‘Not in my back yard’ is the phrase commonly heard when planning approval is sought for something a little controversial in our cities. It’s a phrase that brewer Richard Adamson was confronted with on the front page of today’s Sydney Morning Herald in relation to his attempts to get Young Henry’s, his proposed restaurant and microbrewery, up and running in the Sydney suburb of Surry Hills.
As Richard is in discussion with the local Council, he cannot discuss the specifics of the complaints but the Sydney Morning Herald quotes him as saying it would, “enrich the neighbourhood” and would “be unlike a pub or a hotel” as there would be no pokies or TVs. “We are extremely mindful of the needs and interests of the neighbourhood”, he said. The council said it is assessing all information and no decision has been made.
The Herald says the proposed development is slated for “a now-empty warehouse that has been a furniture shop, offices and a gym.” and that the surrounding suburb of Surry Hills has “more than 138 licensed restaurants, pubs and bars”. Richard is proposing an upmarket restaurant with six beers on tap and two on hand-pump for consumption on site that sounds more like an English pub than a raucous night spot.
While any new development is potentially scary for residents and these concerns shouldn’t be minimised, the atmosphere and tenor of a brew-pub style restaurant is worlds away from a pokies and plasma-style hotel. While I wouldn’t want the former in my suburb, I’d happily have the latter in my street.
Given the situation in Brisbane, I can say to Richard – if you’re not welcome in their backyard, you’re welcome in mine.
Update.
Obviously there are opposing views on the subject. Though here is an opposing and, seemingly quite reasoned, view point provided in the interests of balance.
Why do the objectors to such a development never publish specific reasons WHY they are against it?
What is it that scares them about such a venue, which they do not seem to be able to voice?
I read about all these locals kicking up a fuss, but no mention of why, other than vague assumptions that it is going to “impact the environment” or it is “not good for families”. But, how?
Are they concerned for the “type of people” the business will attract, possibly anti-social or violent behaviour spilling out into the street…? Or is it a noise issue? Or just the trading hours?
Personally, I would welcome such a microbrewery pub in my street! From the many such venues I have been to (which are often filled with families), I have never experienced anything that I would not want near my family.
Often I feel like brew-pubs are more like cafes, because they tend to attract an easy going and cultured crowd who are there for the dining experience, not just to drink and get drunk, like you may find a pokie-pub with $10 bistro meals.
The is sadly an unspoken association between pubs and society/behaviour/environment that needs to be broken down before craft beer can ever have a truly positive impact in this country.
Unless you live in the immediate local area you do not have a proper understanding of what this proposal would mean for local residents. I would not object if you did not want one in your local street, do not even begin to think you would know what it would mean for us.
And comments from supporters of the brewery, do you have any association with the promoters or with similar developments? We have a vested interest and I would guess that you do to.
Hi James. As is common with journalists, they tend to only scrape the surface of the reasons why people who object to projects (such as Bangaroo or this microbrewery or other developments). Having looked at the DA of this development, it looks like the restaurant is planning to be open until midnight on 6 days a week. It is surrounded by residential terraces on 3 siades. Maybe it is the trading hours they are objecting to? Or the number of people (a 200 seat restaurant is a lot!). I, personally, wouldn’t like to live next door to the proposed developement. The Open letter from Streetcorner has some good points. I would, however, be more than happy to patron a microbrewery/restaurant such as this! Love a craft beer!
As a resident of Surry Hills, I agree that Devonshire Street isn’t the right place. The hundred year old Trinity Hotel (used to be the Elephant’s Foot), a few doors up the road, is a fantastic and popular community pub (with 14 beers on tap). It seems stupid to open another taphouse so nearby. Especially one with such a corporate focus as Adamson implies expressed in his DA application.
Seriously, this doesn’t seem like a place like that which James thinks will be “often filled with families”. The DA goes on about corporate clients being shown through the brewing process, and sitting down to expensive gourmet meals. It doesn’t seem anything like the “Friend in Hand” in Glebe, which is more like what James describes.
I can’t help but wonder why Adamson doesn’t use his concept to breathe new life into the Hopetoun. Its a few blocks up the road, where there’s a lot more nightlife, and it sounds like the residents would whole-heartedly support it there. If not, they at least wouldn’t have real grounds for complaint.
I know the area well, if they put Young Henry’s in the warehouse they want, it would turn the existing residential strip into a crowded commercial strip. Effectively destroying a little heritage neighbourhood. It would be like turning a back street in Paddington into Norton Street, Leichhardt.
People keep comparing it to Crown Street, it’s really different.
There are two types of places: Places people go, and places people live. At the moment, that part of Surry Hills is where people live, but this would turn it into a place people go.
That might be fine for some (like some friends of ours who chose to live on Crown Street), because they made the decision themselves. They wanted to live in a ‘destination’; some of us though, like living near great pubs and restaurants without living right next-door or above them. Is that really so bad?
Again, Adamson, if you’re reading, if you really want to “enrich the neighbourhood” why don’t you take your awesome idea, and use it to save our Hopetoun Hotel? You’d be an instant local hero.
Don’t waste your money on a lease that is obviously going to upset your potential neighbours, go the extra mile to buy the Hopetoun and do something truly great for Surry Hills. You’d probably even get community investment to support the venture. I know I’d be willing to throw some money at it.
Actually, there’s a great idea: A community owned microbrewery that restores a great old Hotel to its former glory. Go on Adamson, I dare you.
As someone who works in the pub game I can tell you the that the same reasons that shut down the Hopetoun are the same reasons it is NOT for sale. Massive bill to bring it up to code and onerous Council controls, because, you guessed it, resident complaints.
The Carrington was for sale but was recently sold to the same owner/tenant combo as the Norfolk. No dice there.
I don’t know Young Henrys’ plans but I’m guessing putting a mircobrewery into an old warehouse would be more practical than retro fitting a pub. They would probably still cop resident complaints about the change anyway.
@Fraser: I appreciate that the Hopetoun would be a more expensive venture, that’s why I suggested some community investment. But surely complaints from people who moved in next to a pub have far less validity than those who have a pub move in next to them?
Besides which, Young Henry’s has been very clear that the expected clientele will be very different to the live music crowd who used to frequent the Hoey (shamefully hangs head in recognition of self).
I’m not sure I can see residents complaining about the conversion of a derelict building into the type of bar Adamson has proposed, If it’s really going to be the quiet place everyone seems to think it’ll be (I don’t believe that).
It might be more practical superficially to retrofit a warehouse, but is it more practical in terms of the context of the community you’re putting it in?
Option A: Go the extra mile, restore the Hoey, be a local hero;
Option B: Build where you’re not wanted, deal with constant complaints from hositle neighbours, go through hell with the land and environment court to get your DA through, then eventually get screwed because it’s only a lease and the Landlord has just used you to get the usage of the premises changed.
I think I’d take option A or not at all…
Also, the Carrington sale occurred well after this proposal was initated, the Adamson is not entirely blameless in passing up that opportunity.
Nameless Resident,
You maybe right about the Carrington but missed the point about the Hopetoun. It’s not for sale. Track down the owners and give them a call.
BTW – Don’t hang your head in shame for frequenting the Hoey in it’s hayday! A lot of us miss the place.
Frase.
Hey Fraser, I’m playing “Nameless Resident” because I don’t want friends living near the defunct Hopetoun to get upset with me for suggesting we take back their new found serenity 😉
I was just hanging my head because in my youth I was probably part of the crowd that contributed to the complaints.
I can tell you that every pub in Surry Hills gets noise complaints. A lot of restaurants with outdoor seating do as well. It’s just a fact of life when doing business in the area. In fact, it’s the same with all pubs that I’ve work in throughout the inner suburbs.
Who knows what will happen with the Hoey? I’m sure a lot of people would love to see the old girl back to it’s former glory. I’ll still got the RIP T Shirt from the first time it closed down. Seems unlikely that it will reopen though, and we can thank the Sydney of City for that.
Inner city rock and roll dies a little more.
Sounds Awesome! Proper beer and food for adult people. Where do I sign?
Actually James if you read the objections submitted to Council opposing the development you will see they are very detailed and specific. The primary concern is simply noise from a large venue (almost double the number of seats of the council definition of a “high impact” establishment) proposing to operate to midnight 6 days a week and 11pm on Sundays smack in the middle of a residential area that is presently very peaceful after dark. Crown St is where that sort of action is and should be – a thriving entertainment strip.
David,
I looked on the City of Sydney website for the DA but couldn’t find anything. I did find an older consent for 2 grease arrestors, exhaust and changes to windows. Is there two sites at that address?
Cheers and Beers,
B.
B,
the public exhibition of the DA has finished so the Council has taken it off the site. That DA you saw has been approved, as you noted, and works finished. These were building works for the brewery site. A separate DA is needed for its fitout for intened use. Unfortunately the Council does not display all submissions on DAs. There is a link on the “Bugger Off Young Henry” facebook page to a very detailed and specific objection, but when I just checked the link was not working – maybe give it a few hours.
cheers and beers also – I would love to have a venue like this on Crown St or even better to replace the old Hopetoun.
David
Not really interested in reading either side’s propaganda. Bugger Off Young Henry…really? And you’ve hijacked their domain name? Nice.
To be clear, the council has approved two grease arrestors and exhaust for the site. So, the landlord was planning for two restaurant type premises for the site and the microbrewery is taking both lots?
Sounds like the council has no problem, per sea, with having hospitality venues on the site. Your objection is the noise the number of people will generate? Wouldn’t the noise from two restaurants will at least equal to one larger one?
Another poster here and said the Hopetoun is not for sale so it sounds like you’re flogging a dead horse on that one.
A mate of mine put a DA in for a restuarant in Bourke St and got well over 20 objections from residents. For a Microbrewery to get 50 odd is no real surprise. You got to hand it to Surry Hills residents, they are the masters of complaining. Isn’t that end of Devonshire home to the Trinity, the Book Kitchen and the Bourke St Bakery? Hardly quiet sleepy town! Looks like they have friends us high places at SMH to get that loaded poll.
Let’s hope we don’t miss out on one of the few opportunities for craft beer because of some vocal NIMBYS.
I’m not suprised they got 20 objections for a restaurant on Bourke Street. It’s not a commercial area. I doubt they would have gotten a single complaint if it were Crown Street or Cleveland. Because that’s where the restaurants are. What a daft comparison. You’re comparing a residential area (albeit with a few extant restaurants) with a commercial area like Crown Street. I’m sorry, but your friend was naive if he tried to open a restaurant in that bit of Bourke Street.
The Trinity has been there about a hundred years, the Book Kitchen has been there (previously as the Warehouse Cafe) as long as I can remember, is fairly small, and closes relatively early; and the Bakery is only open during the day. By nine o’clock at night it is defnitely a quiet sleepy town. Obviously you don’t live nearby.
Um, Bistrode is on Bourke St. The Hoprtoun was on the corner of Bourke St. A commercial building is zoned commercial by definition. What are you on about?
The Hopetoun is up on the northern, more commercial, end of Bourke Street.
Between the Hopetoun and Devonshire there are: The Hopetoun itself, Aero Design; Aquadesiac pet Shop, Bistrode, a convenience store, and some tiny cafe for cyclist I’ve forgotten the name of near the corner of Phelps Street; Foxes Clothing; Canvas Hair, Il Baretto, and the Carrington near the corner of Arthur Street; and finally Fico and the Bourke Street Bakery near the corner of Devonshire, Just a bit further down the road is the primary school.
That’s about a dozen commercial properties amongst about 250 homes along a strip about 600 meters long.
Of those dozen properties,about half are hospitality venues, and only a few of those trade late at night.
When Bistrode opened in 2005, in a heritage listed butcher shop, it was probably one of the last hospitality approvals that section of Bourke Street will see, apart from footpath seating and small licensing changes.
Most of those restaurants seat less than 40 people, and some would be lucky to fit 20. The Bakery only sits about 6 inside.
I’d say that’s pretty residential, and trying to get a new venue in would be pretty naive. That said, if the Brewery goes in, it might become a free for all.
I notice it’s pretty easy for you to call other people NIMBYs when it isn’t YOUR backyard…
The proposal is not for a big restaurant in Bourke St, yet you all still whined. I’d love to live in surry hills but simply can’t afford it. It would be an awesome place to live because of all the cool places there, yet you all complain about these places. I dont get it!
Seems that the some residents in Surry Hills are protesting against exactly what makes our town so great. As for any part of the hills being a “little heritage neighbourhood”- I don’t know about you but I can’t even find a car spot these days within 500 mts of my place let alone a piece of quiet suburbia! I’ve heard that Orange or Milton attract people looking for a peaceful treechange………but then again they do have pubs so maybe not!
Sad that Surrey Hills Resident feels so insecure in his/her communist/facist stance. The poor bastard RICHARD adamson mentioned something about ‘corporate’ customers. Obviously Surrey Hills Resident has a class issue with any ‘corporate’ and would prefer ak47’s and tanks rolling down the street to imbibe friendly neighbourhood atmosphere.
Hi Scott, thanks for your random flaming! You’ve certainly made a constructive contribution to the discussion.
I can assure you I’m pretty secure about my stance, I also don’t like causing unecessary aggravation with neighbours. That’s called society, and is the leading reason for people to pursue anonymity in media, especially the internet.
Thank’s for putting Richard’s first name in bold for us all, It’ll save time for poeple who don’t finish the first paragraph of MATT Kirkegaard’s story.
Unfortunately I’m not on a first name basis with the brewer (or the Author of the article) so I referred to him by his surname, as is convention.
I have specified the corporate nature of the venue, because many defenders of the venture have waxed lyrical over beer cafes that are family and community centres where neighbours get together. I was pointing out the discrepancy between the romanticised image of Young Henrys as an old style local pub (a few of which already exist nearby) and the reality of a corporate function centre.
Corporate function centers are not in and of themselves a bad thing. The Bavarian Beer Cafe on O’Connell street is a great example, but supporters of Young Henrys should check what they’re supporting before attacking resident trying to stop it. I have no problem with informed objection, but at the moment misinformation seems to be king regarding this micro-brewery.
Finally, I just need to say some thing about your reference to “Communism/Fascism”. I can only assume you are not a student of political science. These terms describe the extremes of the “Left” and “Right” wing politics you might hear desribed on the news, they are not, as you seem to imply, the same thing. For the record, you will find Surry Hills residents have a real sense of community, which usually leads them to tend a little to the left when it comes to their political philosophy.
Hi SURRY HILLS RESIDENT / JAMIE AND KAREN / K & J (MOSTLY J) (as is the convention apparently but I’m feeling unsure which of your online personalities to refer to you by?)
Many thanks for the clarification of my previous post. I learnt quite a lot from it. It is a shame though that I was perceived a troll because I support the application and made some outlandish statements, but the same attention has not been paid to some detractors near hysterical comments as can be seen in the comments section below – http://www.streetcorner.com.au/news/showPost.cfm?bid=20474&mycomm=SC
I can say I am lucky to base my evaluation on the outcome of the project based on experience and fact. Through my experience in the brewing trade I can easily say that the majority of concerns are ill-founded. Gone are the day of boozie late night pubs spewing drunk patrons out of their doors and in particular this can be said for this project. I’d challenge anyone to find a pub brewery behaving in this way.
I must say I am struggling to find any facts to support the concerns raised. This via police data, local council information or google. I even looked at the US, with some 994 pub breweries. If anyone can find any evidence where a Pub Brewery has resulted in a dip in local real estate prices, the loss of personal investment in local real estate, become a ‘rat run’ or made a safe area ‘worse’ then can you please post it here? This would be great information to be had as I am hoping to submit a DA in a nearby LGA within the next 18 months for a similar style project.
As much as I can see it, detractors may simply not want the development put in place. And that is fine, its a free world and the right of people to complain. But, as an evaluating body, is this sufficient for the Council to deny the applicant? Experience shows pub breweries are a positive local business and there are little facts to show otherwise.
Admirably, some have suggested alternative venues such as the Hopetoun as a preferred site. This is a flawed concept, first based on the nature of the licence held on that or other sites, second the issues surround the closure of that particular venue (see http://www.thevine.com.au/music/articles/iconic-sydney-venue-the-hopetoun-hotel-closes-its-doors.aspx ) and third knowing the venue the lack of suitability for a small brewery system.
So I think we agree, there is significant misinformation based on applications regarding Micro Breweries, Pub Breweries or Production Breweries (note by definition these are very different). So with a bit of research into pub brewery developments I wonder what some detractors may find out. Somehow I’d say this would be a scary concept as there would not be little no argument left besides a persons general wish not to have the development in their backyard.
Anytime you feel like popping in for a beer at a 385 people capacity venue let me know, its pretty easy to find by being in the Rocks.
Scotty
It’s highly inappropriate for you to use my decision to remain anonymous to attack a third party.
I suppose you will say that any fall out on anyone else is my fault for being anonymous, rather than your fault for making assumptions about people’s identities?
If I were representing a company I would happily use my name and business details, however, as I am discussing my home, I remain anonymous because I don’t “s**t where I eat”. I’d appreciate it if you did me the same courtesy. Especially as, having no commercial interest in the venue apart from living nearby, my identity has no bearing on the discussion.
This is especially true after some of the written attacks and expressions of outright nastiness that have come from a small minority of Young Henry’s supporters – Not that I condone all of what has come from other residents either. Paranoia and naive blanket accusations have come from both sides.
I apologise for assuming you were just being a troll, but if you re-read your original post you’ll see how I came to that conclusion.
The point is, almost everyone I know in Surry Hills supports the local hotels, and usually live within a couple of hundred meters of one. What they object to are new venues opening away from the commercial strips of Oxford and Crown. And it’s not just pubs, people have paid a premium for their homes (as you would appreciate, living in the rocks) and they would object just as strongly to a new cafe or restaurant opening next-door. People who have chosen these areas don’t mind living near shops (Paddington is a great example) because shops close in the afternoon, and they don’t have customers leaving at midnight. If they didn’t mind living next to a hotel, they’d have moved in next to one in the first place.
You can’t honestly tell me that when evaluating whether to buy a home you’d anticipate that the design offices on the corner might one day be turned into a microbrewery open until midnight? It might be theoretically possible, but it isn’t something you’d expect, especially when there’s already a pub up the road.
As I said in my first post here, one of the main choices people make when buying a home is whether they want to live “where people go”. If so, they buy right in the action, like Crown, Oxford, William, or most of the Rocks. More often people like to live somewhere a bit quieter, so that after they’ve been to the pub, they can go home and leave the crowd behind. Near the inner city you pay a premium for that option, to live just a block or two away from the hustle and bustle. By that rationale the late night venues should be restricted to the late night trading areas, and the quieter back streets preserved.
I agree with you that, in the right location, Young Henry’s would be an asset to the community. But for that to happen, it must be either in an existing hotel, or on Crown or Oxford.
If you want to make the arguments that a late night trading venue will have no late night impact, or that the quiet streets behind the commercial areas are a myth, then I’m afraid we are unlikely to find common ground.
Ahh, there goes the neighbourhood!
http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-diary/the-hills-alive-with-hotels-20110220-1b145.html
Great Op Ed piece
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/this-edgy-and-spirited-city-is-losing-street-cred/story-e6frezz0-1226008654735
“Why would you live in town if you only want suburban tranquillity? Can you imagine a city without bars, buzz, commerce, nightlife?
I can. It’s Canberra in the ’80s.
Now, there’s a phrase to sober even the feistiest resident action group, surely?”
It’s amazing how much this is polarising people.
Locals would have complained just as much if it were another 40 seat cafe or restaurant, but it never would have seen the press.
Arguably, a 200 seat microbrewery is going to have a much larger impact than a 40 seat cafe, but the brewery gets more support than a cafe would have had in otherwise identical circumstances.
Why does everyone think this is about beer haters and suppressing craft brewing?
It’s just about people living near what used to be offices (design studios) which closed at 5pm, and now find they might be living next to a place that draws crowds until midnight. 90% of the population would complain under the same circumstances.
If there wasn’t such a great community supporting craft brewers, and such nostalgic Sydney drinkers, Young Henrys would have next to no support.
It just seems strange that a smaller impact proposal would be dismissed easily, but the big high impact proposal gets a lot of support.
The paranoid would suggest that it was the power of the AHA, of course that’s ridiculous; but it is really amazing that a new watering hole, in an already pub and bar laden suburb, calls to every Australian’s spiritual need to defend their right to their local. Like almost all Australian suburbs, Surry Hills loves it’s pubs, and most residents will defend them til the cows come home.
There’s a twisted irony that those who live in Surry Hills, who moved there because they want to live near (not in, but near) the bars and restaurants, are now demonised as tee-totalling geriatrics. In truth they’re the same ones that are downing Stone & Wood at the Trinity, or sipping a Wig & Pen at the Local Taphouse.
Dunno if it has anything to do with size but the support is definitively for the concept.
As for local support of other venues, all I know is that restaurants, bars and clubs in the area all get complaints from residents. Talk to the owner of the Trinity you keep mentioning. I’m sure they will tell you the same thing I hear from the other people operating in Surry Hills.
The problem, as I see it, is that the locals want all the benefits but don’t want any of the negatives that come with it.
This has certainly caused more noise than a DA should, but surely you should be pointing the finger at your well organised neighbours rather than the AHA (lol!). That sad photo in the SMH didn’t take itself. Man, that guy looks like he needs a beer!
Any luck with the Hopetoun?
“Locals would have complained just as much if it were another 40 seat cafe or restaurant”..
You revealed yourself there!
So, the specific objections to this and to my mates restaurant are complete rubbish and this really is a not in my backyard argument. Thanks for the honesty!
I know some of the problems the Trinity has had; their outdoor area is shut now at 10:30 because of a single noise complaint. A bit ridiculous. Like I have said before, people have very little right to complain about the existing venues. They moved in next to them, with full knowledge of what was there.
I haven’t tried to chase anything up re the Hopetoun, you guys would know more about what’s involved than I do, so if you say it’s a no go, it’s a no go. You’ll notice I dropped the issue. It’s a bloody shame though, I had been under the impression it had one of the larger cellars of the local pubs, with full headroom and then some. I guess I must have been misinformed.
I’m not pointing a finger at the AHA, like I said, that’d be ridiculous. I’ll leave that to some of the more paranoid folks, I was just saying I’m surprised at the way people leap to defend their nostalgia for what was a pretty horrible place, even if it did have a few good memories. I know what you mean about the photo though, it looked like they were survivors in a warzone. Then again maybe he is sad because he really believes he is going to lose his home? Hyperbole aside, I know I feel a little bit that way.
Leon, there’s no big revelation. I’ve always said it’s all about stopping new venues in residential areas. The objections aren’t rubbish at all. They’re exactly the same arguments I’ve made the whole time. Your friend wouldn’t even have tried to open a restaurant here if it wasn’t the area residents have made it.
Gentrification was a process driven largely by residents, they created the area that others are now trying to capitalise on. If locals didn’t object to things like this, or your mate’s restaurant, it wouldn’t have become the area it is, and you wouldn’t want to put a restaurant here. We helped the council and police make the area safe enough for the wine bars and gastropubs to become successful, all we’re asking is that they be kept to the commercial areas.
If anyone wants to put something up on Crown, Oxford or Cleveland, they’d get a lot of support.
As Fraser said, we want all the benefits, but don’t want any of the negatives that come with it, that’s why we didn’t buy a home on Crown Street. We’ve enjoyed those benefits for years, It’s nothing new. It is in fact exactly why we live where we do. So its not an unreasonable expectation.
Similarly, the business owners want a successful area where people will come to their restaurants, but they weren’t prepared to open here until the residents had gentrified the place. Residents living and working in Surry Hills took a suburb no one else wanted, and turned it into a place where people want to live and play. Now it’s all shiny and new, businesses want to move in and start profiting from it. That’s well and good in principle, but aside from so many people not wanting a new venue on their doorstep, this development is out of scale with its surroundings, and would become the dominant feature of the immediate neighbourhood.
And that’s not cool.
Hey Fraser,
I know some of the problems the Trinity has had; their outdoor area is shut now at 10:30 because of a single noise complaint. A bit ridiculous. Like I have said before, people have very little right to complain about the existing venues. They moved in next to them, with full knowledge of what was there.
I haven’t tried to chase anything up re the Hopetoun, you guys would know more about what’s involved than I do, so if you say it’s a no go, it’s a no go. You’ll notice I dropped the issue. It’s a bloody shame though, I had been under the impression it had one of the larger cellars of the local pubs, with full headroom and then some. I guess I must have been misinformed.
I’m not pointing a finger at the AHA, like I said, that’d be ridiculous. I’ll leave that to some of the more paranoid folks, I was just saying I’m surprised at the way people leap to defend their nostalgia for what was a pretty horrible place, even if it did have a few good memories. I know what you mean about the photo though, it looked like they were survivors in a warzone. Then again maybe he is sad because he really believes he is going to lose his home? Hyperbole aside, I know I feel a little bit that way.
Leon, there’s no big revelation. I’ve always said it’s all about stopping new venues in residential areas. The objections aren’t rubbish at all. They’re exactly the same arguments I’ve made the whole time. Your friend wouldn’t even have tried to open a restaurant here if it wasn’t the area residents have made it.
Gentrification was a process driven largely by residents, they created the area that others are now trying to capitalise on. If locals didn’t object to things like this, or your mate’s restaurant, it wouldn’t have become the area it is, and you wouldn’t want to put a restaurant here. We helped the council and police make the area safe enough for the wine bars and gastropubs to become successful, all we’re asking is that they be kept to the commercial areas.
If anyone wants to put something up on Crown, Oxford or Cleveland, they’d get a lot of support.
As Fraser said, we want all the benefits, but don’t want any of the negatives that come with it, that’s why we didn’t buy a home on Crown Street. We’ve enjoyed those benefits for years, It’s nothing new. It is in fact exactly why we live where we do. So its not an unreasonable expectation.
Similarly, the business owners want a successful area where people will come to their restaurants, but they weren’t prepared to open here until the residents had gentrified the place. Residents living and working in Surry Hills took a suburb no one else wanted, and turned it into a place where people want to live and play. Now it’s all shiny and new, businesses want to move in and start profiting from it. That’s well and good in principle, but aside from so many people not wanting a new venue on their doorstep, this development is out of scale with its surroundings, and would become the dominant feature of the immediate neighbourhood.
And that’s not cool.
Your whole double posted essay can still be boiled down to one argument: leave my sacred patch of city alone! Pointless to debate. I’m done. I pity anyone trying to do something new in Sydney City.
Looks like the locals could do with a few more people around a night to scary the junkies away…
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/gardeners-fight-to-keep-oasis-20100213-nyeo.html
Has anyone heard what is happening with this? Is the microbrewery going ahead? When is the expected opening date and what are they planning to have on tap?