SURCHARGES - DINING

We just spent $344 for the two of us for lunch and were charged an extra $3.78 surcharge for using a normal bank credit card - including that same surcharge charged on the tip!  This is a grubby little rip off for little dollar value.  Some financially challenged so called junior manager decided to penalise anyone who doesn't keep a bucket load of cash on them when dining - may I suggest no one!  Let me put that into perspective, this charge is the same as adding circa 50c to the cost of say a main course from $48 to $48.5 as we had this day.  It's a hidden charge designed to make the menu seem cheaper - except it doesn't.  My suggestion, join the real world and make people's experience seamless without reputation ruining nasty surprises.  Think the ramifications through instead of trying to grub a few cents over and above an expensive lunch.In our job we have eaten at hundreds of restaurants all over the world and rarely encounter such backward anti-customer charging.

The farce with a sad end that is Fitzroy Street St Kilda.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PORT PHILLIP CITY COUNCIL

Concerning Fitzroy Street ...

In my opinion the Councillors for the City of Port Phillip, PTV and Vic Roads should have to personally reimburse the 18 or 20 businesses which have turned up their toes and given up in Fitzroy Street.  If it had been that just one or two failed then one could possibly blame the operators but being there are so many who have gone broke it would seem that there is more to it than just an incompetent operator or two.  From top end to plebeian, they have all failed to meet their owners expectations lost money and had to just close.

Who’s to blame?  The overriding answer is simple – people are in public authority positions of power wherein they can make decisions about which they have little expertise, historic perspective or strategic view.  This describes the Port Phillip City Council, senior city management, PTV and Vic Roads.  As far as the council are concerned, a bunch of people elected on some criteria far removed from what should be essential skills. There are many examples proving this point such as at least 18 years of no action on the Port Melbourne foreshore despite having an acceptable urban design framework for the whole period.  Examples such as the stupidity surrounding the original design for the triangle site which thankfully, due to public force, was eventually withdrawn but still cost us millions of wasted dollars.  Another example is the cost of car-parking.  A 10 year old reading ‘statistics for dummies’ could analyse usage [read tourists], rates against time and costs and see that there is a correlation between high costs of parking and empty spaces.  Drop the costs and people will come and nett profit for the council would remain as is.  Simple but too hard for some people to digest.

A fourth example is Fitzroy Street and its destruction as a must-go-to destination for both Melbournian’s and tourists.  This is a direct result of a weak council failing to recognise what Fitzroy Street was all about and acquiescing to minority groups and statutory authorities by allowing these groups to create urban havoc all without a feel for the area, its history and its future.

When there are 18 vacant shops in one smallish street, with past tenants ranging from high end restaurants to boutique businesses - just closing down - there can be no escape from the fact that there are major issues with the street itself.  Traders across all levels walking away from millions of dollars says quite clearly that the street is the problem and not the traders.

Given the inescapable fact that the street is the issue then what’s happened?  Once again the answer is simple Fitzroy Street has become a throughway but in fact it should all be about recognising that not every street in every suburb needs to transformed into a super fast tram route with channelled traffic and dedicated bike lanes.  This is because some roads deserve to be slow and visual so the strolling rubberneckers can see, taste and enjoy.  Not every street needs a few more tons of concrete to create unneeded and unwanted super fast throughways for cars, trams and bikes.

St Kilda is ‘Melbourne quirk’ and that’s what people expect and want to see and be a part of whilst being kept safe away from the disaffected. 

Changes to Fitzroy Street have destroyed its character which in turn means that it has lost the ability to attract both tourists and normal Melbournians.  It does however attract the bottom end of society and the drug affected.  With the ‘ice’ epidemic it has now become seedy and dangerous.   Take the Gatwick Hotel for example – it is a dangerous place.

The solution is unfortunately not simple.

Firstly, and in the immediate short term, the disaffected have to be removed.  CCTV is but one of the critical tools to make that happen.  Councillor Touzeau said, whilst recently voting against the installation of CCTV,  ‘everyone has the responsibility to make the sort of world we want to live in’.  This is just plain stupid and far removed from the real world.  Especially so given the Council created the problem in the first place. 

Secondly, Fitzroy Street needs to be made a ‘slow’ destination street by creating a streetscape for both pedestrians and destination visitors through creative parking.  There is no need for a somewhat dangerous bike lane and there is no need for any tram super-stops other than at the beach end [already installed] and St Kilda station end [already installed].  The middle bit needs rethinking.

There is need to remove the dangerous and little used bike path and replace it with 60 degree free parking because car parking correlates to visitors.   Then add lots of mature trees breaking down the long visuals, large quirky sculptures and more non-food retail.  Then add public seating in the middle of the road under the canopy of shade trees where people can just sit and watch the slow trams and the streetscape; after mandatory facia regeneration. 

We need the development of a ‘tourist’ precinct where wandering becomes an art form instead of a dice with dropkicks.

I personally remember the days when we ventured to dinner at Tolarno’s [since closed as Mirkas - once again] wandered around after dinner and absorbed some of the quirkiness of the street before returning to our dormitory suburbs. Successive councils have destroyed this ambience.

This council has to make a decision.

Are they going to recreate Fitzroy Street by removing the disaffected, recognising that Fitzroy Street is not a speedway for trams, cars and bicycles and spend some of our money creating a streetscape which will attract tourists and locals alike seeking a quirky but safe immersion experience.

This is a no-brainer – YES.

And with a properly designed triangle site and Acland Street precinct we have a chance at creating a world class tourist area.  Let’s not wait another 20 years.

Say thirty million dollars over 3 years is absolutely nothing in terms of the financial return and the benefits to all Melbourne.

Opera [house] in Melbourne ..

I wish to thank the Sydney Opera House Trust from a Melbournian’s perspective for their decision to downgrade and make Bennelong restaurant more 'accessible'. 

That pesky Frenchman created a beautiful multi-hat restaurant called Bennelong within our national icon.  A first class affair befitting its status.  Guillaume Brahimi, being  that pesky Frenchman, sought to create something special in the space as has Ducasse who leads the restaurant Jules Verne within Paris’s Eiffel tower.  Little compromise in either ‘wonders of the world’.

However, Australians it seems, according to the opera house trust, want an ‘accessible’ venue similar to the dozens of cafes and restaurants in the immediate vicinity. 

The Utzon hating Ryan Committee of yesteryear seems reborn – ‘don’t bother to create something really special because us Australian’s just want pub tucker – no need for that smancy stuff – just give us another café/bar’.

Nothing special or world leading, just average so us average people can go there and feel, well, average.

As Sydney does not seem to appreciate how to deal with ‘first class’ I wonder if we could shift the opera house to Melbourne where we would indeed laud the brilliance of Utzon and create a world class experience decidedly away from average.

This is not a slight on the successful van Haandels and we wish them well but my question remains, ‘Do we want yet another café / bar and importantly, do we want it in our one-off wonder of the world?’

My thanks, as a Melbournian, to the trust for downgrading Sydney.

Response – ‘Heads on a platter’ by Colman Andrews and ‘It’s a tough job ...’ by Joanna Saville and ‘Food critic’s demise’ by Suzanne Carbonne.

Tuesday’s Epicure in the Age September 25 2012 and Wednesday’s Age in Entertainment 26th September 2012.

It is indeed a pity when self-devotion to the aggrandisement of the self proclaimed professional restaurant critic’s expertise [apologies to Dickens] is toppled by Joe the blogger blob. Food reviewers are crying foul as their level of self proclaimed importance and vitriol is replaced by the equally self proclaimed but now collective vitriol of the unsworn albeit anonymous masses. For years so called food writers have survived on sensation and the negative such as demonstrated by the dubious literary eulogies of ‘Close ‘em down Downs’ [Stephen Downs – since fired] or the recent court case against a Sydney newspaper when they had to pay out millions because of a ‘review’ [Mathew Evans – no longer reviewing] which closed a restaurant. Something about the pot calling the kettle black comes to mind.

If nothing else the Evans case solidified defamation and liable laws where food writers and I suspect bloggers can not just wax lyrical with impunity from their own egomanic distortions of the real world. Say or write something untrue and the doo doo bucket just got deeper. We, the beleaguered restaurateurs, have a precedent!

Coleman Andrews said in his article, “We have to write better and more intelligently...” when referring to bloggers as competition. May I ask, “Why hasn’t this been a guiding principle for any article written about anything, ever?”

We own two restaurants and suffer the same indignities by food writers and bloggers as everyone else yet we still enjoy blogger ratings of 92% and 73% which, in the first case, outranks nearly all the hatted restaurants for a dining experience. We have had extremely negative blogger reviews removed from Google and Urban Spoon from people who never dined at either restaurant - having to do this really sucks. A published review on one of our restaurants a couple of years ago castigated us when the reviewer made some ‘interesting’ claims about a piece of metal the size of a kitchen knife left in his meal but post publication refused to provide any evidence preferring to hide behind a legal wall [He has just been given the flick from The Herald Sun]. Fortunately, after nine years, our business is strong and it made no difference but I wonder what would have happened to a new venture?. If we had a legal precedent then, all would have been different. The key change is that food writers can no longer say what they feel like and feed the malcontents in print just to sell papers. It got harder. The same publisher as the ‘metal in the food’ review named us as one of Melbourne’s best restaurants just two weeks later. Doesn’t say much for ‘professional’ food writers me thinks.

The problem for a reviewer and indeed any ‘food guide’ publication is that bloggers are finding the cracks. If a reviewer gives a restaurant two hats but the blogger collective gives them a mediocre score then who is right? If democracy is alive and well then the bloggers must be heard and perhaps the hat system needs to be revised to remove inconsistencies.

As a restaurateur, my challenge is to provide a ‘product’ consisting of the design of a space where people want to be, service which surpasses expectations and food aimed squarely at our target markets. Add on to that, making a profit and getting time enough to play golf and go on one of those strange things called, holidays.

A ‘reviewer’ [as distinct from a blogger] needs a proven level of expertise, relevant qualifications and must be prepared to take responsibility as does a ‘trouble shooter’ or a ‘consultant’ for what they do. It is not good enough to just feed the face and pontificate in print when the reviewer can destroy a new business costing ‘someone else’ their invested capital whilst they retain their impunity and ignore contributing factors.

The blogger will be with us forever but hopefully will be seen as the uneducated and unprofessional opinion albeit, an extremely important opinion as our efforts as restaurateurs are laid bare by their comments and, others of like mind will listen and make decisions based on those bloggs. The challenge is to remove comments by bloggers of low intelligence or whom have not raised themselves above toilet humour or who think that writing something nasty will bring them closer to nirvana. The answer is that we can’t remove them in total but we must make sure the idiots are seen as idiots and we must also make sure everyone realises that bloggs are manipulated by people seeking advantage – like advertising the more money you spend the greater the impact.

The way to do this is to make sure future professional reviewers are and are seen to be expert, above complicit activity [see article on Downes by Suzanne Carbonne in The Age September 26th] and support restaurateurs, not destroy them [see Coco Roco Vs Mathew Evans].

The newspapers and glossies like Gourmet Traveller along with the rest of us are subject to pressure by media marketing companies and it really is a joke the amount of free publicity some people receive before opening, during opening and post opening their next big foodie venture [see Epicure and Gourmet Traveller current editions]. Or indeed, how the level of advertising in a particular publication translates into positive publicity or the level of kickbacks taken to give a positive review [see article by Suzanne Carbonne].

The reviewer must rise above this underworld of kick-backs, bribery and bulsch [euphemistic interpretation of doo doo] to become a guiding light - not a ‘critic’ but a professional ‘reviewer’. Not a reporter but a journalist with opinions based on expertise, qualifications and a recognisable face. Just saying you have eaten out for 20 years therefore you are a qualified reviewer is not good enough. This is blogger territory.

We don’t need the vitriol, we need reviewers who are seen as honest but supportive and delve into why a particular restaurant is doing what they are doing. The blogger doesn’t give a toss other than what’s put in front of them and neither they should as their experience is one dimensional. [But that singular view is of enormous importance because they are our clients and like it or not they will have very valid opinions albeit not necessarily right.]

The reviewer on the other hand must be ‘three’ dimensional and above the underworld of the holier than thou’s.

Sorry but I’m on a roll now – personally, as restaurateurs, we don’t pretend to offer multi-hat cuisine [with one cook/dishwasher it’s impossible] but we do offer reasonable food, great atmosphere and service. We rank at 93% on blog sites which means 93 people out of 100 liked our total product and had a great experience. Our ‘blogger’ reviews are for the most part,sensational and we are full most of the time. This is despite Mr Downes and despite the fact that neither of our restaurants has featured in any Good Food Guide [nine plus years in business] and we have no media company selling us and we do not give kickbacks and we do not advertise and we grudgingly welcome bloggers.

This is what the reviewer needs to focus on, a total product but from a professional point of view. It’s not all about the food! It’s about an individual restaurateur’s investment in a great experience and the review must be cognisant of the hopes and dreams and indeed strategies of all the people involved in the restaurant.

Let’s take the review up the food chain a few notches! [pun intended].

Jon Langevad MBA

Director Cafe Dansk Pty Limited

Trading as:

Mon Ami Restaurant & Gallery - 144 Nicholson Fitzroy 94173220

Deco Bistro - 49 Beach Street Port Melbourne 96461101

Langhill Consulting - langhill.net

Jon Langevad Photography – jonlangevad.com

PRESS RELEASE - MAN BITES DOG!

Well not quite, but just as rare.

After two years of aggressive lobbying by Jon Langevad, the City of Port Phillip has DROPPED parking rates for the Port Melbourne tourist precinct between Bay Street and Melbourne’s international sea gateway, Station Pier.

Deep breath.

“This is probably the first time in at least 2000 years a local council has actually reduced fees and watch this space because Port Melbourne beachfront is going to be dragged out of a ‘who cares’ mindset into a place of action, history and excitement”, said Jon Langevad.

“This is a huge mindset step forward for Port Phillip Council as they have finally recognised parking is actually provided to attract destination visitors but if they jack the fees too high revenue decreases because people avoid the area. In the past Council implemented fees to “dissuade” tourists and destination visitors, but now they have seen the light and recognise the importance of making this fabulous ‘tourist’ area approachable and affordable.”

Being slightly pushy and somewhat tenacious Mr Langevad invited his local member, the Premier and two of his Ministers to join him with the Port of Melbourne Corporation and the Council along with Arts Victoria and NGV to create something special for Melbourne as part of an open development team. So far Martin Foley [MP] has been very supportive as has Stephen Bradford [CEO PoMc] and now Kay Rundle [CEO Port Phillip] seems to be also of like train of thought.

“To be fair, the Council has had a great urban design framework for the area for years but unfortunately it seems to have been filed under ‘too hard’”. Mr Langevad also said, “We need to make sure the shame that is Princes Pier does not repeat itself by bringing all the design parties together into one space to deal openly with the opportunities.”

He also said, “This stretch of beach could rival Rio or Antigua or any number of great tourist destinations not to mention San Francisco or indeed those strange northerners, Sydney people and their harbour.”

The impetus for change has been created and the first results are in.

“We need to keep it going”.

Jon Langevad

Director Café Dansk Pty Limited trading as Deco Bistro 49 Beach Street Port Melbourne.

An open letter to the Premier of Victoria about Port Melbourne

“Port Melbourne has no soul, why would you go there?” [Overheard from a not so potential tourist]

The Premier

Dear Premier Baillieu,

Please read the following and please don’t fob it off to some paper shuffler whose only objective is to avoid communication and actually doing something. As Leader, Minister for the Arts and an architect please make this happen.

Summary The less than 1km stretch of Beach Street and Waterfront Place between Bay Street and Princes pier including Station pier is a disgrace to Melbourne. Just imagine being an international visitor arriving by ship to Port Melbourne? Not a good look to say the least. Various levels of government have created the face of Port Melbourne and it unfortunately is less than welcoming to the point of shouting, ‘go away – we don’t want you’.

Australian bureaucracy .. Melbourne is one of the great cities in the world, is kid safe, has natural good looks, is extremely liveable and is in a country which led every other country out of the GFC. Yet, there is a dark side. Maybe we need to learn from Greece, Spain and Italy when it comes to scrutinising what all levels of Government actually do. Not what they say they do or are going to do but what they actually achieve for the good of the country and the people depending on those decisions. More importantly, we need to clearly understand just what they have failed to do and the ramifications of those inactions.
At what point do we object to the way elected governments fail to translate our needs into sustainable policy or indeed, even to be able to clearly recognise dysfunction? How bad does it need to be before we realise that our elected officials do not necessarily have the appropriate drive to deliver on the cognisant, positive and essential policies designed to enhance our country?
Unfortunately, it is a fact that there are many of our elected officials who crave public recognition at any cost but not by achieving recognition through positive deeds and actions but by seeking ‘instant recognition’ - more important than the outcome. The obvious example being, politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something by instigating punitive action rather than spending a bit more thought and creating a positive outcome. Punitive is easy.

Port Melbourne .. Our international seaway disembarkation at Port Melbourne is a disgrace to Melbourne, Victoria and Australia. This is the fault and responsibility of several areas of Government - The State Government, The City of Port Phillip, Melbourne Ports and possibly the Federal Government. Given the tourist and international importance of less than a kilometre of coastline encompassing the stretch from Bay Street through to Princes pier and including Station Pier, one would think there would be sustained effort to create something special. Not so. In the last 13 years to our knowledge nothing positive has been achieved. Indeed, the whole area has regressed to a point of dysfunction. As I said above, we need to see what has been achieved and what has gone backwards – not what has been promised or planned or ‘is in next year’s budget’ or ‘we will take it under advisement’ or ‘we are working hard’ or ‘it’s in train’ or ‘leave it to us’. May I say, nothing has been achieved and indeed the area has regressed to a point where insolvencies, bankruptcies and business closures are endemic.
This is a legacy of many current bureaucracies and past governments.
What a shame for Melbourne!

Solution .. The problems are obvious and the inability of multiple levels of Government to deal with these problems is also obvious. Therefore, to save our heritage and reputation, we need to immediately establish a body / consultancy / group without politicians albeit representing the 3 areas of government with enough legal drive to turn this situation around within weeks. That body could be as small as 3-5 people but with enough clout to demand from various government departments immediate action and address known systemic and endemic dysfunctions.

First fix – the obvious .. Immediate action is needed to support tourism and local businesses that depend on destination visitors. This is an easy first fix as all it takes is to reprogram parking meters to reflect reality.
Independent reports on parking commissioned by another council stated that parking fees are only applicable when demand exceeds supply and if that occurs, fees should be set at a figure promoting an 85% fill rate. In this way revenue is maximised, parking availability is maintained and parking supports local business. In the tourist precinct of Beach Street and Waterfront Place, it is mostly empty [less than 23%] being only busy when there are functions in the local restaurants and people have no choice but to park or when something like QE2 or Queen Mary steams into port. There is little demand and as parking is free everywhere else it discriminates against traders on this strip. Big words? No, not when you consider the ramifications i.e. up to 5 insolvencies in the area. The primary reason for the empty spaces is the cost of ticketed parking. We get many many complaints a week from our customers vowing to go somewhere else next time. This is a serious issue for our tourist precinct, the businesses and indeed a serious issue for Melbourne. This is because our sea gateway is seen as empty, dead, unapproachable and undesirable. No critical mass, no people and as people are gregarious by nature it remains empty. There are other reasons for this but parking costs are the first and most easily fixed. Simple, first hour free then $2 per hour from 2am to 7pm with no cap. The message this sends is simple and effective. ‘Port wants you to visit and enjoy what we have to offer and to show that, we have dropped our parking fees. ‘You should see us now’. There is no demand after 7pm as the ferry has gone; therefore there is no justification for fees at all but as the Mayor of Port Phillip believes parking fees dissuade Tasmanian ‘abusers’ and residents park their second and third cars on the streets, then make fees applicable from 2am. Everyone needs 85% occupancy from car parking for tourism, business and indeed promoting our gateway to Melbourne. Fee structure is one easily implementable action to help create a solution. Port Phillip council need to recognise a dysfunctional tourist area and make immediate and definitive change in terms of parking fees.

Second fix – anti-dead .. The second immediate fix is to force the Port Melbourne Business Association, into which all traders are required to donate, to action visual strategic promotion of the area. The ‘PMBA’ need to be forced to develop a professional business plan defining responsibilities reflecting our collective levies with immediate action [as distinct from its present documents and indeed, actions]. For example, why haven’t we got defined entrances with street banners and flags to Beach Street past Bay Street so that tourists feel special about entering the tourist area? Why are the banner points derelict and why are the flagpoles empty – for literally years? Port Melbourne is being whipped by Docklands and it shouldn’t happen. If you are in any doubt, PMBA recently advertised Docklands in a glossy magazine delivered to all of Port Melbourne within which we have a lift out. In effect we are advertising ourselves to ourselves whilst promoting the opposition. Fantastic! The above is the easiest part and can happen within two weeks. These actions will in themselves create an impetus for change and show to the Melbourne population that Port Melbourne wants visitors. Then, we get down to short term remedial actions. Port Melbourne cannot be seen as dying or dead. The closure of the former gym ‘block’ means that the area is empty, hostile and ghostlike. Dead or dying businesses also mean people avoid the area. An empty property has a certain spooky feel and is lifeless and foreboding. Up-lights under the palm trees on Beach Street outside the dead gym are indicative and are also dead and do nothing to alleviate the spooky feel. Not good for Melbourne.

Third fix – the ugly. The truck parking area remains a third world transition border crossing sans the barb wire. This is appalling unless you are a trucker with an avid love of truck spotting. Beach Street and Waterfront Place are turning into truck parking yards at peak tourist times with a marshalling yard designed to expedite truck movements rather than support a tourist precinct. We are aware that truck movements keep the ferry going and are critical to its survival and therefore are critical to maintain. However this does not mean that that goal is mutually exclusive to creating a tourist precinct. For example, the fence surrounding the area is dreadful. A dodgy wire fence with a misspelt sign is not the best look. Trucks do what trucks do within their marshalling area but it doesn’t have to be visible and destructive. There are many fixes for this but the easiest and quickest [think 2 weeks] is a proper fence and gates. The ideal would be a fence where pedestrian tourists say 200m away cannot see the tops of trucks within the yard. A fence designed to hide. [See heritage guidelines for second story additions to homes with an overlay] This not just a chunk of black hessian / plastic wrapped onto the existing fence, but a proper fence of some architectural merit with plantings around the top and base designed to hide everything. Maybe charcoal or dark green would be appropriate. For the entrance gates think wrought iron and Art Deco or go and see the fantastic new-ish gates on the St Kilda Botanical Gardens.

Fourth fix – Our future The area needs up-market retail to survive. The western side of the truck marshalling area needs to be developed for 8 or so small retail shops above truck height over the yard itself with a boardwalk and utilising existing grassed area. Any up market shop seen as leisure related would be great such as, souvenirs, designer garments, etc. Other fixes include - the wide footpath on the waterfront opposite Nott Street could become a market like St Kilda upper esplanade. Easy to implement through third parties. There are many water related sports which could be promoted for the beaches including kayaking, canoeing, diving, etc. Easily implemented through third parties. Why haven’t we got bollards [Geelong] and/or sculptures all along the area [Bondi] where artists can erect their masterpieces for sale and if not sold within say 6 months remove them and let someone else have a turn? Docklands are killing us in terms of street art yet we have the beaches and should lead the pack! Go figure!. Lastly, our international seaway. This is our huge opportunity to scream ‘Melbourne’. Station Pier is a disgrace to Melbourne and remains as a Gestapo style lock down. It has turned into a barricaded industrial homage for ferry access instead of promoting Melbourne as a city of life with ease of living and a welcoming persona. Imagine our trams going all the way to the end of the pier – imagine an arthouse theatre – imagine the MSO plugged. There are so many opportunities. Once again, for a ‘talented’ architect, the brief to create a world recognised landmark for Melbourne incorporating heritage features, the ferry and all the ancillary things would be sought after with some vigour and it doesn’t have to be the Taj Mahal. Princes Pier has not worked and is currently a homage to design by committee. Yet, it can be fixed. Changing our international arrival point and heritage piers is harder because it depends on several areas of Government working together. But it can happen and can happen quickly. All it needs is some forethought and a desire to actually make something happen along with power to make the changes. I can only imagine these changes happening through multi-level Government interventions because idiot power mongers will want to protect their area of so called responsibility and will not submit to mere co-operation preferring to hold onto power but in effect, do nothing. Therefore we need an independent body to take control of this tourist specific area and turn it around. Notionally, the less than 1km stretch between Bay Street and Princes Pier. May I stress an ‘independent’ body. Why, because multiple Governments have proven their incompetence on an ongoing basis. Especially the local council.

Mr Premier, this letter has been copied to the undermentioned, is published on my blog [nothappyjon.blogspot.com] and is with all the daily and local papers. It is up to them whether or not they consider Port Melbourne worth saving.
Yes, we do have a vested interest because we own Deco Bistro and Gallery at 49 Beach Street Port Melbourne and see the dysfunctions on a daily basis.
We want this tourist area to thrive and be a model for the rest of the world and it can happen quickly given commitment by all vested interests and an agreement to remove politicking.

Jon Langevad MBA

CC. Mr Mark Birrell Chairman
PoMC
Fx: 9683 1570
Included in this request because of his present role as Chair of PoMC and past experience as and especially Minister for Major Projects (responsible for Agenda 21 infrastructure projects like the Exhibition Centre, Museum, City Circle tram, the Regent Theatre, Docklands, Beacon Cove and the Sports and Aquatic Centre) as well as his interest in photography / visual arts. A man who should understand visual amenity and the failings of Port Melbourne.

Ms Rachel Powning Mayor City of Port Phillip
mayor@portphillip.vic.gov.au
Included in this request as Mayor of Port Phillip albeit because of elections this year, of limited tenure.

Dine out with an open mind.

We own a couple of restaurants and I suppose try to offer something other restaurants do not.
To survive and prosper, our cuisine needs to be a little different, meet a ‘wow’ factor and perhaps by virtue of supplying a menu, not offer too many over the top surprises. People hopefully come to us to enjoy what we offer and enjoy the experience. For example,you can go to a thousand places to get poached eggs but how many have poached eggs with truffle oil, poached cauliflower and ‘soldiers’ from house made ciabatta style bread?
Not many me thinks.
You may just want the generic poached eggs on white toast and you would be right in going to one of the thousand cafes who cook that style of egg. But, you would not be within your rights to come to our place and demand poached eggs your way, when we offer a different experience.
In reverse, it would be like going to a cheap and cheerful and demanding caviar - totally inappropriate.
Last weekend we had a gentleman who ordered a seafood risotto. This dish was mentioned on our ‘A’ board and was detailed within the menu.
Our ‘A’ board and menu version consisted of cured salmon, crayfish bisque and schnapper.
This customer was unhappy because he had expected something else; perhaps from one of the thousand cafes he frequented. He even demanded that he see the chef to tell him that he was concerned ‘others’ would be offended by the errant risotto because it didn’t contain what he thought it should.
Well, the chef [me] did confront the customer and tried to explain all of the above but the customer was well past listening because he was concentrating on himself and his opinions as well as even going to the absurd by justifying his position by exclaiming he was in the hospitality industry.
I feel sorry for this person because he misses the fun of dining out. He wanted the same seafood risotto as he had had at the thousand.
But when you come to our place expect to get the product we offer. It may be the same or it may be different but it is ours and we serve it our way. Hopefully it is always good.
In this way we remain differentiated from the thousand.
Telling me how to do my job is irritating and unfortunately I did tell him. Semi-politely.