As city staff gets set to propose a simpler scheme to process outdoor patio proposals, the Fox and Feather is sticking with the old method that worked for its competitor, MacLaren’s pub.
Last year, city council granted MacLaren’s pub a pass to build an outdoor patio at the intersection of MacLaren and Elgin streets, even though the patio violates an encroachment bylaw because it sits less than 30 metres from residential buildings.
Now, those same 30 metres of MacLaren Street are in focus again as the Fox and Feather Pub and Grill aims to build a patio on a patch of city property facing MacLaren’s pub across the street.
Joseph Eyamie, owner of the Fox and Feather, first applied for an outdoor patio in 1998.
He says Brian Karam, owner of MacLaren’s, was approved first even though he only started applying in 2006.
“And all of a sudden, you know, boom, boom, boom, he gets it,” Eyamie says.
The applications were stalled until last year. Staff denied both because of the encroachment bylaw.
Karam and Eyamie asked Somerset Coun. Diane Holmes to intervene, but she denied them their day in city hall after she decided, based on residents’ feedback, that patios would be too noisy.
Karam found a loophole last year. He appealed to River Ward Coun. Maria McRae, who brought the matter to the transportation committee.
At the committee’s request, city staff again consulted residents on MacLaren Street, and 80 of 91 respondents said the patio would be too noisy.
Nevertheless, the committee and city council voted against Holmes to allow the patio.
Eyamie appealed to Innes Coun. Rainer Bloess, who brought the matter to the transportation committee Feb. 2.
That makes two suburban councillors, along with a majority in council, who’ve sided against city staff and Holmes on the matter of outdoor patios.
“This definitely sets a precedent,” Holmes says. “They want a party life on Elgin Street and none of them live anywhere near it.”
City staff are drafting a recommendation that might remove some public consultations and speed the patio request processing time.
When an encroaching patio application comes in under the new procedure, staff would immediately consult residents within 90 metres. That would have saved time and effort in the four-year-long MacLaren’s case, in which Holmes polled residents and directed staff to poll residents.
The transportation committee then directed staff to poll them again.
The proposed setup would fast-forward applications to around where the Fox and Feather application is now – a survey through nearby high-rise and low-rise apartments on MacLaren Street to collect, from the exact same residents, what everyone assumes will be nays.
That’s not to say the patios aren’t welcome.
“I like the idea of a patio, it’s nice,” says Susana Chheng.
Chheng has lived on MacLaren Street for over a year and enjoys the “dynamic” vibe.
However, she already hears revelry in the early hours from nearby Elgin Street, even on hockey nights when doors are closed. She worries about that noise increasing.
Doug Ducharme, who manages the 12-storey apartment building beside the Fox and Feather, spoke out against the proposed patio at city hall on Feb. 2.
“I would rather see the city wait and see what effects one patio would have on its residents before approving another,” he said.
This month, Eyamie convinced the committee to let him use the old rules instead of waiting for the new procedure, which will be discussed in early March. He says he wants the same treatment as Karam.
Eyamie, like Karam, promised the committee he would close the patio and stop playing music outside after 11 p.m.
“There’s not going to be no noise in the area, you know what I’m saying?” he said.