'Liquor License Loophole' in Albany's Crosshairs
One of the concerns some Carroll Gardens residents had about the controversial Hoyt Street oyster bar, whose application for a liquor license was hotly debated at Community Board 6 this Spring, is that it’s near both a school and a church. Opponents of the business said the bar shouldn’t be granted a liquor license because…
One of the concerns some Carroll Gardens residents had about the controversial Hoyt Street oyster bar, whose application for a liquor license was hotly debated at Community Board 6 this Spring, is that it’s near both a school and a church. Opponents of the business said the bar shouldn’t be granted a liquor license because by some measures it’s within 200 feet of a church, which would mean the State Liquor Authority couldn’t give it the green light. The brouhaha no doubt influenced bills that’ve been introduced in both the Senate and Assembly to close a “liquor license loophole” under which bar owners move the door of their establishments so the entrance isn’t within 200 feet of a house of worship or a school. Assemblywoman Joan Millman, who represents the district that includes Carroll Gardens, intro’d the bill in the State Assembly. This change would not cost the state a dime, but it certainly would benefit our neighborhoods immensely, said Millman in a statement (copy on jump). I have introduced this bill largely in response to community input that we close this loophole. Paul Nelson, Millman’s spokesperson, said that problems with business owners exploiting the loophole aren’t particular to Carroll Gardens, but it’s become a bigger concern for residents as the neighborhood transforms into “more of a destination area for bars.”
Shucks! Oyster Bar Dredges Up Controversy [Brownstoner]
Photo by ‘Mr. History.
Assemblywoman Joan Millman has introduced legislation to close a loophole which allows establishments applying for liquor licenses that are located within 200 feet of a school, church, synagogue or other place of worship to evade the 200 foot rule by moving the entrance of their establishment. The 200 foot rule prevents an establishment from receiving a liquor license from the New York State Liquor Authority (SLA) if the entrance to the establishment lies within 200 feet of a school, church, synagogue or other places of worship.
In response to this growing problem, as well as numerous complaints by residents of quiet, residential streets, Assemblywoman Millman has introduced Assembly Bill 11364. This bill would amend the SLA’s standards in relation to the 200 foot rule between a liquor establishment and a school, church, synagogue or place of worship from measuring between entryways to measuring between the closest property line of the liquor establishment and the entryway of the school, church, synagogue or other place of worship. Too often, a bar simply moves its entryway so that it is compliant with the letter of the law; however, the spirit of this law is to prevent bars from being too close to a school, church, synagogue or other place of worship.
This change would not cost the state a dime, but it certainly would benefit our neighborhoods immensely, Millman stated. I have introduced this bill largely in response to community input that we close this loophole.
Surrounding residents did not make a stink when Black Mountain opened. We were not NIMBYs concerning this first bar. I even went in there once, but their choice of music (Foreigner) played really loud and an uninspired and expensive wine list did not call me back. We residents do have an issue with a SECOND bar opening on our small, residential block. And yes you don’t need a kitchen to serve oysters, but then it really isn’t a restaurant – it’s just a bar that serves appetizers (unless people just eat oysters for dinner, making those cocktails a lot more potent). And there couldn’t be much worse garbage than shellfish.
And finally, no our “investment property” (aka our homes) will not increase in value with the level of noise and smoke outside our bedrooms. We enjoy our street and neighbors (many of whom have been here for decades). We have to fight within the rules of the games, therefore the church/school distance seems our best shot as logic holds no sway with the CB6. We’re not prudes or cranks, we are simply reacting to the circumstances.
Not to worry, Juggler314. Such businesses are almost always “grandfathered” and allowed to carry on even if regulations or circumstances change. This means that if a CHURCH suddenly gets built within 200 feet of a BAR, the older bar doesn’t have to shut down. There’s little chance a new regulation would kill anybody’s existing business.
But how many bars does this neighbohood need, anyway? Neither Smith nor Hoyt are Times Square, with its numerous sources of alternate entertainment. Here, after you have a drink, all you can do for fun is drink some more. That’s how the hanging out, noise, and rowdiness spin out of control. Right now at least it’s mostly confined to Smith. Let’s leave it at that and encourage other kinds of shops on the small streets.
OOOoooo, be careful, davinbedstuy! Your racism is showing!
So if African-American schoolchildren from the projects you despise are influenced to use alcohol by 2 prosperous yuppie bars they have to walk by to and fron school, that’s OK? And there’s no guarantee these bars will stay yuppie and attractive once the owner flips them (and he will, ASAP).
Yes, this group should spend their money opeing bars in your neighborhood, all very near you. Right across the street, or under you, I hope. The closer the better! Enjoy.
If any one of the above commenters actually owned a house on Hoyt Street between Union and Sackett Streets, they too would be opposed to the so-called oyster bar. Whatever a family paid for their brownstone, that investment does not become “more valuable” with the honking of a car service at 1 o’clock in the morning, with groups of people standing on the extremely narrow sidewalks smoking and talking, pacing the street while chatting on cell phones, or with a garden full of people talking and drinking, or with the sound of dumpsters being lifted in the early morning hours. One buys a piece of property on a street such as Hoyt because one appreciates and desires the serenity. And it is that which is valuable. If one buys a house on a street where a bar already exists, then one has accepted that reality. But it does not seem right that a bar should be foisted onto a residential street. It’s too profound of a change. Bars make noise. They belong on a commercial strip. But I’m certain that because the rents on Smith Street are $8,500 a month now, the proposed bar owner in question is anxious to lock in the much lower rent on Hoyt Street.
hello, this area is a few short blocks away from a housing project. i can remember looking at a brownstone right there on union in ’96 and thinking, it’s just too close to the ghetto and once you go west on union, the street sucks. both of those things are still true today, over 10 years later.
these people should thank their lucky stars that an upscale establishment like an oyster bar wants to open there!
it will only make their investment in their property become more valuable.
Separation of church and state is what this country was founded upon. It seems that a large portion of the electorate from the very top down , including ALL of the presidential candidates, need to relearn this principle.
Everyone already said this, but I just must chime in and express my disgust with these idiotic laws about bars near schools and churches. Instead of wasting their time on these loopholes Millman and others should concentrate on repealing these ancient laws. I often stop by for a beer on Smith St. after I pick up my kid from school; he sips a coke or a juice and plays video games and I have a bit of a rest. Many other parents do the same. It’s civilized and it teaches my kids that there’s nothing wrong with an afternoon cocktail. I’m sure that these silly restrictions and stigmata are one of the major causes of teenage binge drinking and alcoholism. And don’t get me going about the churches, they have nothing to do with this, period. My second home is in Madrid and there we have no such laws and it’s actually customary to stop in for a caña or a sherry after church, so there’re usually several tavernas very close to a church. I can’t wait to do some shucking on Hoyt Street.
singing…didn’t mean to offend anyone who uses AMSLAN in that last post.
2:32 is right…all that signing on Sunday morning nearby after you’ve had a late night out at Union Hall. And what’s with all the double parking in front of these churches?