New Bar/Restaurant in the 19th Ward

Hello,

I recently joined the Location 19 website to make you aware of a college bar that is opening in my neighborhood. I am a longtime resident on S Plymouth Ave and I just became aware of a gentleman that is trying to open up a college bar at 1155 S Plymouth Ave. This is the same gentleman that has been buying up properties for students and evicting my friends and neighbors. I do not think the neighborhood needs a college bar. We will be inundated with drunk college kids on Friday and Saturday nights. The city and neighborhood must stand up to prevent this bar. It will only bring trouble. The bar name is Plymouth Roc. That is the same name of the gang that terrorized our streets years ago. We do not need this. We do not want this.

You can see details here. http://www.facebook.com/#!/PlymouthROC?sk=info

Sincerely,

Lucinda

2 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anthony D'Alessandro on March 21, 2012 at 11:52am

I have been walking around and talking to many of the residents in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Frank N Steins and... There seems to be common concern of what are you gong to do about "the kids" coming in a causing a ruckus. The kids they are talking about appear to be in high school. What are peoples thoughts on an age restriction? if you are under 18 you must be accompanied by someone over 30?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Judi Baker on March 21, 2012 at 4:16pm

30+ crowd only. The Rec center is in the close proximity as well as the Boys & Girls Club for teens. Hope we don't have to part the ruckus rousers to get in the door! I have long since stopped walking this neighborhood.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Boutet on March 21, 2012 at 4:17pm

Touch base with Sonny's Side Family Kitchen on Thurston and see how they are doing. Sonny's has done a lot of good thing to help draw customers. I have not checked with them lately. Their predecessor, Food Lovers, in part went out of business because of "the kids" hanging around and scaring away the customers. Some of those "kids" were selling drugs. You can call the police if you see that happening. You have the advantage and disadvantage that your establishment is going to be dependent on "the kids" from the U of R. Most of them, even if over 18, will look younger than "the kids" you are worrying about. You will have to be looking at a lot of ID's.

Hopefully if your business is doing well enough and your terrace tables are often full, that will keep "the kids" who would be working the corner away. That of course assumes that your customers are not interested in also being their customers. Probably several prominent surveillance cameras would help a lot.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Judi Baker on March 21, 2012 at 4:21pm

Cameras with TAPES or CD's at all times and kept for a minimum of 14 days. Good point John about the double customer comment.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony D'Alessandro on March 21, 2012 at 5:09pm

First of all I want to clearly state that WE ARE ABSOLUTLEY NOT INTERESTED in catering or being in anyway hospitible to any person looking to transact drugs or engage in any illegal activity. Frankly if I even see someone litter they can find someplace else to eat. If I have any suscpicion we would immediatley begin taking descriptions, notes and recording the activity to turn over to the police. The expectation needs to be set from day one that there is a zero tolerance policy at the intersection of plymouth and Jefferson.

Tapes? CDs? What are those? ;-) We would get remote pan tilt zoom nightvision IP cameras that record digitally to a remotely located hard drive with motion alert e-mail notification.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marian Boutet on March 21, 2012 at 6:48pm

Over 30 only. A bar on Plymouth Avenue that had a disturbance a couple of weeks ago previously had a minimum age of 30 for admittance, and since the ruckus someone at the last PCIC said the owner plans to raise it to 35! I hope he does.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Sweetland on March 21, 2012 at 11:36pm

I question over 30 only. That eliminates most of the potential clientele from the coming U of R development at Brooks Landing. I would say over 21, the legal drinking age. The problem referred to earlier was about high school students, I believe. Anthony was suggesting they not be allowed in to eat without someone over 30.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Judi Baker on March 22, 2012 at 7:15am

Over 30 OR valid U of R id required if catering to the students. Or would the ACLU jump all over that one???

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Boutet on March 22, 2012 at 11:17am

21 year old college students and beer... 21 year old college students who don't need to drive back to their dorm. They can stagger. Yes the ACLU will want it to 21 year olds period. and I do agree with Mark about 21 to get in. How do you police the terrace on the sidewalk will be a problem. How do you keep the 18 year olds away from the terrace?

I know! You can put the surveillance footage on a live webcam site. The "Frank N Steins Mothercam" site. Let mom and officer friendly check out how straight Billy and Susie are walking when they head out. Have a picture taken of them when they ID in that also posts in on Mothercam site. That will keep problem"kids" out.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony D'Alessandro on March 27, 2012 at 2:44pm

John I thought about your idea all weekend! I love it! It is definitely win-win. It will enable us as well as anyone in the community to help identify and give a face to the individual trouble makers in our area. While offering complete transparency to the integrity of our own operation. The "mothercam" idea will be a great forum for all to keep watch and share the individuals that we as community should be concerned about. Eventually maybe we could get other businesses to adapt the system as well, not that it is going to be cheap but certainly affordable and well worth the investment (my research shows that by using IP Cameras we should be able to accomplish this for under $3000.00 not including what hosting we would need, but hosting is pretty cheap anyways )

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony D'Alessandro on March 27, 2012 at 2:47pm

and they make devices that photograph and VERIFY the authenticity of every ID. The correlation in putting a name to the face would be huge in keeping any ill intentioned people out!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony D'Alessandro on March 27, 2012 at 2:51pm

In regards to the overall 30+ or 35+. I was talking about high school kids not being allowed to enter unless they are with an adult over 30. This is a classic case of a couple rotten apples ruin the whole bunch. Due to the actions of some of these youth, that I and many others have witnessed, appropriate precautions must be taken. As far as implementing an age restriction to everyone under the age of 30 or 35, I don't doubt it could be somewhat effective in keeping the ruckus rousers out. I genuinely think that it sends the wrong message. We are a restaurant that also has a bar. People of all ages, in many other places manage to keep their composure in this same setting and there is no reason we shouldn't hold our guests to that same expectation. That's eventually what we want and I am fairly confident that many others would agree. By implementing an age policy like that we are essentially saying to each person under 30 or 35, we here at Frank N Steins don't believe you have the maturity to eat and or drink at a restaurant? I DO NOT think that is true. The age restriction doesn't address the problem. We are dealing with a behavior problem here not an age problem. It is bad enough that the well intentioned high school kids may have to suffer for the actions of their peers (we haven't made any concrete decisions regarding the policy as we are not open. We are still throwing ideas around) . To many well intentioned adults would now lose out on the benefit/product/service we would like to provide to the community based on age rather than on how they choose to conduct themselves.

This started with concerns from the community regarding a group of individuals that are high school students. We have gotten a little off track from that but while we are here I would also like to add and reiterate that I think the reason you are seeing that bump in age from 30 to 35 is not because its the answer. It is not the answer because it is not the problem. The behavior of individuals is the problem. It appears to me that what is happening is that business owners or their managers may be choosing to implement this ambitious age restriction rather than address the behavioral incidents, individually, head on and one by one that are going on inside of their establishments. Ultimately failing to set the expectation of ZERO tolerance in search for a policy that is easier to implement.

A lot of people wouldn't think you would find this behavior at a place such as Walt Disney World but the truth is that occasionally you do. I don't know if any of you have heard of Pop Warner. It's a football competition for kids. Pop Warner itself is not bad however it has a tendency to attract the same type of fighting I have seen these high school kids engage in. We don't solve the problem by alienating everyone under a certain age we solve it by taking the time to target the individual troublemakers and removing them.

I want to be clear in saying that I am referring to how we would operate for the majority of our business hours which would be lunch and dinner. Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights would undoubtedly be 21 and up.