95 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

Victoria News
1 a.m. closing causes alarm

By Rebecca Aldous - Victoria News

Published: September 22, 2008 4:00 PM
Updated: September 25, 2008 8:44 AM

If Victoria’s proposed bylaw to mandate a 1 a.m. closing time for downtown takeout eateries and food carts passes, Randy Preston will be out of a job.

For close to seven years he’s operated a Mr. Tube Steak cart. By 11 p.m. the hotdogs are sizzling and ketchup is ready for hungry customs leaving the Red Jacket nightclub on View Street. There Preston stays until 3 a.m.

“The majority of my customers come after 2 o’clock,” he said.

Those customers are the target of the bylaw.

Victoria municipal staff suggest curtailing serving hours of outlets without public washrooms or indoor seating will help eliminate unruly drunks hanging around downtown after pubs and nightclubs close.

It’s a problem that is drawing police away from greater priorities, says Mayor Alan Lowe.

During a city council committee of the whole meeting Thursday, with the exception of councillors Sonya Chandler, council agreed to the the necessity of the bylaw.

Rob Woodland, the city’s director of legislative and regulatory services, estimated the bylaw would cost $150,000 to enforce, adding two new bylaw officers into the fold. But this is a cheaper and easier option than collecting evidence for the city’s nuisance bylaw to use against businesses.

Lowe said he would consider a blanket approach for all of Victoria to avoid people herding to outlying eateries. Coun. Charlayne Thorton-Joe noted retail spaces, such as 7-Eleven and Mac’s, which sell food should be included to ensure people don’t gather at those outlets.

While staff and council mull over the idea at city hall, Preston and other eatery owners are calling the bylaw bunk.

Mohammad Hajivalizadeh, owner of Second Slice Pizza, earns 40 per cent of his income during the late-night rush.

Hajivalizadeh along with other businesses on Douglas Street hired 24-hour security to help deal with problems. He would welcome the opportunity to sit down with police and the city to come up an alternative solution, such as the businesses have taken upon themselves.

There is no magic solution, says Downtown Residents’ Association chair and council candidate Robert Randall, but he too believes the city is heading in the wrong direction.

“We can’t just shut down the restaurants because that is not going to get rid of drunken people,” he said. “People need a place to chill out after a night at the bar. It would be a good thing to have more places that are open late, have more diversity, more choices.”

The situation is exacerbated with eateries located next to taxi stands and phone booths, he added.

Randall said it shows another area where a community court could help downtown Victoria. Fines could be handed out for misbehaving followed up with swift consequences, he said.

“Community court would be a huge part of getting rid of the real trouble makers so that the regular people who just want to go out and have a drink and have a good time can do that.

“We shouldn’t be punished just because of a tiny minority of people who go out to cause trouble; we have got to catch the trouble makers.”

Municipal staff are still drafting a bylaw. Currently, the proposed law would only affect vending carts and restaurants with serving areas of 300 square feet or less. The proposed hours of operation run from 6 a.m. to 1 a.m. The targeted area has yet to be determined.

raldous@vicnews.com

[Baro]

That's so ridiculous. It won't work and the next thing you know they'll want everything shut down at 12, then 11, then 10, then just saying no business can be open after dark. How could anyone think that forcing eateries to shut down would do anything but make public drunkenness even more of a problem?

You know how to solve it? Let pubs, clubs, and eateries open as long as they want. The problem is currently mainly caused by these places having to kick a huge group of drunks out at the exact same time. These people still want to continue their evening but can't since they've just been kicked out of their bar and into the street. If we let places stay open as late as they need, people will trickle out over the course of the night/morning when they're ready to go home.

The stated problem is that we have too many rowdy drunks on the streets at the same time downtown. So their solution is to force more drunks onto the streets??? How can anyone be so idiotic?

[Zimquats]

I'm furious about this.

It boggles my mind that these elected officials could be so incredibly stupid. I mean, how could they think that ruining several downtown businesses is going to help fix a problem that, by and large, doesn't really exist. So people loiter downtown late at night, after a few drinks. Big ****in deal. I feel safer downtown at 3:00am than I do at 3:00pm. I've never been harrassed, yelled at, or bothered by anyone after leaving the bar to get a slice. I certainly can't say that for leaving my downtown office to get some lunch.

And why is the only other option 'collecting evidence' to use against the establishments. Why not go after the drunks who are causing the problems that so urgently need to be remedied at the expense of law abiding citizens? Haha...I know, I know. Victoria Police don't pursue these types of criminals. In the downtown core, they don't go after drug dealers, blatant drug users, drunks, or other vagrants. It's to hard to prosecute and not cost effective. Instead, they grab folks like you and me doing 5kph over the speed limit in our BMW's. It's clean, it's safe, and we always pay...we can't take our eye off that prize to go after people committing actual crimes according to our Mayor (who has done such a bee-a-you-ti-ful job running the police so far).

I tell you, if I owned one of these establishments, there would be no way I'd close. No way I'd pay any fines. And I'd convince my competition not only to join me, but to pool our resources to fight it in court. I'd name not only the City, but the individual councillors. And I'd find out where they live.

Who elects these people?

[jklymak]

Right - instead of drunks milling about in the street, we will now have hungry drunks milling about in the street. How are these carts even remotely the problem?

If drunks are really out of hand, (and I have no evidence they are) they are the problem. I agree with those who say put them in the tank and fine 'em. Do it often and folks will calm down.

[Ms. B. Havin]

I've said it before, but say it again (in the hope that councilors listen): punish the troublemakers, the drunks who act like jerks or even the bars that strategically overserve to pad their sales. Why punish those who didn't cause the problem? What's wrong with authorities here?

[G-Man]

It is absolute insanity. I too hope that owners know that there is no way that this will hold up in court and fight it and sue the city for every lost penny.

As a voter I am shocked that I cannot vote for many of the councillors that are sitting now that they have made this decision. I may have to hold my nose, vote for Sonya Chandler and the rest of the list will all be newbies.

[jklymak]

I think we should close whatever coffee shop they go to so they stop coming up with all these bright ideas.

[zoomer]

/\/\ Bea Holland and Pam Madoff also didn't publicly support the early closures. The online article omitted them in error, but their names were in the print edition.

So...G Man will vote for Madoff and Chandler?

I think that's like one step forward, 2 steps back. Sometimes I wonder if there is a Most Regressive Councillor trophy we're not aware of...

[LJ]

Wasn't the idea to close all the places that did not have any facilities?

The restraunts with washrooms and indoor service could stay open as long as they wanted. The thought being that you would get the clientele off the streets so they could at least use washroom facilities and reduce the noise.

[Jason-L]

1 AM Closing looks back on the docket...

Late-night eateries face forced early closing

[sebberry]

1 AM Closing looks back on the docket...

Late-night eateries face forced early closing

More of the same of Lowe with Fortin? I thought we were in for fresh new thinking and solutions to our problems

[D.L.]

This will just move problems elsewhere, not solve them.

[aastra]

It's always interesting to see how downtown swells and contracts depending on the issue we're discussing. Whenever we want to ban something, downtown seems to become very large:

The bylaw targets takeout restaurants, restaurants with serving areas of 300 square feet or less and vending carts within an area of downtown bounded roughly by Belleville Street, Fairfield Road and Colliston Street to the south, Cook Street to the east, Pembroke and Discovery streets to the north and the water to the west, permitting them to operate only between 6 a.m. and 1 a.m.

[VicHockeyFan]

It's always interesting to see how downtown swells and contracts depending on the issue we're discussing. Whenever we want to ban something, downtown seems to become very large:

Ya, I'm pretty sure a food cart near Royal Athletic Park would not be a problem (or a business success) at 2am.

[aastra]

That area must be the equivalent of about 110 city blocks.

[sebberry]

This will just move problems elsewhere, not solve them.

I'm speaking as someone who does not use the downtown core for entertainment, but I agree with you that bylaws that are set up this way will continue to allow the problematic people to stay downtown after hours, roam the streets, make noise and urinate publicly.

Closing places that don't have washrooms does nothing to solve public urination.

Am I correct in saying that clubs need to shut down within x minutes after final drink service? If so, let's extend that time so patrons have enough time to use the washroom and perhaps get some more food to snack on.