Jump to content

      



























Photo

Latenight nuisance bylaw


  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#1 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 82,943 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 09:45 AM

As Mayor Lowe bends over backwards to supply drug users with facilities for shooting up drugs and advocates that the drug problems are "everybody's problems and not just downtowns," his government is imposing bylaws that will punish tax-paying business owners for serving "rowdy" clientèle, regardless of whether or not the business has anything to do with selling or supplying patrons with alcohol. All this under the guise that there's not enough policing resources to deal with crowd control. Ah, so drugs warrant begging for funds from all munis but an outflow of residents from every nook of the region doesn't warrant inter-municipal support? The City should be cooperating with other police forces, not cracking down on the free market.

As you read this, keep the following line in mind that was printed in today's TC as well with respect to an infraction at Felicita's up at UVic:
The 10 business-day suspension, which began May 18, was the result of a March 16 incident where Saanich police officers happened upon a “regular customer” at Felicita’s who was overly intoxicated. It is a breach of liquor-licence rules to allow an intoxicated person to remain on the premises.

Victoria goes after downtown businesses with rowdy clientele
Take-out places put disruptive behaviour on street, police say

BY CAROLYN HEIMANTimes Colonist staff
Victoria wants to put a little more ammo into a nuisance bylaw it plans to aim at downtown businesses with latenight, rowdy clientele.

The proposed additions to the bylaw will create graduated penalties for operating businesses deemed nuisances because of repeated calls to the police about problems such as public urination, garbage and noise.

The penalties would begin with charging the businesses —including takeout restaurants and bars — for police calls.

The ante could then be upped by ordering them to close earlier and then, as a last resort, taking away their business licences.


But the owner of a late-night pizzeria says it’s not reasonable for the city to make business owners pay a penalty for people’s behaviour on the street.

Jeff Hurry, owner of The Joint on Wharf Street, said he’s merely feeding people, not getting them drunk.

Hurry said he can be responsible for what happens inside his premise, but has little control over what happens on the street, “It’s public property.”


Victoria police operations officer Jim Simpson, who has been waiting three years for an improved nuisance bylaw, doesn’t buy Hurry’s argument.

“The businesses are a magnet for people to come to. The business model is shovelling cheap food out the door along with all the disruptive behaviour. ...The model we encourage is for indoor food services so that people aren’t crowded outside on the street.”

Late-night businesses need to take personal responsibility for the behaviours they attract, said Simpson.

Late-night coffee shops have dwindled in popularity over the years, replaced by small take-out places offering quick food. But Simpson said inside eating locations rarely resulted in many police calls. If there were complaints it usually affected staff or fellow customers, not neighbouring residents.

Two late-night take-out eateries on Wharf Street, which are handy to numerous bars, have been particularly the topic of complaints to police and the city from area residents and hotel staff.[Here's an idea. Promote the prospects of late-night business downtown so more will stay open and, you know, disperse clientele. If cities with millions of residents can do it, so too can Victoria.]

Council’s original nuisance bylaw worked for problem apartment buildings, said Simpson. But it became difficult to link take-out food places and bars with the calls made about people on the street. The proposed changes, which will be discussed further at a public hearing in late June, are intended to tighten that loop.

Hurry said he’d have to lay off half his staff if he was ordered to close by 11 p.m. “We make 25 to 40 per cent of our income between 10 p.m. and 3 a.m.”

“I opened up as a mom-and-pop pizza shop and never imagined there would be issues around that,” he told Victoria council this week. “For the last three years I’ve felt harassed. Now I’m classified as a nuisance property.”

Hurry has installed security cameras around his premises and said he keeps his washroom open for public use most times, closing it occasionally when it is abused. Sometimes patrons rip the sink off the wall and urinate on the floor.

Victoria Coun. Charlayne ThorntonJoe said the city has tried to walk a line by creating rules to address late-night problems without forcing early closing on operations that aren’t a problem.

Earlier proposals suggested a blanket reduction of opening hours for downtown businesses.

Rob Woodland, Victoria’s corporate administrator, said the proposed changes would add another tool for enforcement. “We would still regard it as a tool of last resort.”

A hearing would have to be held before ordering a business to close earlier, or cancelling its licence. The order to cut back hours of operation to 11 p.m. from 3 a.m. would be in effect for six months.

“The bylaw can be used for bars and any businesses causing a late-night nuisance on a repetitive basis. The whole intent is to say that we are serious about this and businesses should be developing their own plan for how to deal” with problem clients, said Woodland.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 01:13 PM

People want to be downtown late at night. The bars have to shut sooner than most cities for some reason and people find them selves with nothing to do. They've go no where to go. They're drunk and having fun and suddenly get kicked out of a bar. I don't have any sympathy for roudy noisy people that cause trouble, but what right does the city to fine businesses for other people's behaviors? Sometimes it seems the city actually wants to kill downtown business and wipe out every trace of fun. If people are being destructive and comitting crimes late at night then punish them or enforce stricter public nusiance laws. Don't blame late-night eateries for giving material support to the 'enemy'. There's two groups you could even remotely "blame" for any trouble. The city for making bars kick people out before they feel like going home, and assholes for not knowing their limit or just being assholes. What the hell does a late night pizza place have to do with this? What next, trying to demonise and fine the public works department for "providing the illumination needed to conduct criminal acts on our streets late at night!" ?

This is knee-jerk punative governing at it worst. I like to get to bed around 1am the latest. I don't like to drink, I don't go to clubs, I think people should be quiet and respectful and have quite a distain for the late night roudies that get out of hand (and only smile at the loud drunks who don't cause any trouble). But I'll defend the rights of these businesses to stay open as long as they want serving what ever food they want. If roudy drunks are congregating at some certain unrelated (unrelated to getting drunk that is) businesses, then maybe we need more late night places to hang out, not punishing the existing ones. We should be bending over backwards to support ANY business that fills up a storefront and pays its rent. if late night places with seating aren't economically viable, then get more people downtown late at night. Doesn't anyone understand that roudies and trouble fill vacumes, not create them. These take-out only places havent driven the late night coffee places out, rather they filled the vacume that the failed coffee places left behind. Why did they fail? Answer that, solve that, and you've solved a big chunk of this problem. I'll give the city a hint, it has something to do with diversity of use and eyes on the street.
"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#3 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 82,943 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 01:26 PM

How about them taxis causing all that boisterousness as people cluster around busy intersections to flag them down?

These policy makers probably didn't think about the compound effect of a small group of people standing still at a street corner. Once you have a group of five people at a light waiting for a taxi, you'll attract a few more who also think it's a good spot the hail a cab. Add a nearby pizza place or any other establishment and all of a sudden you have an agglomeration of people. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS ALL AROUND THE WORLD, planners, council, and local police.

Solution? Stagger closing times and let people leave when they want to leave. I've left the "bar scene" early on plenty of occasions because I was petered out or had other things to do the next day. Drop the silly limits and people will leave when they need to! Simple solution but it requires forward thinking and decisions that the status quo may not fancy. Our councillors shy away from serious debate on these issues because voters tend not to be bar stars or university kids out having some fun.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#4 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,570 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 01:45 PM

What the hell does a late night pizza place have to do with this? What next, trying to demonise and fine the public works department for "providing the illumination needed to conduct criminal acts on our streets late at night!" ?


Good one. I thought Mr. Hurry also made some great points on the CHEK TV item about this.

Methinks officialdom's attitude on this issue is basically the same as its attitude toward new development. Ignore it, thwart it, pretend it's a temporary phenomenon, do anything but actually acknowledge reality.

Good gravy, if there are indeed too many rowdy people on the streets late at night, then why not put an appropriate police presence in relevant locations and nip problems in the bud before they happen? You know, keep the peace? I suppose they'd say downtown is much too vast for such a strategy to work? Victoria is a huge city one moment and a small town the next, depending on the issue people are politicizing.

If a single block of Wharf Street is such a problem then post a couple of cops there after midnight on Friday and Saturday.

#5 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,570 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 01:50 PM

The whole intent is to say that we are serious about this and businesses should be developing their own plan for how to deal” with problem clients, said Woodland.


Is he suggesting the owners of pizza joints should be arresting troublemakers at gunpoint and locking them away?

#6 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 02:05 PM

^ Yes, and ensure that there are sufficient trash containers in the area between the source of the food and the time people need to get rid of the take out containers and pop cans and bottles..

#7 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 02:19 PM

bylaw will create graduated penalties for operating businesses deemed nuisances because of repeated calls to the police about problems such as public urination,


So does this mean that the hotel on Wharf Street with all the greenery between it and the front entrance will be cited if people slip into the bushes to tale a pee?

Or those which had recessed doors that provide a bit of "shelter" will be held responsible...

#8 Ms. B. Havin

Ms. B. Havin
  • Member
  • 5,052 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 03:52 PM

If roudy drunks are congregating at some certain unrelated (unrelated to getting drunk that is) businesses, then maybe we need more late night places to hang out, not punishing the existing ones. We should be bending over backwards to support ANY business that fills up a storefront and pays its rent. if late night places with seating aren't economically viable, then get more people downtown late at night. Doesn't anyone understand that roudies and trouble fill vacumes, not create them. These take-out only places havent driven the late night coffee places out, rather they filled the vacume that the failed coffee places left behind. Why did they fail? Answer that, solve that, and you've solved a big chunk of this problem. I'll give the city a hint, it has something to do with diversity of use and eyes on the street.


I think Baro nails it, esp'y the bit re. trouble surging into a vacuum, whether it's rowdies or cheap take-out joints. The solution is to get more people doing the right thing, not creating an even bigger dead zone (vacuum) by shutting everything down.

In addition, I'm 100% with aastra on this, too. What would be the big hardship in putting a couple of cops on Wharf at 2 a.m.?

...why not put an appropriate police presence in relevant locations and nip problems in the bud before they happen? You know, keep the peace? I suppose they'd say downtown is much too vast for such a strategy to work? Victoria is a huge city one moment and a small town the next, depending on the issue people are politicizing.


But instead, shutting things down is how civilized society is supposed to deal with trouble-makers? Make everyone go away, stay home, pack up -- regardless of whether they're behaving or not?
When you buy a game, you buy the rules. Play happens in the space between the rules.

#9 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 04:04 PM

I recall that this has been an ongoing "irritation" on both Wharf Street and on Douglas Street for a lot of years...

I'm sure that if one reads the City's Committee of the whole minutes in March of 2005, one will see the pressure that the Hotel (a hotel/residential strata property ?) has been putting on the Council of that day..

The topic recalled for me the disgust I felt in reading the conclusion of this article...

I don't see haow City Council can in good faith extend the hours of nearby pubs - under consideration now, and target two small food businesses..




LATE SNACKS UNDER ATTACK



Don Denton/News Staff
Owner Ian Laird stands outside his Pita Pit on Wharf Street. A proposed bylaw would force it to close earlier.


By Brennan Clarke
News staff
May 11 2007


Council moves to curb hours of two late-night eateries near hotel

Ongoing problems with rowdy drunks downtown have Victoria city council threatening to limit the hours of late-night eateries that serve inebriated bar patrons.

Councillors last week gave preliminary approval to a nuisance bylaw amendment that would allow the city to “restrict operating hours for businesses that violate the bylaw.”

The move is primarily aimed at two late-night eateries on Wharf Street, The Joint and the Pita Pit, which attract drunken revellers after last call.

Pita Pit owner Ian Laird said the bylaw amendment unfairly targets his business, which has limited seating and caters to the after-hours bar crowd.

“I know they’re coming directly at me with this one,” Laird said. “It looks like they’re coming at us because we don’t have the seating.”

Rather than blaming restaurants that feed bar patrons after closing time, the city should be focusing on personal responsibility and bars that over-serve their customers, he said.

“I don’t have this problem at two in the afternoon and I’m not doing anything different at two in the morning,” he said. “Not all these people are coming to see me. I’m not serving any alcohol.”

But at Thursday’s committee-of-the-whole meeting, councillors voted unanimously in favour of targeting late-night food vendors and asked city staff to work with police and bylaw officers to monitor eateries whose customers cause problems.

Described as a last resort in enforcement, the bylaw would allow the city to force a vendor to close at 11 p.m. for up to six months.

“What we have is a bunch of liquor establishments that get everybody liquored-up and then push them onto the street. Then they go outside and go to some eating establishment which doesn’t have enough seats and cause problems out on the street,” said Coun. Dean Fortin, who nevertheless voted to crack down on the eateries. “So who’s actually causing the problem?”

Outside the meeting, Coun. Charlayne Thornton-Joe said the bylaw amendment is “not a silver bullet” but argued that trying to target bar owners would be far more complicated.

“You’re not sure what bar (troublemakers) have been attending. They may have gone to several bars,” she said.

Area businesses, notably the Regent Hotel, have for several years been complaining about noise, fights and public urination as intoxicated people loiter along Wharf Street and in Bastion Square during the wee hours of the morning.

Regent Hotel manager Earl Wilde said late-night problems on Wharf Street have “grown exponentially” in recent years, a development he blames on the Pita Pit and The Joint, a pizza-by-the-slice establishment.

“This isn’t a complicated issue. The Pita Pit and The Joint are near a residential facility. They are profiting from other people’s misery, and that doesn’t work for me,” he said. “I’ve been fighting this thing for a decade. It’s absurd.”

The bylaw amendment is a great idea “as long as they enforce it,” Wilde added.

“If they enforce it, it will put them out of business.”

mailto:bclarke@vicnews.com



#10 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 08:32 PM

The pita pit sells hard drugs and is a sex-slavery ring right? That's the only way that bolded portion would make ANY sense to me.

... right?


uhg..

When someone says selling a pita is profiting off human misery I think perhaps we could use a slight perspective re-evaluation.
"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#11 zoomer

zoomer
  • Member
  • 2,144 posts
  • LocationVictoria - Downtown

Posted 26 May 2007 - 08:49 PM

It's crazy to blame places that open late, maybe if we had more than a handful there wouldn't be a problem as the late night revelers would be dispersed throughout downtown and folks might actually be able to find a table to sit down at. Yes, perhaps the city should force all restaurants to stay open until 4:00 a.m.! ;)

Better yet, why not have a closing time of 5:00 a.m. for nightclubs/bars? That way most people would disperse naturally instead of spilling out at 2:00 a.m.

#12 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 11:48 PM

OK. I'll chime in. Speaking from the bar that I run, if they let us stay open until 4am, we would see way less leave at 2am. We already see less leave between 1-2 then 12-1. 2-3 or 3-4 leavers would be minimal. It's BS that they would find a way to fine businesses that do not serve liquor. We are willing to pay extra for the calls we make to cops to deal with rowdy patrons in our place, but not outisde our property, unless we made them very drunk - for that we accept responsibility. The boss here has always said that if folks here get drunk and stupid, it is mostly our fault, so we have to deal with it. But these late night places have nothing to do with the earlier booze-serving of folks.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#13 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 09:01 AM

The restaurants could help themselves by opening their washrooms and maybe have an employee shovel the sidewalk once in a while if it gets really bad. The City can help by having more than one garbage can for the entire side of the block and maybe install a washroom or at least a urinal in Bastion Square.

I'm not sure how I feel about the 4 am closing because there seems to be some grumbling about it in Vancouver. I don't know if it's considered a success there or not.

My genius solution is instead of pizza and pita, serve turkey with stuffing and gravy and everyone will be nice and sleepy and quiet.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#14 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 09:55 AM

Nothing puts a drunk to sleep like poutine.
"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#15 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 10:39 AM

Holden..

I've never been on Wharf St. at bar closing time..

According to the recent news the washrooms are open except when damaged...

debris .. on the street outside... does that mean that everyone rushes over for Pita.. or a slice of pizza to quell the "munchies".. and then has a street part there? How long does it last from the time the bars close to when the customers of the bars and the food providers leave the scene?

In summer infrequently, I get awakened by home going revellers crossing St. Ann's.. They don't hang around...

Anyone experienced the Wharf St. scene?

#16 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 10:44 AM

I suspect the restrooms are closed more often than the article suggests.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#17 Galvanized

Galvanized
  • Member
  • 1,196 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 10:56 AM

I've witnessed the mayhem on Douglas St. It goes from the Mac's on Yates down to Johnson near the Pizza place and across to 7-11. Good luck trying to get a cab from there.

I'll let you in a secret if you are down there at closing time. Go down the block to the Brickyard, short line up and better Pizza and when you walk out the door there is a cab to flag down instantly that's coming back downtown via Yates St.
Past President of Victoria's Flâneur Union Local 1862

#18 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 11:16 AM

Is the problem the result of having a major part of the "entertainment district" consolidated in one area?.. After seeing a mass of people descending View heading towards Bastion Sq. at Government one evening, I wondered if they had all arrived by bus?

I recall going to St. John's in the early '80's and enjoying being able to walk a good distance along Duckworth St. between bars.. Then, George St was created by the downtown redevelopment concepts to create a boutique, cafe/bar space... It was made up along a street that was the service lane to stores on the "high street".. It was good when it was getting going, but by the time I left in '97, it was wall to wall bars... and just "maggoty" with patrons on the busy nights...

As some of you are aware, Water St. is/was the "high street" in ST. Johns.. I still have a picture in my mind of the effect on property values and heritage values the lucrative nature of having a bar in the entertainment district is... A "heritage" building, - with no setbacks, I deviate.. was generally boarded up on its Water St. side... one of the multiple and possible storefronts has been taken over and, approved by city officials, to provide a second means of egress for the bar that was located on the "backstreet"... IIt said to me that the bars were more inportant than the "heritage", and that the efforts at downtown economic and social renewal had been overcome by the financial interests of both the City and the bar industry... The bars thrived... the City was able to say that the downtown tax revenues increased.. The suburbs grew as fewer people wanted to live near downtown..

Humpth.. we keep talking about mixed use.. vibrancy, but, are we just talking?

I don't know what happens when big bars dispersed in other parts of the city empty at closing time.. It will be interesting to hear about the anticipated impact of the residential buildings at The Radius on the bars in the SOFAC area -individual property owners will be introduced into the area, and like society some will be night people, others will not and not like being disturbed ?????

#19 Icebergalley

Icebergalley
  • Member
  • 596 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 11:20 AM

Thanks Galvanized..

We're getting off Wharf Street...in terms of the extent of the issue... I had asked about that in a posting when this topic was being addressed on another thread... What's the extent of the late night nuisance problem.. ?

So, why is it that two establishments are being targeted for punitive action?

Another thought..

Are these late night establishments not part of the DVBA? And, has the establishment of the Beverege industry Assoc. recently created "cover" for the bars at City Hall? And, What is the position of the Downtown Resident's Assoc.

#20 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 82,943 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 11:24 AM

I think the City is after any late-night eatery or business and not just these two. They were targeted for the article, however.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users