DC- none
DM- bush, williams
KB- thienes, twining
BB- mcgee, williams
BT- mckeon, burns, babineau, palmer
AP- thienes, mckeon, twining
Marco Cuevas, Jr., Associate Planner, gave the staff presentation for the proposed project.
dm- who provides alcohol training
MC- ABC approved agency. app can discuss
DM- decline in calls for service? this year
Vicky Adams, civilian investigator for vice, - check dvd
dm reviewed calls for service from PD
AP- none of the other tenants are in support. they
cause noise issues and trash issues. crime rate vs general city. concentration of abc licenses. census tract.
BT- does HB have any restriction on distance from school to ABC licenses? Besides CUP 300 ft
MC- no.
DC- any complaints from families?
MC- none. public notification was done twice.
dm- check dvd
bb- check dvd
ap- school open in 1962. it's pre-existing.
bb- was a cup required when restaurant opened.
bb- when distractions became business?
mc- 2000, 2012? when did name change
dm- does have security on every shift?
mc- defer to applicant
OPEN
Keith Farrow, OVSD, opposed to item no. 26-264. denying intensification will not harm their business but apoproval will hurt residents and students. there are already multiple licenses in the area.
Peter Blied, Distractions, spoke in support of item 26-264. thanked staff for their work. this request is to convert type 42 to 48. business onsite since the 80s. issues in 2020 and owner and staff have been working with PD to improving things. there has been a reduction for calls for service. longstanding establishment. the license will help secure the future of the business. one year review required. owner could walk away and operate with cup. good opportinity to place conditions on the project.
CLOSED
DC- agree with appeal and ovsd. safety needs to come first. has school district ever recieved complaints?
KF- not ot my office
DC- establishment is set back. question if there is harm, children are not being released onto Beach Blvd. they're being released into adult care. do not think facts support concern. it's 600 ft from school, corner is gated off. leased to developer for retirement home. conditions seem stringent and on year review. support.
dm- why do we distinguish between licenses. when you add liquor then it causes increased incidents. more incidents this year than in 2025 and it's only april. liquor will likely increase incidents
ap- incidet rates for 48 dramtically hgiher than type 43.
dm- think we'd be negligent to allow
dc- if calls increase more than 25% in a 12 mo period than
dm- would you like to use this as an experiment then?
dc- trust PD
kb- no security required?
mc- not with current license.
kb- but recommended?
mc- yes. (read condition)
kb- if business stays status quo, then no security. so conditions would increase security/
bt- don't understand these bars. don't think there's anything good. looked at code and proximity to school. allowed by code. don't believe i can justify findings to deny, thinks this will give the city more authority. would support motion to continue. could get more police data and research. concerns with health recommendations for concentration of abc licenses.
ap- is there an ordinance that manages undue concentration of abc license.
mv- no
ap- so would need to request to council
mv- yes
ap- would also supoort becasue can't find for denial. but would add condition to upgrade bathrooms. currently open due to previous incidents. would support continuance.
bb- not as optimistic. there's a reason we have 26 conditions. it only takes one incident to regret. does everyone support continuance?
bb- does pd do follow ups on the licenses? who does them?
vicky- not a normal procedure but we will do a follow up. will probably be me.
bb- have we done these ever?
vicky- unsure.