Cafe owners face going broke over council's 'ridiculous' 12 chair limit
A couple say they face going broke after the council told them to remove all but 12 chairs inside their cafe – or stop operating. .
Jimmy Fairweather, 34, and Katie Funnell, 28, bought the Black Rabbit Kitchen & Bar in Bannockburn, on the outskirts of Cromwell in Central Otago, a year ago.
Fairweather said their dream had turned into a nightmare.
Three days before Labour Weekend the Central Otago District Council emailed the couple, co-owner Matt Crimp, and their landlord, to say they were operating outside the bounds of their resource consent by having seating for more than 12 people inside, and more than 12 people outside.
* Local council joins 400-plus voices opposing large-scale development
* Masterplan to be developed for Cromwell's future amid unprecedented growth
* Southern Stays: Cromwell does well for a weekend of sun
Council staff arrived on Friday morning to check the chairs had been removed, and warned they would be monitored over the weekend.
"It's turned into a nightmare, and it's a nightmare we can't get out of because we are financially invested in it. If we have these restrictions put on us we will end up going broke and that will be the end of this," Fairweather said.
When they were buying the business, no-one disclosed there was a limit of 12 seats inside, he said. Had they known, they would not have gone through with the purchase.
Their lawyer and the previous cafe owner had not picked up the condition, which came to light after a neighbour opposed the couple's application to renew their liquor licence, he said.
"I said [to council], 'you must have been in here over the years and realised there was more than 12 seats inside and 12 seats outside'. They said unless there is a complaint they don't do anything."
The couple, who are 30 weeks pregnant with their first child, have turned hordes of customers away, and looked on with embarrassment as patrons stared at chair-less tables. Some customers left. Others chose to stand. Some sat on the ground.
"I am wild about it. It's ridiculous. All the tables that are here now were here before, and there was seating for about 40 inside and 40 outside when we bought the place."
Former owner Imelda DeFreese said she was the fourth owner of the business and was unaware of any 12-seat condition.
"It was never something we were aware of. I don't understand how it happened in the first place and why the original owners never brought it up. Bums on seats is how you make money in this industry and you can't make it on 12. I would have never bought the place if I had known that."
Landlord Tim Hawkins said a submission was currently with council to increase patron numbers to 36, which had been approved by the owners before it was submitted.
Fairweather said he understood the application was for 36 inside and 36 outside, not in total.
"For us to trade, we need the numbers back to where they were. However, the council has said they will only consent for 36, which only gives us six more inside and six more outside, which is miles away from what it was originally. I don't understand where they got that number from and no-one can tell me."
Bannockburn resident and Cromwell Business Network member Duncan Faulkner said Bannockburn only had one cafe and it was one of the best in the region.
"It's owned by a young couple who are risking everything to make the cafe a success, and they are doing an incredibly good job. My family and I love it," Faulkner said.
More than 2000 people had signed a petition started by a patron in support of the cafe, he said.
"The council have discretion in their enforcement. Why can't CODC give them a few months to fix the consent, have their baby and give them a fighting chance a keeping the business alive?"
Stuff asked the council for comment on Friday, but it did not respond. However on October 21, council executive manager of planning and environment Louise van der Voort emailed the couple. She said the petition and "misinformation" about the consent and the position of the neighbours could "antagonise neighbours" and affect their new consent application.