and absurd to think that animals (besides trained licensed support animals) have any right to be near people eating food.

  Comment added June 25, 2025 1:03pm

• bianca

  The 36 inches rule sounds quite complicated and actually insane. I think allowing dog in an outdoor dining space should be just allowed. As a dog owner, I I think it is very important to have some space where we can sit with friends and our dogs to relax without so many complicated rules. We already are not going to dine indoors so why not let us dine outdoors? Common sense and respecting the restaurant other paytons is the key. I agree with what is written in one of the comments: “ the solution would just be to say “Hey Fido, come here!” and the dog would move out of the way.”.

  Comment added June 26, 2025 9:53pm

• Deborah M. Farley

  The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene is proposing to amend Chapter 32 (Dogs in Outdoor Dining Areas) of Title 24 of the Rules of the City of New York (“RCNY”) to align with changes to the definition of “sidewalk cafe” made by Local Law 121 of 2023.

  I agree with establishing a 3-foot service aisle. Establishing a 3-foot service aisle will provide ample space for servers, staff, diners, and dogs, ensuring unobstructed movement. This extra space will help reduce tripping hazards and prevent leashed dogs from getting tangled in the legs of tables and chairs or with passing pedestrians.

  Additionally, the increased width of the 3-foot service aisle will enhance hygiene. Dogs often drool and may urinate when confined to sidewalk café seating areas or roadbed dining sheds. Allergy sufferers would also benefit from the expanded area created by this 3-foot aisle, as it reduces exposure to allergens and reduces discomfort.

  It is crucial to recognize that some dogs accompanying diners are service animals. Unlike regular pets, service animals perform specific tasks and should be able to navigate without interference from other diners’ pets. A service dog needs to move freely, without being hindered by the congestion and distraction caused by other animals. The 3-foot aisle will also help limit potential dog-to-dog altercations.

  Creating a 3-foot service aisle will provide more accessible space for servers, staff, and diners, improve safety, reduce tripping hazards, prevent dog-to-dog altercations, and minimize the risk of leashed dogs becoming entangled with furniture and pedestrians. This will contribute to better hygiene and safer accommodations for all servers, diners, and their dogs.

  Comment added July 8, 2025 1:10am

• Deborah M. Farley

  The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene must take immediate action to amend Chapter 32 (Dogs in Outdoor Dining Areas) of Title 24 of the Rules of the City of New York (RCNY) to reflect the changes made by Local Law 121 of 2023 regarding the definition of “sidewalk cafe.”

  It is essential to establish a proper perimeter treatment to clearly demarcate sidewalk cafes. This should consist of a removable and self-supporting barrier such as a wall, railing, planter, fence, or stanchion with rope. However, using a “stanchion with rope” is wholly inadequate and fails to provide an effective perimeter or a clear, unobstructed path for pedestrians.

  The current conditions are untenable. Dining establishments with sidewalk cafes and roadbed sheds directly opposite each other allow dogs in both areas. When altercations occur, dogs can easily dart out from under the flimsy “stanchion with rope.” This lack of a proper barrier creates a dangerous situation where aggressive dogs can burst onto pedestrian pathways, putting innocent bystanders at risk.

  We must support the establishment of a 3-foot service aisle to address this serious issue. Inadequate barriers like “stanchions with ropes” force a dangerous crowding of diners, dogs, tables, servers, and staff. I witnessed a shocking incident where an innocent pedestrian, while walking her dog, was caught in the middle of a chaotic dog fight. Dogs from both the sidewalk tables and the roadbed shed engaged in an altercation, and the diners exhibited no reasonable control over their pets.

  The unleashed chaos left the pedestrian trapped and her dog attacked, causing her considerable distress. To ensure the safety of all patrons, we must implement a 3-foot service aisle. This critical change will provide the necessary space for servers, staff, diners, and dogs, allowing for safe and efficient movement. The current outdoor dining arrangements are insufficient and pose a substantial risk. It’s time to prioritize safety and enforce effective solutions. Outdoor dining must be safe for all the city’s residents.

  Comment added July 8, 2025 4:31pm

• Leslie Clark

  The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene is proposing to amend Chapter 32 (Dogs in Outdoor Dining Areas) of Title 24 of the Rules of the City of New York (“RCNY”) to align with changes to the definition of “sidewalk cafe” made by Local Law 121 of 2023.

  I agree with establishing a 3-foot service aisle. Establishing a 3-foot service aisle will provide ample space for servers, staff, diners, and dogs, ensuring unobstructed movement. This extra space will help reduce tripping hazards and prevent leashed dogs from getting tangled in the legs of tables and chairs or with passing pedestrians.

  Additionally, the increased width of the 3-foot service aisle will enhance hygiene. Dogs often drool and may urinate when confined to sidewalk café seating areas or roadbed dining sheds. Allergy sufferers would also benefit from the expanded area created by this 3-foot aisle, as it reduces exposure to allergens and reduces discomfort.

  It is crucial to recognize that some dogs accompanying diners are service animals. Unlike regular pets, service animals perform specific tasks and should be able to navigate without interference from other diners’ pets. A service dog needs to move freely, without being hindered by the congestion and distraction caused by other animals. The 3-foot aisle will also help limit potential dog-to-dog altercations.

  Creating a 3-foot service aisle will provide more accessible space for servers, staff, and diners, improve safety, reduce tripping hazards, prevent dog-to-dog altercations, and minimize the risk of leashed dogs becoming entangled with furniture and pedestrians. This will contribute to better hygiene and safer accommodations for all servers, diners, and their dogs.

  Comment added July 10, 2025 2:10pm

• Elizabeth Savage

  Definitely put in the 36 inch rule for places that allow dogs

  Comment added July 14, 2025 4:24pm

• Elizabeth Savage

  Please put in the 36 inch rule for places that allow dogs outside. Patrons should not have to climb over your dog to get to their table.

  Comment added July 14, 2025 4:25pm

• n pasley

  Yes! This rule is really needed and should be adopted. I agree completely with Deborah Farley and Leslie Clark, and do not need to reiterate their very sound reasoning.

  Comment added July 14, 2025 5:59pm

• Karen B.

  Dogs or no dogs, the sidewalk cafes need a 3 ft service aisle AND a barrier between the cafe and the pedestrian area. I see little or no enforcement of either of these requirements.

  Comment added July 14, 2025 7:15pm

• Gail Fox

  I vote yes

  Comment added July 15, 2025 10:46am

• Lora Tenenbaum

  This is a great idea.

  The pre-pandemic sidewalk cafe rules required a 3-foot service aisle for waitstaff. THAT WAS A MISTAKE TO DROP. ADA rules require it for wheelchairs, but the DOT doesn’t seem to think that necessary to follow. (Along with the rule about a barrier between the cafe and the sidewalk.)

  Maybe a DHS rule will work. The reasoning is sound.

  Comment added July 16, 2025 2:43pm

• Nora Cole

  I see a real necessity for a rule like this. I like dogs, but I am uneasy to be in close quarters in a confined space with dogs — especially when there is more than one dog present. Some dog owners may be well meaning, but many others are now violating the rules against dogs in places like supermarkets and indoor restaurants (I recently sat next to one that was on the floor or in the lap of the diners at the next table in a small, crowded indoor restaurant recently). We can’t count on dog owners to be willing and able to control their animals when the furniture in cafes is close together (and this is true in almost all the outdoor cafes I have seen). There already has to be a barrier of some sort that protects sidewalk passers-by (both people and dogs) from dogs that are inside outdoor cafes with their owners. Some protection also should be provided to other diners (and their dogs) that are also within outdoor cafes. Requiring some unobstructed space around tables where dogs are allowed is a necessary step in the right direction.

  Comment added July 16, 2025 4:48pm

• Megan

  I am writing to express concern regarding proposed increased regulations on outdoor dining, particularly in relation to space clearance requirements and animal presence. I am a bar and restaurant owner that has navigated outdoor dining since its inception during Covid-19 and then through the most recent iteration that had us all jumping through insane hoops in order to get 16 seats. While we understand the importance of maintaining safe and accessible streets for all, I urge you to consider the unintended consequences these regulations will have on small businesses and the long-term success of the outdoor dining program.

  Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, business owners have adapted quickly and effectively to managing outdoor spaces—including responsibly regulating the presence of animals and ensuring customer safety. These practices have become part of daily operations, and further restrictions are not only unnecessary, but risk penalizing the very businesses that helped make outdoor dining a vibrant and essential part of our city’s recovery.

  Increasing mandatory clearances beyond what is already required may appear minor in theory, but in practice, it significantly reduces the amount of usable space for tables. For small business owners operating within tight margins and in narrow frontage areas, even a loss of a few feet can mean the difference between profitability and hardship. These regulations would directly impact revenue at a time when we are still recovering from years of economic uncertainty and facing an increasingly expensive cost of doing business.

  Outdoor dining has been one of the few silver linings of the past few years—bringing life to our streets, supporting jobs, and creating a sense of community. We ask that you work with small businesses, not against them, by preserving flexibility in how we operate these spaces. Thoughtful, collaborative policy—not one-size-fits-all regulation—is the key to maintaining the success of this program. For a city that claims to support and love small businesses in recent years its just feels like we are being regulated into extinction. Help us be successful with thoughtful regulations, not ones that further strangle us.

  Thank you for your time and consideration.

  Comment added July 16, 2025 10:10pm