Outdoor Dining Structures - Streateries and Parklets

The outdoor eating spaces looks like trash. There is no uniformity and it takes away parking for businesses like mine that have no need for out door space. Clients have to weave in and out of this maze of what amounts to a make shift income generator for restaurant. I get that these space where useful during the pandemic but now it seems unnecessary. If however people want to have this type of eating space, make them uniform and open. I have walked past Tadeo's on Holly and their outdoor space feels more like a hostel and blocks the openness of downtown. The homeless people like it because it creates a barrier for drug use, sidewalk sex and more. I have witness both.

I understand the concerns of wanting to shove parking out of downtown, and the constant advocacy for making Bellingham car-free, but the reality is that more than half of Whatcom’s population lies outside of Bellingham, and it’s unreasonable to expect that someone in Glacier is going to bike or hop a WTA bus to come into downtown on a Friday night. Realistically, parking needs to be available, and it needs to be relatively convenient.

That said, the businesses that offer these parklets need to be paying a reasonable fee for the space they’re taking up. I think a fair compromise is to grandfather in the existing businesses by allowing them to pay the current fees for two years while they bring their units up to the specifications suggested in the study, which means no plastic sheeting or other shoddy-looking materials. I support the idea of these structures having character, but also being attractive. I also didn’t see much in the study about sanitation or pest control, but I hope those are being accounted for—the last thing Bellingham needs is to make the list of “rattiest cities in America.”

These businesses need to pay for the space they’re taking up. Whether a person thinks those parking spaces should be parking or not is beside the point. If you were renting an apartment and found out your neighbor was being gifted an extra unit across the hall and being allowed to make money off of it to boot, you’d likely be angry. This situation is no different. Other businesses have to pay for the square footage they use, and these restaurants should have to as well. If it’s not a great business proposition for them, they can remove the parklet—it’s not up to the city to subsidize them as some kind of community service (especially if the food is lousy).

Adequate parking is important in our downtown space and affects downtown businesses when customers decide the search for parking isn’t worth it. Reducing the use of cars downtown also sounds great but will cause many suburban customers to go elsewhere. A vibrant downtown has clear thoroughfares and attractive storefronts. I like the idea of consistent design standards and the partial use of sidewalk space where possible for streateries. Any business using public space for income should pay market rate and I believe our state Constitution prohibits local government entities from waiving that.

Streateries make our communiity a more enjoyable place to be. As others have noted, we should be taking more steps to encourage people-oriented development, especially as a community so concerned about climate change.

While I am for the ADA accessibility and safety improvements generally, I am against the substantial fee hike. Any step taken to increase the fee is more justification for businesses not to start or keep streateries.

The fee should be set at the prevailing commercial lease rate per 100% of the space used, the city should not offer preferred treatment (operating subsidy) to one category of business.

I love the Streateries and frequented many establishments with outside service during Covid, even in the middle of winter. To have these in place in case of a viral surge, and for immunocompromised customers would be a boon for both customers and businesses. Even though business have to incur extra expense with staff, heating, electricity, fans, etc. I understand the need for a fee, but this seems too high and would cause many to take down the Streateries. They support small, local businesses and emphasize people and foot traffic over cars, slows down car traffic (yay!) something Bellingham has been advocating for a while. People have gotten used to them, me included, and I don't want to lose them.

As a downtown resident since 2005 I would like them all to go away. We need the parking because City Planning has already permitted so much housing without adequate parking and these are tacky and a misuse of parking that all of us pay for. Let’s get back to before Covid living and clean up our streets so we can just go into the restaurants. It’s very hard for disabled people to navigate the junk on the entrances to stores and dinning. We want our City back !!! It belongs to the people it should not be “ for sale” by the city department .

Allowing food & beverage businesses outdoor dining options during COVID was helpful. Though, the cost of removing parking spaces for outdoor dining was borne and continues to be a burden on non-food & beverage businesses. Fewer parking spaces has a high correlation with reduced customer volume. There should be improvements in measuring the impact reduced parking has on non-food & beverage businesses so that the benefit to one form of business is not a cost carried on the backs of other businesses.

I love that our downtown businesses are able to make the street a more usable community space, but they should absolutely have to pay fairly for the space they use. Not every business got these special opportunities. The proposed plan of $840 per parking space is absolutely fair. Make money on public land, pay the city for it. The rate is not even high. A business who has been getting a roofed seating area for $50 a year while I have to pay $10,000 a year to afford a room to sleep in...

I'm a big fan of the streateries and general increased pedestrianization of downtown and give people who prefer to eat or drink outside the option to do so. Every decision that puts people over cars will be a benefit and the downtown parking structure rarely fills up, from what I've seen, so parking is ample already. Contrary to other commenters, I would prefer that they not be standardized aesthetically. It's a lot more fun to have personality and liveliness. I very much support that ADA compliance be part of the mix though. Chances are, it is required by the ADA already.

I'm not a business owner, just a customer of many downtown businesses (and some in Fairhaven too). Our business community has had to endure enough hardship lately, with Covid, traffic detours, road work, etc. It's quite brutal to pile on additional fees when some of them are just treading water at this point. Shouldn't we be trying to encourage small businesses instead of making their lives harder?

Also, I completely agree that traffic lanes should not be used for streateries. Holly is an unsafe disaster.

There is a wealth of studies/literature that shows parking is a low value use of land in a urban core. I think it is great that the city is recognizing that land (parking stalls) has greater value than its historic use and I fully support the city charging more for the use of that land.

I strongly urge the Council to NOT raise the fees for streeteries. There is plenty of parking, and we should be discouraging car use downtown anyway. Furthermore, existing parking fees should be enforced much more instead. There are way to many people who don't pay for parking at meters because they figure they are not going to get a ticket anyway. Streeteries enhance the walkability and heighten the appeal of downtown.

The reports assessments and recommendations are reasonable. When making use of public space for private ventures and operations market rate based fees should apply to that operation. In fact, I believe state law requires it.

I love the streeteries and appreciate the thoughtfulness of this recommendation. I also agree with the commenters calling for more pedestrian-friendly space and better bike flow through the city. Close whole streets to cars (railroad and parts of downtown Fairhaven are good candidates), convert most non-arterial streets in the city to one way, and use the extra space to build PROTECTED bike lanes.

1. add additional pedestrianized spaces jn addition to streateries.

2. eliminate fees and promote active use of public ROW over car storage.

As a downtown business owner and daily bike commuter I'm in full support of removing driving lanes and parking spaces to make the city center a more vibrant and accessible space. I agree with earlier commenters on the importance of enforcing ADA accessibility and ensuring pedestrian safety (sidewalks need clear sight lines to oncoming traffic).

I also agree that Holly needs to be rethought. It's one of the most useful and most dangerous bike routes across downtown. That was true before the pandemic, as well; taking away a few streateries on the 200 block might let cars drive faster but it won't make the road any more accessible to cyclists of all ages and abilities.

As a commuter cyclist, I find the Holly Street and Railroad Street outdoor structures impeding traffic flow with cars, pedestrians and cyclists.
From Black Sheep, Camber and Old Town restaurants, the road navigation is seriously impaired and dangerous.

While these were 'fun' during COVID lets get back to normal. These eateries take up parking spaces and make parking and driving downtown difficult. Having a table or two outside the restaurant is one thing; but also I'm not going to eat outside while watching someone smokes off foil.