Golden Light take-out vs. Alderman Jack Connolly

[ron_newman]

The Somerville News reports that Golden Light Chinese restaurant must now close at 1 am instead of 3, following complaints from Alderman Jack Connolly and residents of Ciampa Manor, a senior citizen housing project across the street.

This seems wrong to me, since the restaurant, Ciampa Manor, and Alderman Connolly have all been in Davis Square for decades, without any trouble. I don't see a good argument for restricting the hours of non-liquor-serving businesses.

Comments

[myselftheliar.livejournal.com]

That is such a ridiculous bummer

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

It seems wrong to me because forcing this restaurant to close is not going to solve the problem of loud drunks walking down College Ave. at 2am. Why punish a business for something totally out of their control?

[srakkt.livejournal.com]

On the one hand, it seems to me that if the fellow's been violating the law, it matters not at all for how long he's been doing it - he's violating the law. Now that law might not make any sense, but simply violating it is not the way to get it changed, unless you're talking about a civil disobedience campaign, in which it is understood that you are willing to bear the consequences of your actions.

On the other, there is probably a hefty argument to be made for something like an Easement by Use which may or may not even be a legitimate concept in modern American law (IANAL!!!). Or, for that matter, the legal concept of Nuisance - we can most likely demonstrate that the residents of Ciampa manor (and perhaps the manor itself) are younger than the restaurant.

In any case, I agree that restricting the hours of businesses is sort of silly, liquor-serving or otherwise. Noise and public drunkenness ordinances presumably already deal with the fallout.

[ron_newman]

Ciampa Manor, the building, is probably a few years younger than the restaurant. The News article says that Golden Light is 28 years old. I believe Ciampa Manor opened some time later in the 1980s, replacing the Woodbridge Inn hotel that had burned down.

Now, the residents of Ciampa Manor are all much older than the restaurant. (I've edited the original post to make clear exactly what Ciampa Manor is.)

[srakkt.livejournal.com]

Sure, the residents are older, but they certainly haven't been residents *at Ciampa Manor* for that long.

[eeyorecol.livejournal.com]

Nuisance is nuisance is nuisance.

Moving into a place that is across from the street from a place that is open too late in violation of the law doesn't make it not a nuisance and not illegal.

By that logic, if I had been firing guns into the neighbor's house for 10 years without them complaining, and they managed to sell the house to another person without telling them about my gun habit, that doesn't mean that I get to keep shooting at their house...

[ron_newman]

But what's causing the nuisance? Not the restaurant, which is doing nothing more than preparing and selling food to people like me who want to buy it. If some of the customers are being disorderly, then arrest the customers.

[srakkt.livejournal.com]

You are needlessly confusing several different concepts.

"Nuisance" here does not mean the same thing in a legal circumstance that it does in general parlance. I'll say again here that I'm not a lawyer.

In your example, the issue isn't one of nuisance, but basic violation of the law: shooting at someone else's house is just plain against the law.

A better example is this: instead of shooting at your neighbor's house, you start a pigfarm on your property (and it's zoned such that you can legally do so.) The smell is overpowering. Your neighbor actually (as I understand it) would have a pretty solid case to sue on the grounds of nuisance. Instead, we follow your example, and they move away and sell the house to another person without telling them about the pig farm. The new neighbor does not then have a nuisance case - precisely because the pig farm existed before they moved in.

My understanding (again, I'm not a lawyer, and could be very wrong) is that this is why the City of Cambridge calls for commentary by abutters when granting or revoking retail liquor sales permits.

So yes - illegal. No, probably not a 'nuisance' case.

[eeyorecol.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not needlessly confusing several different concepts, you are. Let me explain. There were two points I was making. The first was that you don't get an easement for a nuisance, nuisance is nuisance. So, for the people who were wondering if the people living there for so long have acquiesced and granted an easement for the noise, that doesn't work.

Secondly, I was talking about breaking the law. You are right, shooting at someone's house is against the law, as is opening your restaurant and serving food at an hour where the law says you are not allowed to be open. A basic violation of the law, much like shooting your neighbor's house. I recognize that the shooting example takes it to a ludicrous extreme, but it's also a basic violation of the law.

You are right about the whole pig farm example. The problem with comparing that to the Chinese place is that the Chinese restaurant is not zoned or legally able to serve food at that hour. If the law said the restaurant could be open until 3 a.m. and people wanted to change that, we would be having a different discussion. The problem here is that people are trying to defend the restaurant's right to remain open at an hour that it is not allowed legally to do so in the face of neighbor complaints.

So, you are right in one sense. This is not a nuisance case, I was just responding to those who were wondering about nuisance law in this matter. And, you are also right in the other sense, what the restaurant is doing is illegal and they don't have any right to do it. The neighbors win.

Also, this isn't eeyorecol, it's her husband, and I am a lawyer.

[srakkt.livejournal.com]

Cool.

So, as I said when I first brought it up, it seems unlikely to apply, not least because we're not in England, but all of that aside, and only tangentially related to the conversation at hand, do we know whether or not Easement by Use is a concept recognized on this half of the globe?

[ron_newman]

And yet Ciampa Manor, Jack Connolly, and Golden Light have gotten along without complaint for 20+ years. What has changed now?

[chumbolly.livejournal.com]

You're not entirely correct on the pig farm example--I'd guess that you read in you Property Law class the case of Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Dev. Co., where the developer of Sun City, Arizona successfully shut down a cattle feed lot that existed before Sun City was built. Interestingly, the court in Del Webb quoted a Massachusetts court for precedent as follows: "The law of nuisance affords no rigid rule to be applied in all instances. It is elastic. It undertakes to require only that which is fair and reasonable under all the circumstances. In a commonwealth like this, which depends for its material prosperity so largely on the continued growth and enlargement of manufacturing of diverse varieties, 'extreme rights' cannot be enforced. * * *.' Stevens v. Rockport Granite Co."

I realize this is really just a case of Golden Light being in violation of the law, but I think Del Web is fascinating.

[mihmo.livejournal.com]

Seriously? From the large apartment building that is catty-corner to Ciampa manor, the screaming children and preacher at the Church across the street are far more disruptive (at all hours it seems) than Golden Light's patrons late at night.

[ron_newman]

Which church -- Community Baptist, College Ave United Methodist, or some other?

(And if your apartment building is the one I'm thinking of, Alderman Gewirtz lives there too.)

[mihmo.livejournal.com]

Yep, same building :)

It's the white one that's really loud, not the brick one. Although I think this Sunday there was a crowd of screaming children in front of the brick one for a couple of hours and I am guessing they were running in front of the cars since the cars kept honking as they went by and traffic was stopped up in front.

I'm okay with kids, really I am. But the screaming is really obnoxious and out-of-control.

[jamiesquared.livejournal.com]

the food there is NASTY, even at 2am drunk.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

Oh, it's not THAT bad. It's certainly better than Kee Kar Lau.

[jamiesquared.livejournal.com]

Matter of opinion. I really dislike it.

[arrowintwolakes.livejournal.com]

Golden Light and Lucky Star are interchangeable, as far as I'm concerned. But, yeah, Kee Kar Lau is not too good.

[ron_newman]

What and where is Lucky Star? (I know this only as the name of a cheap Chinese bus line.)

[arrowintwolakes.livejournal.com]

Lucky Star is basically identical to Golden Light in terms of quality and is on Salem Street in Medford. I always get it delivered anyway, so it looks like Lucky Star is about to get some more business from me, anyway.

[ron_newman]

I wonder if the city would look more favorably upon Golden Light if they were delivery-only after 1 am (no sit-down and no take-out).

[m-b-w.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure (it's been a while since I've been in there) they are no "sit-down" late at night but, as there is take-out, people do hang around waiting for their food.

Why crappy Chinese?

[wallacestreet.livejournal.com]

I understand the impulse for crappy Chinese if you're drunk and it's 2 in the morning (or 1 now) and you're right there, but if you're getting delivery, there are many, many better options. Try Wangs on Broadway, Qing Dao Garden on Mass Ave right by the bike path, or East Asia in Powderhouse. All respectable and, if you order right (hint: try the pink section at Qing Dao or dumplings at Wangs), really quite good.

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[arrowintwolakes.livejournal.com]

Because I only order Chinese at 2 in the morning when I'm drunk.

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[siderea]

Wait... Qing Dao is open late?

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[wallacestreet.livejournal.com]

No, only 11 on the weekends (East Asia to 11:30 and Wangs only 9). My point was only that, when getting Chinese delivery during sober hours, there are lots of good choices. As I said, drunk at 2 1 am is different.

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[boblothrope.livejournal.com]

Are we talking about the same Wang's? The one at 509 Broadway with the really good homemade dumplings is open until 1 AM every day.

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[boblothrope.livejournal.com]

(except Tuesday)

Re: Why crappy Chinese?

[wallacestreet.livejournal.com]

Damn internets. Good to know. Do they deliver that late? If so, there really is no excuse for ordering crappy Chinese, even when drunk at 1 am.

[lbmango.livejournal.com]

I like the phrase "impromptu, booze-fueled athletic contests"

[m00n.livejournal.com]

I think the solution is to make it easier, rather than harder, for most businesses to be open that late. If there's only one business open at the time that the bars close, then everyone's going to go there almost no matter how bad it is and naturally there will be a lot of noise. If people had a number of choices about where to go, it would really be no more popular than anywhere else in the square at any time of the day.

[marmota.livejournal.com]

Exactly. For years I lived just around the corner from the Store 24 across from the Medford police station, and it's darn near the only thing open around here after about 2. Unfortunately Davis Square gentrified before it could open up to a real urban schedule, so I doubt it'll happen now.

[eeyorecol.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, no one is going to welcome the drunks to their section of the neighborhood...

Unfortuantely, drunk people are much louder than sober people. I, personally, don't want "anywhere else in the square at any time of the day" when it's super late...

[m00n.livejournal.com]

This is just like the airplane noise argument though. If the number of people coming out of the bars at 2 am is a constant, would you rather if they all go to the same place or if they disperse into many smaller (and thus quieter) groups?

[eeyorecol.livejournal.com]

I think it's totally different than the airplane noise. Airplanes have to take off in a certain direction based on the wind. Drunks don't need to go to the Chinese food place. They might want to, but they don't need to.

Also, the airport is closed between 11pm and 5am. There is nothing coming in or out then for the reason that it is night. I have no problem with Logan noise.

Furthermore, you are coming to the nuisance when you buy a place near an airport. You don't necessarily know that the drunks will congregate outside your house at 3am.

If the law said he could stay open until 3am, then fine. However, he's been violating the laws for years, and it doesn't make the residents the jerks for asking that the law be enforced.

[purpless77.livejournal.com]

I couldn't agree more with all of Connolly's comments. I do feel bad for the restaurant in a way. But hopefully them closing early will help reduce the drunken idiots from loitering around and messing up the area.

[righteousness-1.livejournal.com]

Drunks making noise should be arrested and the Chinese store left alone.

[sapphira-altair.livejournal.com]

Drunken idiots will loiter somewhere that is annoying to someone, regardless if there is a Chinese place open past 1AM.

Actually, as proven, idiots who are not drunk will loiter somewhere and annoy someone, even if it's just on LJ.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

It won't.

[tt02144.livejournal.com]

What part of the word 'legal' is so hard for people to understand? And for that matter, the word 'nuisance'? The owner of this store has a permit to operate during certain hours, and he surely must know what those hours are. He has chosen to ignore the permit. He got lucky and noone from the city realized, apparently, that he was staying open later than was allowed. Now, however, he must comply with the law and with his permit to operate. Why is that not enough? This establishment is in the middle of a neighborhood and I'm sure people would have a different opinion if it were in the middle of their neighborhood. Would you complain if a car repair shop across the street stayed open until 3 am? If you don't own a car then I'm guessing you would complain! Let's be honest here, most people going to a Chinese restaurant at 3 am are coming from bars or clubs and are more often than not, drunk. They make noise. 'Arrest the drunks' is supposed to be a solution? So in order for you to be able to buy chinese food at 3 am we are supposed to station an officer in front of the store to 'arrest the drunks'? Maybe, just maybe, people don't like living near a late-night food establishment.

An alternative

[nyyvonne.livejournal.com]

Perhaps they should apply for a 2am license, since some of the bars have been able to extend their license to 2am, which means that there are still drunks in Davis at 2am, and the city gave them license to be there.
3am was pushing it, but one could argue that 2am is reasonable on weekends, since there are other establishments in the area open that late. Does anyone know if they tried to get it extended?

Re: An alternative

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

Most Chinese restaurants in this area stay open, unofficially, until at least 3. There's some joint near Foss Park that I swear to God I've walked by at 4am and it's open.

[rethcir.livejournal.com]

If you read the menu carefully, there are some hilarious typos. Such as the "Chicken Things" combo.

[jamesnorton.livejournal.com]

our office is next to ciampa manor. the golden light is not a nuisance, nor has it been. contrary to popular believe, i really dont like making declarative statements; however, as someone who has had an office within 750 feet of that place off and on for the past 18 years - and who has worked all night long many a night - other than random standard drunken stupidness every once in a great while, there is no harm in that restaurant staying open in my eyes. as far as i remember, hours were dialed back from all night or very late in the night (early morning) because of a couple of violent incidents which prompted people to hike their skirts up and start the blame game, once again. it wasnt really associated with gentrification (at least not from my perspective).
a store or restaurant with proper security measures, that doesnt in any way shape or form allow loitering or the purchase of alcoholic beverages - should be allowed to stay open at LEAST as late as the latest currently licensed establishment (meaning, more specifically - mcdonalds, white hen, the burren, whatever).

[daviscubed.livejournal.com]

You'd think Davis Square was Times Square circa 1983. I live right near this place. "Fighting, public urination and impromptu, booze-fueled athletic contests are ordinary events"? Really? Whuh?

[alexdw.livejournal.com]

Wait... restaurants are only licensed for certain hours of operation around here? Who came up with that idea?

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

Puritans.