Shebeen down the road

BTTB

BTTB

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
8,429
Reaction score
1,061
Location
iKapa
Shebeen down the road
25/04/2007 11:35 - (SA)

Verashni Pillay

Cape Town - Nobody would say no to a nice pub down the road, but allowing shebeens into the suburbs is another story all together.

That's one of the argument in the furore around the amendment of the Land Use Planning Ordinance of 1985 (LUPO), which will effectively allow shebeens or "house taverns" to be run from residential homes.

The recently approved Western Cape Liquor Act, which allows house taverns to be issued with liquor licences, will come into effect soon.

Now Western Cape communities are in uproar as provincial government proposes an amendment that will legalise shebeens in residential areas, and allow for "micro manufacturing" of alcoholic beverages.

The deadline for complaints and comments about the amendment is on Wednesday, and residential ratepayer associations are scrambling to hand in petitions and memorandums entreating the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning to think twice before approving the amendment.

Drunkenness in the neighbourhood

"There are a lot more cons than pros," says Amy Grainger, chairperson of University Estate Resident's Association. "There's going to be loud music, drunkenness, cars coming and going and there will be people right next door who need to get up for work the next morning, trying to sleep."

"We already have enough drunkenness in our country and now we're bringing it into our neighbourhoods."

The proposed amendment will include the definition of "house tavern" as being "an enterprise, conducted from a dwelling house or outbuilding or a residential zoned property... by the lawful occupant of the dwelling house concerned."

But Grassy Park community leader, Reverend Phillip M Bam, takes issue with that definition. "'The lawful occupant' could be any person who the owner puts into the place," he told News24. "One owner can own ten places and put in people to run it for him." Bam fears that it could turn into a franchise, with rich businessmen living in lush suburbs while filling up areas like Grassy Park with shebeens.

Bam pointed out a common concern: underage drinking and shebeens operating in areas where children will be playing and going to and fro.

"Children will be exposed to the sale of liquor in the very area they grow up."

Communities in protest

Bam is chairperson of Landsdowne, Ottery and Grassy Park Ratepayers Association (LOGRA) Civic and the Grassy Park Community Police Forum. He has galvanised his community into action and will deliver a letter and petition to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning on Wednesday.

The community gathered to meet in protest of the bill on Tuesday evening.

But director of Environmental and Land Management, Rudi Ellis, cautioned that the amendment means very little in itself. "These amendments are aimed at regulating the informal liquor trade from a planning point of view in areas where such control currently does not exist," he said, in an interview with News24.

He pointed out that in terms of the new Liquor Act the liquor board may only issue licences once it is satisfied "that the applicant has the right to use the premises concerned for the purpose to be authorised by the license.

"Since none of the existing approved scheme regulations of municipalities in the Western Cape make provision for such uses, it was necessary to include these uses in the regulations to enable municipalities to consider planning applications for such uses," said Ellis.

Amendment won't be shelved

Ellis said that social issues like those brought up by Bam and Grainger will be "taken into consideration by the Liquor Board when considering the issuing of a licence".

Forty complaints have been lodged with the department so far, but Ellis said amendment plans will not be shelved. Instead the comments would help "to draft the regulations in such a way that it could be more to the benefit of everyone involved".

But if communities have it their way, suburbs will be kept shebeen clear, by whatever means necessary.

"Urban residential areas are densely populated," says Bam. "It's not like a rural area where your neighbour is 100m away. You can't operate this without affecting your neighbour." "We're bringing it into our suburbs and that's not a good idea," says Grainger. "If only they would be as strict with alcohol as they are with cigarettes. You never see people getting raped or killed because of cigarettes."
Click to expand...

Firstly I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Philip Bam for his continuous efforts to make his community a better place.
I know this man and you can take it from me he is a Saint.

This new amendment to LUPO (Land Use Planning Ordinance) to allow a Shebeen into a residential area, flies in the face of ratepayers/residents expectations of service delivery from our Local Authority.
This amendment imho has been rigorously if not maliciously pushed through for none other than cheap political gain to appease a small sector of the community, many of which could be living in RPD houses paid with our tax monies or rented properties or simply unauthorised dwellings.

Basically someone can now open a Shebeen next to your house with this new amendment. :mad:
It has opened a whole can of worms which was totally unnecessary.

Of course there would be an opportunity to object against such a business in the first stages of the Application like any Land Use Application.
But the trouble with these sorts of application is that even if the Application was declined, this does not stop the Applicant appealing the decision and this is where the whole process can come unstuck.
As an objector one would have to actually attend the Appeal Hearing and state your case before the Council.
You would need to be armed with all the latest crime statistics from your area which you would need to obtain from the Police Station and make a case based on the fact that crime and alcohol go hand in hand.

It is a tedious and long process and Philip Bam has been successful in stopping each and every application so far.
The trouble is not every area has a Philip Bam living in it and this is how a seemingly innocent application to run a business from home can turn horridly wrong.
Go visit these areas where Shebeens are situated and one can see dubious people hanging around day and night and merchants peddling drugs and basically the whole area just turns to ****.
Not to mention the value of the properties in the area.

This amendment to LUPO is a rather large step backwards in Town Planning.
 
Last edited:
i am in a loss of words :eek:
how common can they get ? shebeens are horrid places and as you said only unpleasant people dwell there. "She-Been not so great idea that" :p

I hope that this action gets blocked in every possible way ... if they manage to land the 1st one it will be chaos ....

just imagine .... alcohol and drug abuse right on your foorstep ....
and our children will be exposed to it :sick:
 
If the shebeens is required to comply to all safety, health and other regulations, then just maybe it would more like a local pub. If however, it's run like the "normal" shebeens, it will only cause problems.
 
Nod said:
If the shebeens is required to comply to all safety, health and other regulations, then just maybe it would more like a local pub. If however, it's run like the "normal" shebeens, it will only cause problems.
Click to expand...

i agree BUT i do not even want a PUB nextdoor from me.
Just the disruption alone and the school pass rate should be enough the stop this sort of planning.
Imagine trying to study for your year end exams ... where it's in a township or any other neighburhood and you have a roaring "pub"/ shebeen right next to you ... kids will suffer the most.

but if you look at it the way the government see it, maybe ....
Less drink&driving. "You can now walk 3 houses down to go and drink" :sick:

but the way we should see it:
WRONG !!! JUST PLAIN WRONG !!!
 
Nod said:
If the shebeens is required to comply to all safety, health and other regulations, then just maybe it would more like a local pub. If however, it's run like the "normal" shebeens, it will only cause problems.
Click to expand...

I suspect there will be regulations to control these Shebeens, but with Council Morale at a low ebb and the few officials left that are worth their salt under pressure, I can see that the Shebeen's will rule the roost even despite complaints from residents to control them.

The thing is why put alcohol selling businesses in residential areas in the first place? Has the Government gone mad. Are they trying to cash in on more Sin Taxes from the extra booze sales.

Pathetic. :mad:
 
Bad idea all around. Hopefully it doesn't pass.

Comment period ends Wednesday, only heard about this on Wednesday evening, so no room to object. Pity and so much for public participation in gov't affairs. :(
 
South Africa's Cape Region has the highest recorded levels of fetal alcohol syndrome

If one has to draw a comparison.
Look what happened with the Taxi Industry when Government relaxed controls.
The Industry turned into a mess, that my own staff will rather wait 20 minutes for a bus than drive in a Taxi.

Give it a few years and certain areas where Shebeen's have been legalised will become the new slums if they are not already.

From a health point of view this new amendment to the legislation has probably nailed the lid on the coffin for FAS.
South Africa's Cape Region has the highest recorded levels of fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) in the world
 
I've heard you can protest the changes if you don't like them.

I think many of these amendments are designed to take the workload off the lazy, understaffed council workers.
 
You guys are missing the point, as usual. The act is to regulate shebeens, they been in the townships for ages and people there are tired of them. So this is long overdue.

As usual suburb dwellers get their panties in a bunch thinking OMG it's going to happen next door! Catch a wake up and realise that the act is going to be there to regulate a major problem that people deal with day to day.
 
sox63 said:
You guys are missing the point, as usual. The act is to regulate shebeens, they been in the townships for ages and people there are tired of them. So this is long overdue.

As usual suburb dwellers get their panties in a bunch thinking OMG it's going to happen next door! Catch a wake up and realise that the act is going to be there to regulate a major problem that people deal with day to day.
Click to expand...

so you condone this shebeen down the road mentality ??? maybe you are the one that should let loose some tension in your panties.

a shebeen is supposed to be illegal. now they want to aid this county's high
alcohol abuse stats regulated or non regulated .... ???

and all they will do is to destroy families and empower poverty and and drunkenness into society ? :eek:
 
sox63 said:
You guys are missing the point, as usual. The act is to regulate shebeens, they been in the townships for ages and people there are tired of them. So this is long overdue.

As usual suburb dwellers get their panties in a bunch thinking OMG it's going to happen next door! Catch a wake up and realise that the act is going to be there to regulate a major problem that people deal with day to day.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. :)

That is what Council would like you to believe. Council has another agenda.
The Ratepayers from the outset told them that this Amendment to LUPO was not necessary nor wanted, but they chose to pursue it.
It was politically motivated.

Give Philip Bam a call at LOGRA in Grassy Park. You will change your view on the matter after you hear the truth. Grassy Park has a lovely middle class coloured community that are trying desperately to rid themselves of Drug Lords, Shebeens and the like. The Police constantly raid these Shebeens and every month at the Community Police Forum Meetings the same old problems emerge from the speakers when we hear about these people that sell Liquor in Residential Areas.
There are so many social problems in these areas it is so sad and disheartening.
I try to attend the monthly CPF Meetings if I can.
Everyday someone in that area is stabbed or murdered because of drugs and/or alcohol. Last month a woman stabbed her husband to death while we were attending the meeting and the Station Commander had to leave in the middle of the meeting to go to the place of the murder. And guess what, the woman was drunk.

Why allow it in the first place?
No shebeens, nada, niks, ***kaal. End of story.

The devil will be in the detail when these applications surface and the applications that are successful will not be policed by Council.
Mark my words.
The different sectors within Metro Police don't even know their function or purpose, with the culmination of the 3 branches of the old City Police, Law Enforcement and Traffic Police in Cape Town.

And you/we/council are assuming that all people in Townships want Shebeens?
The Black Ladies that work for me complain of not getting enough sleep as the constant noise from the many Shebeens disturbs them at night, but they haven't the means or the know-how of how to complain about the predicament and if they do they will get a brick through the window.
They are the losers, as those areas will remain poor slums as a result of these liquor selling businesses.
No decent peace loving citizen will want to live next to a Shebeen whether they be in a Township or Constantia.

My 2c
 
Last edited:
The government has a problem. Illegal shebeens sprung up in the townships and they turned a blind eye.

Now it is seen as a problem because these places employ people and provide income to their community. If they closed them there would be trouble (cc. taxi situation)

Unfortunately, they cannot write bylaws that apply only in townships or only in Sandton.

They are trying not to have to act and enforce the law, because that involves effort, manpower and paperwork, so they do the least effort by allowing them under certain conditions.

It's understandable, but not the best way.
 
Skeptik said:
The government has a problem. Illegal shebeens sprung up in the townships and they turned a blind eye.

Now it is seen as a problem because these places employ people and provide income to their community. If they closed them there would be trouble (cc. taxi situation)

Unfortunately, they cannot write bylaws that apply only in townships or only in Sandton.

They are trying not to have to act and enforce the law, because that involves effort, manpower and paperwork, so they do the least effort by allowing them under certain conditions.

It's understandable, but not the best way.
Click to expand...
Good summation Skeptik.
Council=Least Effort :D

Council can try and spin this yarn, but as you said Government allowed them to blossom just like the Taxi Industry.
The damage is irreparable and lasting, because Government was negligent in doing it's duty.

It is a horrible Catch 22 situation. So many CC examples at the moment, all as a result of Government inability to act when it should.

I sympathise with Philip Bam and the Grassy Pary Community as they must feel like they have been sold out. They try so hard with little or no praise for what they do. Now this.
 
Last edited:
I think this is a good idea... The gvt is good at keeping its ppl under control.
He is giving the poor nice shebeens close by, thus allowing them to stay drunk 24/7

Thus making it even easier for the gvt to control them.

What the previously disadvantage doesnt know is that the gvt is using them like pawns... and because they are not educated and will never be educated they will love the idea.

Drunk ppl are easier to control, and drunk ppl are usually excellent crowds.

Let the gvt do this, the rich will just move out of the areas where the shebeens are implemented and the poor will have no choice

That is what the free market is all about.
 
baasvandieplaas said:
I think this is a good idea... The gvt is good at keeping its ppl under control.
He is giving the poor nice shebeens close by, thus allowing them to stay drunk 24/7

Thus making it even easier for the gvt to control them.

What the previously disadvantage doesnt know is that the gvt is using them like pawns... and because they are not educated and will never be educated they will love the idea.

Drunk ppl are easier to control, and drunk ppl are usually excellent crowds.

Let the gvt do this, the rich will just move out of the areas where the shebeens are implemented and the poor will have no choice

That is what the free market is all about.
Click to expand...

sad but very true ...
government's plan is to keep them drunk and uneducated ....

"It's like placing a frog in a pot of boiling water, it will just right jump out. But place a frog in a pot of cold water and heat it up slowly the frog wont realise that he is beeing boiled to death " :eek:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X