Thanks for the clarifications, Alice. Given the way the requirements are written, you would think it would be a slam dunk that they'd get turned down, on the density issue alone. But i guess slam dunks haven't had such a good track record in recent years. <br>
<br>Do we know what the owners' plan is? A new restaurant? Expansion of the Alamo? Might the Board counter-offer an on-premise only license for a restaurant in view of the public and council opposition along with the rather stiff hurdles in the requirements for a liquor store that you outlined?<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 10, 2008 10:06 PM, Alice Ewen Walker <<a href="mailto:alice@ewenwalker.com">alice@ewenwalker.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On a couple of the points Dwight asked about...<div><br></div><div>The liquor board does consider density in the sense that it considers whether the public is being adequately served or not. In this case, the existing liquor stores in the area appear to be more than sufficient for the community's alcohol needs. A legitimate argument for the liquor board is that there are already many existing off-sale liquor stores that are adequately serving the public need. It is not necessary to provide another off-sale license to accommodate the public at this location. </div>
<div><br></div><div>In addition, the county implicitly addresses the issue of density by limiting the total number of licenses available. The license rules also recognize that location matters - for instance, you can not site a liquor store within 1,000 feet of a school. We would not have all these rules if there had not already been a societal and legal recognition that too many liquor stores, too close together, is generally a bad idea. </div>
<div><br></div><div>In getting a license, an applicant must show that "the granting of a license is necessary for the accommodation of the public" and "that the area surrounding the proposed site does not contain a sufficient number of licenses". In addition, the liquor commission may consider "that there are other reasons at the discretion of the Board why the license should not be issued." (which allows for argument / political pressure)</div>
<div><br></div><div>It is still VERY hard to stop a liquor store from coming in. </div><div><br></div><div>I appreciate the counter-arguments, but the potential risk outweighs the potential reward in this situation. While one less liquor store isn't going to solve all the problems we have along Kenilworth, one more liquor store sure won't help.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The Councilmembers from Ward 6, 5, and 4, who represent residents closest to this area, are extremely concerned about this application. I think we should support them and hope you'll take action as suggested in the Mayor's letter to residents. </div>
<font color="#888888">
<div><br></div><div>- Alice Ewen Walker</div><div><br>
</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>
</font></blockquote></div>-- <br>Riverdale Park Community Wiki<br><a href="http://rpwiki.wetpaint.com/">http://rpwiki.wetpaint.com/</a>