Patio ordinance revision due
Rehoboth’s extended patio hours could be permanent
Commissioners to continue noise debate
By Ryan Mavity Cape Gazette December 9
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Customers looking to savor that glass of wine on the patio of their favorite Rehoboth Beach restaurant are in for some good news.
The city commissioners are expected to adopt changes to the patio ordinance allowing restaurants to serve patrons on the patio as long as the restaurant is open.
Commissioner Pat Coluzzi said there were only five complaints in July and August, proof that the extended hours along with improved enforcement from the city’s nighttime code enforcement officer have worked in curtailing the noise problem.
“There’s no reason why people who have patios shouldn’t be able to have the same hours on their patio as their restaurant,” she said.
Coluzzi said the noise and patio ordinances are separate issues and should be dealt with separately. Commissioner Lorraine Zellers agreed.
Zellers said, “I’ve been encouraged by the summer. I think it’s shown that the patios can stay open as long as everyone is on the same page and knows it will be enforced.' Commissioner Mark Hunker, who owns two restaurants with patios, said noise and patios should be separate.
He said people having a glass of wine on a patio are not those making excessive noise and that the city would be making a mistake by marrying noise and the patio ordinance.
Mayor Sam Cooper and Commissioner Bill Sargent disagreed and called for combining the two issues.
A battle between city officials and restaurant owners began in September 2010, when a ctywide crackdown on noise resulted in three restaurant owners being arrested for excessive noise on their patios.
After a series of contentious meetings that brought deteriorating relations between city officials and restaurant owners, the commissioners reached a compromise: they suspended the patio ordinance, which stated restaurants must have the patio clear by 10 p.m., and allowed restaurants with patios to serve patrons as long as the restaurant was open.
The temporary measure expires Sunday, Jan. 1. City officials promised come up with a permanent solution to the patio and noise issues after seeing how well the temporary measure worked.
“I think it was a mistake how this all came down in the beginning, using the patio to get at the noise.
“People have enjoyed the patios. There haven’t been any problems with them. To hold them hostage with the noise ordinance so they can’t be on the patio is just plain wrong,” Coluzzi said.
Cooper said while he doesn’t like linking the noise and patio ordinances, the previous patio ordinance was written the way it was written because of the noise issue.
Enforcement at issue
Cooper said, “The police were enforcing the noise ordinance previously, and people were thumbing their nose at them. That was part of the problem.”
He said the city needs to make it clear to restaurant owners that the noise ordinance will be enforced. After last year's crackdown, restaurant, and some commissioners complained that the city suddenly started enforcing noise rules.
“We need a full understanding of what it is we are going to enforce. Because that is part of what got us into this trouble. We need to be on the record, because I don’t want to come back here with people saying ‘We didn’t know the city was going to enforce that part of the code.’ That’s what happened last time,” Cooper said.
Coluzzi and Zellers agreed the city should be on the record letting restaurant owners know the city will be enforcing the noise ordinance.
“I think the hours can be extended. I think everything else should be enforced. That will control what happens on the patios,” Zellers said.
Cooper: Ordinance lacks teeth
Cooper said the city had a good summer with patios remaining open. But, he said, 'Someone is going to test us one of these days, and I want an ordinance where we can, if someone is truly going to thumb their nose at the city, we can act quickly and decisively and not be bloviating about it. I don’t think we have an ordinance today that really has the teeth in it to do what we need to do.”
Coluzzi suggested discussing the patio ordinance at the Friday, Dec. 16 meeting and then working on the noise ordinance in January.
“I’m fine with working through the noise ordinance; I just don’t think they should be linked,” Coluzzi said.
Cooper said he was willing to move forward on the course Coluzzi suggested with the understanding that the commissioners are serious about strengthening the noise ordinance.
The patio ordinance is part of the zoning code, so a public hearing is required to change it.
City solicitor Glenn Mandalas said the commissioners could adopt a resolution setting a public hearing at the December meeting.
Letter on noise/patio issue
Cape Gazette, December 9, 2011
Rehoboth needs to address patio issue
Credit is due to Rehoboth Beach Commissioner Pat Coluzzi for not allowing the incident of last fall’s selective targeting of restaurants for noise violations to get completely swept under the rug. A temporary extension of outside patio serving hours meant to quell the immediate furor over the injustice is set to expire at the end of this month.
It is very disturbing and quite telling that the city commission has not felt any sense of urgency to deal with this issue, despite their fervent promises last fall to make things right. The strategy now seems to be to ignore the issue and hope that people will just forget about it.
The mayor’s admission that things were mishandled last year hardly serves as a justification, an explanation, or an apology to the businesses that were victimized.
We concerned citizens of Rehoboth also are still waiting for an explanation of what, exactly, happened at the meeting wherein a number of restaurants were targeted for selective enforcement of the patio hours regulation.
There are a number of troubling questions which have yet to be answered.
Among them, why was the patio ordinance used instead of the noise ordinance? Why were certain restaurant owners arrested and others not? Why did the city not check first to see which establishments were grandfathered?
The issue for me is, will we insist that our city officials be accountable for their decisions, or will we allow them to simply offer a halfhearted “excusplantion” and dismiss us?
Let us hope that as this discussion continues in the next few weeks and months we will get the answers we deserve.
Richard Kirchhoff Rehoboth Beach
