Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Placemaking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies Donnelly’s Pub sidewalk‑cafe permit but asks staff to rewrite policy and delay removal deadline
Summary
Council voted 6–0 to deny Donnelly’s sidewalk‑cafe application after the building owner refused to sign the required easement agreement; council simultaneously directed staff to return with policy revisions to reduce landlord vetoes and to hold off enforcing a July 20 removal deadline pending a policy update.
The Iowa City Council on July 14 voted to adopt staff’s resolution denying a sidewalk‑cafe permit for Donnelly’s Pub after the restaurant’s new building owner declined to sign the easement agreement the city requires for use of the public right‑of‑way. The vote was 6–0 on the motion to deny, but councilors also directed staff to return at the next meeting with recommended policy revisions and to delay enforcement of the removal deadline so the operator would not be forced to dismantle an existing patio while the city considers changes.
Owner Josh Emerfall (Speaker 11) told council that Donnelly’s has operated a sidewalk cafe since 2018 with prior owner permission and that the new landlord “simply refuses to sign the…agreement.” He argued the landlord’s refusal functions as an unexplained veto over a public amenity and asked the council either to approve the application or allow continued operation while the policy is updated. “No operator can keep investing in a space…that a landlord can just take away on a whim,” Emerfall said.
City staff and the city attorney explained the current sidewalk‑cafe policy requires owner consent for the easement agreement and that staff lacked grounds under the existing policy to approve the permit without the owner’s sign‑off. Councilors acknowledged the tension between tenant stability and property‑owner rights and discussed policy options such as distinguishing planters (which may remain year‑round) from structures attached to buildings, increasing deposit amounts to cover removal costs, and providing a path for long‑standing operators.
Council direction and next steps: while the council adopted the denial (the resolution before them), members asked staff to prepare a recommended policy change to allow operators who meet specific safety and access criteria to continue operating without a landlord's repeated sign‑off, to raise the deposit amount to cover removal costs, and to return with a resolution at the August 4 meeting; staff agreed to hold off on the July 20 removal action pending the policy revision. The actual permit issuance would remain a staff‑level action once the policy is revised.
