New city liquor bylaw to limit sale of fine wines in Vancouver restaurants

[nova9]

Originally Posted by raggedy13

How much is the typical corkage fee?

I've seen $15 at an average restaurant. Probably more so at higher ones but you wouldn't do it at a higher-end restaurant as they take great care of their wine selection anyway.

[kylemacmac]

City reconsiders liquor bylaw that would have hurt Bono's party

By Gordon Hamilton, Vancouver SunNovember 2, 2009

Diners may not have to worry about being denied a $50 bottle of wine in Vancouver because they only ordered a hamburger.

The City of Vancouver has withdrawn a bylaw that contained a provision limiting alcohol sales to no more than 50 per cent of overall receipts, NPA Councillor Suzanne Anton said Monday.

She said councillors received an e-mail from city staff informing them the bylaw would not be on the agenda for Tuesday’s council meeting. Withdrawing the bylaw means that council will have time to re-consider it, she said.

“Clearly it needs to be re-considered and this gives us the opportunity. I am guessing not too many people are going to want to shut down a restaurant for serving a cheap hamburger and an expensive bottle of wine.”

The bylaw would put virtually every high-end restaurant in the city at risk of being shut down for violating the law. It limits the value of alcohol sales to no more than 50 per cent of all sales over any eight-hour period. The eight-hour limitation would mean lunch sales, where alcohol sales tend to be lower, could not be included to average out dinner sales, where diners might choose a bottle of wine that costs more than their meal.

And dinners like the one rock star Bono held at Vancouver’s Coast Restaurant after U2’s concert here last week, would be illegal.

“Let’s say Bono were to come in and he were to celebrate because it’s the last concert of the tour and he were to order several very expensive bottles of champagne for him and the 12 other people he brought into the restaurant. If the liquor inspector came into the restaurant at that time, then we would have a problem,” said John-Paul Lamb, vice-president of marketing the Glowbal Restaurant Group, owners of the Coast.

Bono’s party was drinking vintage champagne, which generally sells in the $700 to $800 a bottle range.

“You cannot consume that much food to cover it. That’s what everyone is up in arms about,” Lamb said of the bylaw.

Ian Tostenson, president of the B.C. Restaurant and Food Association, applauded the decision to reconsider the bylaw. “I think it is bold of them to reconsider it,” he said.

The bylaw prompted a storm of angry reaction after articles in The Vancouver Sun described its potential impact. Anton said the provision slipped by councillors when the new licencing policy for restaurants was approved Oct. 8.

It was to be made law Tuesday. She described the clause restricting the value of sales as an “unintended consequence” of a bylaw that generally was supported by stakeholders for other provisions, such as extending the hours of alcohol service in restaurants. “In this case immediately after the policy was passed it was apparent there was a serious problem with it that no one picked it up on; not industry, not staff and not council,” she said.

ghamilton@vancouversun.com
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

[kylemacmac]

Originally Posted by nova9

I've seen $15 at an average restaurant. Probably more so at higher ones but you wouldn't do it at a higher-end restaurant as they take great care of their wine selection anyway.

$15 for a bottle of wine? You might as well just buy a bottle of wine at the restaurant. I'm talking about another level of liquor license where the restaurant doesn't serve liquor, but allows people to bring their own. In between unlicensed and licensed. Why not? Many places around the world have restos like this. At a bring your own wine/beer restaurant you never have to pay a corkage fee, and it usually makes for a cheap, drunk, night out.

[delboy]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

City reconsiders liquor bylaw that would have hurt Bono's party

By Gordon Hamilton, Vancouver SunNovember 2, 2009

Diners may not have to worry about being denied a $50 bottle of wine in Vancouver because they only ordered a hamburger.

The City of Vancouver has withdrawn a bylaw that contained a provision limiting alcohol sales to no more than 50 per cent of overall receipts, NPA Councillor Suzanne Anton said Monday.

She said councillors received an e-mail from city staff informing them the bylaw would not be on the agenda for Tuesday’s council meeting. Withdrawing the bylaw means that council will have time to re-consider it, she said.

“Clearly it needs to be re-considered and this gives us the opportunity. I am guessing not too many people are going to want to shut down a restaurant for serving a cheap hamburger and an expensive bottle of wine.”

The bylaw would put virtually every high-end restaurant in the city at risk of being shut down for violating the law. It limits the value of alcohol sales to no more than 50 per cent of all sales over any eight-hour period. The eight-hour limitation would mean lunch sales, where alcohol sales tend to be lower, could not be included to average out dinner sales, where diners might choose a bottle of wine that costs more than their meal.

And dinners like the one rock star Bono held at Vancouver’s Coast Restaurant after U2’s concert here last week, would be illegal.

“Let’s say Bono were to come in and he were to celebrate because it’s the last concert of the tour and he were to order several very expensive bottles of champagne for him and the 12 other people he brought into the restaurant. If the liquor inspector came into the restaurant at that time, then we would have a problem,” said John-Paul Lamb, vice-president of marketing the Glowbal Restaurant Group, owners of the Coast.

Bono’s party was drinking vintage champagne, which generally sells in the $700 to $800 a bottle range.

“You cannot consume that much food to cover it. That’s what everyone is up in arms about,” Lamb said of the bylaw.

Ian Tostenson, president of the B.C. Restaurant and Food Association, applauded the decision to reconsider the bylaw. “I think it is bold of them to reconsider it,” he said.

The bylaw prompted a storm of angry reaction after articles in The Vancouver Sun described its potential impact. Anton said the provision slipped by councillors when the new licencing policy for restaurants was approved Oct. 8.

It was to be made law Tuesday. She described the clause restricting the value of sales as an “unintended consequence” of a bylaw that generally was supported by stakeholders for other provisions, such as extending the hours of alcohol service in restaurants. “In this case immediately after the policy was passed it was apparent there was a serious problem with it that no one picked it up on; not industry, not staff and not council,” she said.

ghamilton@vancouversun.com
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Thank god! It does appear that we have more sensible people on city council these days. A few years ago this would have been approved. Given how expensive booze here, it would be difficult to keep evening sales of food and booze on par. If my wife and I have a couple of drinks each with dinner, it's not uncommon for the bill to be more booze than food. Especailly if places are open later, people are more inclined to order a couple of appies with drinks rather than big meals.

[nova9]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

$15 for a bottle of wine? You might as well just buy a bottle of wine at the restaurant. I'm talking about another level of liquor license where the restaurant doesn't serve liquor, but allows people to bring their own. In between unlicensed and licensed. Why not? Many places around the world have restos like this. At a bring your own wine/beer restaurant you never have to pay a corkage fee, and it usually makes for a cheap, drunk, night out.

I imply that I only do it at restaurants where I know I wouldn't want to order their wine, there are plenty of them that have really inadequate wine lists.

But this rarely occurs. And NEVER at a high-end restaurant or at regular service (or at a chain restaurant, that's just douchey). I'm not that person but sometimes, you just have your own favourite that they don't have or you are honoring someone with their favourite wine. It happens.

I've also had cake cutting fees if you bring in your own cake. That's pretty standard.

[SpongeG]

good news

[kylemacmac]

Originally Posted by nova9

I've also had cake cutting fees if you bring in your own cake. That's pretty standard.

Seriously? Is the cake cutting fee taxable?

[officedweller]

I know - it's brutal - like $3.00 a slice or something like that.
If there are 20 people there for the party, it gets way too expensive - may as well just buy one slice from the restaurant for the birthday person.

[SpongeG]

thats crazy

I also heard that the 1 hour extension the city approved is now on hold too? thats no good

[rather_draconian]

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/m...02_220543_7116

It sounds like the food/wine proportion was a bylaw that was somehow affiliated with the one to extend liquor hours, and since they have cancelled a meeting to discuss the former, the latter won't be passed?

This city is so retarded...in quite a literal sense.

[nova9]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I know - it's brutal - like $3.00 a slice or something like that.
If there are 20 people there for the party, it gets way too expensive - may as well just buy one slice from the restaurant for the birthday person.

what i've never dared to ask though is if i could pre-order their desserts so when they bake them, they'll just keep one or 2 full non-sliced cakes. has anyone ever done that?

[delboy]

Looks like we are good to go without the 50 50 rule. Thank god!

http://www.straight.com/article-2703...s-liquor-bylaw

[GeeCee]

The dumb 50% bylaw is out, the extended hours is in!

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/m...24_013138_6632

[Yume-sama]

Hmmm, why does it frighten me that common sense is prevailing?

[raggedy13]

Great news!

[giallo]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Hmmm, why does it frighten me that common sense is prevailing?

Hehe, yeah. Talk about a 180.

[ozonemania]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

The dumb 50% bylaw is out, the extended hours is in!

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/m...24_013138_6632

From the above article: "under the new rules restaurants must offer the full menu while booze is being served"

Wow, I love this. Common sense. And Simple.

[Robynobotica]

I apologize if I missed it earlier, but why was the 50/50 rule created in the first place? Whose brilliant idea was it? What was their reasoning, anyway? Because places like Section 3 feel more like bars than restaurants after 11pm? Liquor laws in Vancouver are so archaic, everyone agrees on that. However, why do the archaic liquor laws still exist if the general public disapproves? Who are they pandering to? Police or vocal citizens?

[Hed Kandi]

Temporary bylaw would expand liquor hours, ban some ads during Games
Proposed changes, made after public backlash to original plan, go to city council Tuesday
Kelly Sinoski

Sun



Olympic spectators will be able to drink alcohol at pubs and on patios late into the night seven days a week, make more noise and take a rickshaw down pedestrian corridors during the 2010 Olympic Games.

But those hoping to make a buck during the Games with illegal commercial advertising, street-vending without a permit in Olympic zones or sharing single-room hotels, will face a minimum $250 fine as the city ramps up its municipal ticket enforcement.

Those are just some of the temporary changes being proposed by City of Vancouver staff in a revised 2010 Olympic Winter Games bylaw that will go before city council Tuesday.

The bylaw, initially approved in July, proposes temporary adjustments to 10 city bylaws during the Games, including relaxing noise and liquor service hours and cracking down on illegal commercial advertising, graffiti and littering.

The changes arose after a public backlash over concerns that the bylaw would unfairly restrict freedom of political expression.

To resolve this, the city proposes to crack down only on commercial advertising.

It would have the power to remove illegal commercial signs -- or ambush marketing -- in as little as one day, if it has the owners' consent or a court warrant.

The aim is to have the fines act as a deterrent to keep the city attractive to tourists and investors while ensuring the value of Games sponsorship.

"Someone can make a lot of money selling advertising for five days during the Games," said Coun. Geoff Meggs.

"We want to make sure they won't profit."

Illegal non-commercial signs -- including ones containing negative messages about the Games -- would be removed under the existing bylaw process, which could take up to 30 days, unless they pose a safety risk.

Meggs said the initial bylaw was passed as an "insurance policy" but people were not satisfied with the city's explanation at that time.

"Our intention is to be a good host for the Olympics. We have to be proactive in managing the Games properly," he said.

"The city was never intending to kick down a door and take down a fridge magnet ... or tear off their T-shirts. But obviously there was a concern."

The proposed changes would see weekend liquor services for bars and restaurants seven days a week, meaning pubs and restaurants could be open until 2 or 3 a.m. from Feb. 8-28, although licensees will still need approval from the provincial liquor control branch.

The city has also proposed to amend the daytime noise bylaw between Feb. 11 and 28, coinciding with the torch relay and increased activity downtown, and to put into place a plan to quickly eliminate graffiti in high-visibility locations -- at taxpayers' expense -- between Feb. 1 and March 28.

Twenty rickshaws would also be allowed on pedestrian corridors as an "additional sustainable transportation option," complementing 60 pedicabs.

But they, along with the pedicabs, must have a permit or risk a fine.

About 60 city engineers, park rangers, fire officials and community service workers will be deployed to enforce city bylaws, including street advertising, street-vending without a permit and failure to clear snow and ice off the streets.

"The speed with which the city addresses bylaw violations during the Games will be critical to ensure safety and enjoyment of the residents and visitors," according to the city report.

Meanwhile, the city suggests restricting the area of the security zone in Coal Harbour and increasing security around Robson Square, now the official provincial government venue. It will also permanently increase the fine for violations of the fire bylaw to a maximum of $10,000.

David Eby, executive director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Society, said he's pleased with the changes although he's concerned about the potential impact on street vendors and those setting up shelters along Hastings Street, which has been dubbed an Olympic zone.

"What we're concerned about is the ability of people to hold signs and chant," he said. "The Olympics are like any other day in Vancouver."

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

[SpongeG]

i wonder how many street vendors will show up in town hawking useless crap