Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines sidewalk café plan for 46‑seat sidewalk at Bridal after pedestrian safety objections
Summary
After public comment flagged narrow sidewalks and misleading diagrams, and councilors debated the 46‑seat capacity and a tree obstructing the path, the council failed to approve Chomp Kitchen & Drink's submitted sidewalk‑cafe plan and asked administration to work with the applicant on an alternate layout.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The council held a public hearing on Chomp LLC's application to expand sidewalk premises on Bridal (an 8‑table sidewalk café described in permitting materials as supporting up to a 46‑seat capacity). Neighbors and pedestrians raised safety concerns about the narrow sidewalk and a tree that reduces clear walking space.
Resident Spiro Siliopolis told the council the diagram submitted with the application was misleading because the tree and building edge constrict the walk path and make stroller and pedestrian circulation difficult. "The area around where that tree is is a nightmare for pedestrians," Siliopolis said. The restaurant's representative said the 46‑seat figure refers to maximum bench capacity and not continuous usage: "The 46 seats is in reference to the maximum capacity of the seat of the table ... It seats a maximum of 6 people in 12 years," the owner said.
Councilors debated whether the request set an unfavorable precedent for sidewalk seating, whether the seating could be limited by condition, and whether the application should be continued to allow the applicant to submit a revised diagram showing unimpeded ADA clearance. After motions to continue and amend were debated, the council took a final vote on the application as presented and the motion to approve failed; staff told the council they would work with the applicant on a revised plan that ensures a six‑foot clear pedestrian path where required and addresses the tree placement.
No fines or enforcement actions were issued at the meeting; the applicant was given the opportunity to return with adjusted seating and diagrams.
