Temporary street dining spaces became a lifeline for restaurants during the Covid-19 pandemic, giving businesses extra room at a time when indoor capacity was severely restricted. Years later, however, many of those improvised spaces are disappearing as cities introduce permanent rules, higher costs and more complicated permit systems.
For restaurant owners already struggling with rising operating costs, the question is whether the “streatery” can survive the bureaucracy designed to regulate it.
From pandemic lifeline to costly investment
At Marx Cafe in Washington, DC, owner Daniel Quiroz once had a street-side dining shed capable of seating around 30 customers across three parking spaces.
The enclosed structure became more than additional restaurant space. Quiroz described it as a community gathering place where many of his regular customers knew one another.
That ended in February, when city officials ordered him to remove the structure because it did not comply with the requirements of Washington’s new permanent streatery programme.
Quiroz says the loss has cost his restaurant around 20% of its business. He has been trying to build a replacement, but months of dealing with permits and approximately $10,000 spent on architects have left him questioning whether the investment makes sense.
“They make it so difficult that you won’t want to apply for one,” he said.
His experience reflects a wider problem. Temporary pandemic rules allowed restaurants to use streets and parking spaces for outdoor dining with relatively few restrictions. The arrangements proved popular in many cities, but permanent programmes have brought new requirements covering accessibility, hygiene, design and public-space use.
For restaurants operating on narrow margins, those rules can make outdoor dining significantly more expensive.
New York bets on year-round dining
New York City is now attempting to reverse some of the decline.
The city had around 12,000 restaurants participating in its outdoor dining programme at its peak, but only about 1,600 currently have permits. In August, the City Council approved legislation allowing outdoor dining structures to operate year-round rather than only during the warmer months.
Previously, restaurants could use their outdoor structures between April 1 and November 29. The seasonal system meant businesses had to install, dismantle and store their structures every year.
Brooklyn Council member Lincoln Restler, who sponsored one of the measures, said those costs had become prohibitively expensive for neighbourhood restaurants.
The changes build on reforms to the city’s outdoor dining programme introduced in 2023, which were intended to simplify the permitting process. Restaurant operators, however, have continued to complain about delays and the costs associated with complying with the rules.
Melissa Fleischut, president of the New York Restaurant Association, said the impact of the reforms would depend largely on the detailed requirements for winter operations.
“The devil’s in the details here,” she said.
London expands al fresco dining
London is taking a different approach, focusing on expanding outdoor dining during the summer rather than making it a year-round option.
In June, City Hall revived and expanded its Summer Streets programme, providing almost £500,000 in grants for outdoor dining areas and other community spaces across the capital.
Fourteen projects in 12 boroughs received funding for initiatives involving streets, car parks and other public spaces. The programme also supports night markets, festivals and other outdoor events.
The move comes as Mayor Sadiq Khan seeks greater influence over London’s fragmented licensing system. Licensing rules currently vary between boroughs, and City Hall wants a more unified system that could reduce the regulatory burden on hospitality businesses.
Justine Simons, London’s deputy mayor for culture and creative industries, said the aim was to make outdoor dining a normal part of life in the capital rather than an occasional feature.
The hospitality industry says the additional space could be particularly valuable at a time when businesses are facing higher costs.
Shain Shapiro, an urban policy expert specialising in music and night-time economies, said the city could encourage more spending at restaurants and bars simply by making more space available to them.
The debate is especially visible in Soho, where some local opposition has prevented parts of the district from participating in the mayor’s outdoor dining initiatives.
For Irene Margariti, owner of Greek restaurant Suvlaki, restoring outdoor dining in Soho would be transformative for small businesses.
She recalled the later pandemic period, when temporary outdoor dining made the neighbourhood feel almost like a Greek island, with people eating and drinking outside. Today, she says, some of the smaller streets feel considerably less lively.
Washington struggles with the cost
Washington’s experience illustrates the difficulties that can arise when temporary structures become permanent.
On the street where Marx Cafe operates in Mount Pleasant, almost all of the previous dining sheds have disappeared. Local organisation District Bridges is helping Quiroz and several neighbouring restaurants raise money to build shared structures, but other businesses have decided not to apply.
The new system can require restaurants to obtain as many as four permits from different agencies, each with its own documentation and requirements.
Mitra Moin of District Bridges said completing the process could effectively become a full-time job for a small business owner.
The financial burden is also substantial. Permits, public-space fees and professional design and construction costs can add up to tens of thousands of dollars.
Washington officials argue that the city is already subsidising the programme. The fee for restaurants using parking spaces has been reduced from $20 to $15 per square foot, according to Department of Transportation Director Sharon Kershbaum.
But the city’s ability to provide additional financial support is limited after Congress cut Washington’s budget by $1 billion last year.
Kershbaum said applications could theoretically be approved within three weeks, although requests for exceptions or incomplete paperwork can significantly extend the process.
For Quiroz, the new design requirements could also reduce the value of the investment. Under the new size restrictions, he estimates that his replacement structure would seat only 12 people — less than half the capacity of his previous shed.
With annual operating costs estimated at around $6,000, he says it could take years to recover the investment.
Even so, he does not want to abandon the application. After already spending $10,000 on the project, he says walking away now would mean losing the money entirely.
Across New York, London and Washington, cities are therefore facing the same fundamental question: how can they preserve the economic and social benefits of street dining without making the system so expensive and complicated that the restaurants it was designed to help can no longer afford it?
Be First to Comment