197 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

Facebook:

Hey Soccer Fans. Swans Pub will now be bringing in a tv to watch world cup games at mid day until the end of the Tournament. Today is Spain Vs Portugal

Is that rude to the legacy of Michael Williams? Or fair game, now that he's long gone?

[Holden West]

William's rule was no TV, no dartboards, no barstools.

The keeper of his estate also has said the pub is to be run as if he were still alive.

I don't think Williams is spinning in his grave, but he might be slowly rotating.

[VicHockeyFan]

William's rule was no TV, no dartboards, no barstools.

Didn't know that one, but now that I think of it.... even those high end tables off the pillars kinda things, you just stand at.

[Holden West]

Williams wanted people to mingle, not hog a barstool all day like a potted plant.

[pontcanna]

Swan's has had telly before from time to time, mostly during the Stanley Cup playoffs (when Canucks are involved) and normally in the side-pocket part of the bar near the main entrance.

[Holden West]

It's nice to go to a pub and not be assaulted by thirty-seven noisy TVs and those damn Keno machines.

[Mike K.]

Man, I was at Brown's this evening and they had all screens showing a documentary about the murders in Colombia after Pablo Escobar's death. The show was, let's just say, not exactly an "upper."

[Holden West]

^Must have been this.

[VicHockeyFan]

So here's an interesting situation.

Swan's now has a huge sign on their main door to the pub/restaurant, indicating that the patio is licensed as a restaurant, and needs you to order food with any liquor. OK, fair enough, that's sort of typical liquor rules for food-primary locations. In actual fact, you can order liquor only, you just can't have lots of people doing that.

Anyway, this has been the case for many, many years at Swan's.

But now I guess the liquor inspector is cracking down, and having them run by the letter of the law, and/or Swan's is taking the regulations too seriously.

So here is the new rule. If you are dining on the patio, you may not enter the pub through the main Store St. doors, but must enter and exit the patio via the sidewalk entries.

Secondly, you may not even pass through the indoor pub area to go to the washroom. So if you need to use the bathroom, you must exit the patio via the sidewalk exits, then walk outside along the sidewalk, and re-enter the Swan's through the main Store St. doors, then proceed to the washrooms to the left. You may not turn right and go near the pub.

Do the same when you return.

Now, bear in mind this only applies to customers, as your serving staff will bring your food and drinks, both alcoholic or not, through the pub, and that pub is fully open to patrons most hours. It's just that YOU can't go through it if you are dining on the patio, even if you are 19, or 90 years old.

I challenge anyone to tell me how these type of laws protect the safety of the public.

[Sparky]

^ They don't. These types of laws are stupid. If I were the owner, (read University of Victoria) I would have my law students all over this issue. Great practice for the students.

[Bob Fugger]

I don't understand how any of their operation would be considered food primary - they are a brew pub. I mean I've heard of food primaries designating a certain section as a lounge, but not vice-versa.

[VicHockeyFan]

I don't understand how any of their operation would be considered food primary - they are a brew pub. I mean I've heard of food primaries designating a certain section as a lounge, but not vice-versa.

Two licenses, like Sticky Wicket. I suppose after Sticky got a suspension for guys carrying liquor through the restaurant portion, they closed off the stairs that lead from the main bar, down into the restaurant licensed area. That area is the very south west corner lower area. I suppose they are just lucky the fire inspector didn't mind. I don't know where minors that dine in this area have to go to use washrooms, maybe they have to leave via the Courtney exit, then walk around the Douglas sidewalk and go back in the hotel lobby, then through the back door behind the front desk to the washroom in the foyer off Big Bad John's.

Swan's serves food at 7am, so to do that they have to have a restaurant license for the deck.

And let's be clear here, none of this conversation is about the part of Swans to the left after you enter, the restaurant section. We are just talking about the patio that surrounds the pub on the south and west sides.

[Holden West]

^ They don't. These types of laws are stupid. If I were the owner, (read University of Victoria) I would have my law students all over this issue. Great practice for the students.

How would that work? Would a successful challenge mean kiddies would be permitted to romp around any bar that held two licenses?

[VicHockeyFan]

How would that work? Would a successful challenge mean kiddies would be permitted to romp around any bar that held two licenses?

Not romp around, but walk through, just like they can walk through a Vegas casino.

I'm unsure what a minor in a bar is going to see that will turn him into an alcoholic just by witnessing it as he walks to the washroom.

But what is strange is that Swan's has decided to make it policy that nobody can walk through the licensed area if they are/will be/have been eating on their deck. And this is likely because they are scared stiff of just one 18-year-old getting caught by the liquor inspector doing it, so they have enacted a ridiculous restriction because the liquor police are idiots. Same with the closed stairway at Sticky. They did not need to close it, but found it too burdensome to worry about one 19+ guy carrying a beer with him as he walks into the restaurant area, even though that restaurant area looks no different from the rest of the room, has no real barrier or threshold distinguishing it as a different class of area.

And here's a funny thing. I can have a 7-year-old entertainer in my 19+ liquor-primary nightclub at 1:30am, if she is entertaining (playing music, singing, DJing), and she can even walk through the bar unescorted and use the washrooms when she needs to. But between sets she has to go outside or into an unlicensed area. Go figure.

[David Bratzer]

So here's an interesting situation.

Swan's now has a huge sign on their main door to the pub/restaurant, indicating that the patio is licensed as a restaurant, and needs you to order food with any liquor. OK, fair enough, that's sort of typical liquor rules for food-primary locations. In actual fact, you can order liquor only, you just can't have lots of people doing that.

Anyway, this has been the case for many, many years at Swan's.

But now I guess the liquor inspector is cracking down, and having them run by the letter of the law, and/or Swan's is taking the regulations too seriously.

So here is the new rule. If you are dining on the patio, you may not enter the pub through the main Store St. doors, but must enter and exit the patio via the sidewalk entries.

Secondly, you may not even pass through the indoor pub area to go to the washroom. So if you need to use the bathroom, you must exit the patio via the sidewalk exits, then walk outside along the sidewalk, and re-enter the Swan's through the main Store St. doors, then proceed to the washrooms to the left. You may not turn right and go near the pub.

Do the same when you return.

Now, bear in mind this only applies to customers, as your serving staff will bring your food and drinks, both alcoholic or not, through the pub, and that pub is fully open to patrons most hours. It's just that YOU can't go through it if you are dining on the patio, even if you are 19, or 90 years old.

I challenge anyone to tell me how these type of laws protect the safety of the public.

They are a private business and it's up to them to figure out how they will comply with the LCLA regulations. If this is the procedure that works best for them, great.

I don't think it has anything to do with taking a drink from one area of Swan's to another. Minors are allowed in the food primary but not in liquor primary area. So perhaps this is in place to prevent the 17 year old UVic students from starting in the patio area, eating chicken wings, and finishing their night with tequila shots at the bar.

Anyway, it looks like Swan's is hoping to get rid of their food primary license, meaning that minors will not be allowed in any part of the establishment:
http://www.victoria....wans_Notice.pdf

[sdwright.vic]

^^^ Also (while stupid) if the liquor primary is at capacity, and someone leaves the restaurant primary to go to the washroom, and enters the liquor primary and crosses it (instead of going outside to reenter through an area not included in their red line) then the liquor primary is over capacity. As well they can not control if someone under age goes through the door if they do not just "ban" everyone.

Its their officer being a d@ck. But they have been cracking down on all restaurants that have been acting as bars. Have a friend who manages a small restaurant with a small liquor primary and a larger restaurant, they come in on regular basis to check him and his liquor to food ratio's to person ratios.

[jaylow]

In the wicket, there are washrooms down stairs that minors can use, unless they closed them, haven't been there in a while.

[G-Man]

^^ Is it person ratio or simple sales that have to be above 50% food vs liquor. I was unaware that persons factored in.

This doc supports that there is no person ratio:

http://www.pssg.gov....ood-primary.pdf

[VicHockeyFan]

^ Is person ratio or simple sales that have to be above 50% food vs liquor. I was unaware that persons factored in.

It's a completely grey area like most of the liquor regulations. But like the new drinking/driving laws, or the proposed new speeding laws, its so much easier to bite the bullet and do whatever they liquor guys say, as fighting any of their orders is expensive in lawyer fees you can never get it back even if their case is ridiculous. You have to fight it at two "quasi-judicial" steps before you even get in front of a real judge in round #3.

[sdwright.vic]

^^ Is it person ratio or simple sales that have to be above 50% food vs liquor. I was unaware that persons factored in.

This doc supports that there is no person ratio:

While the doc does not support a per person ratio, a liquor inspector can interpret that "enough" food was not sold based on the customer count.

So let say the customer count for the day was 50. Then lets say that of that 50 the food counts show only 15 entrées and 5 appetizers where purchase during the course of the night. Now lets say that 235 total drinks where ordered.

I have heard it done by a liquor inspector that the food sales where not high enough in accordance to the amount of liquor sold with the number of people that where in the establishment.

So why there is nothing in writing, don't forget that inspectors have the right to interpret...