Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK 99 PAGE 595 <br />ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE REGULATIONS DISCUSSION <br />Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed a Memorandum of October <br />30, 1996: <br />TO: James E. Chandler <br />County Administrator <br />D ION HEAD CONCURRENCE: <br />A <br />Robert M. Kea i , A <br />Community Developmen irector <br />FROM: Stan Boling, AICP <br />Planning Director <br />DATE: October 30, 1996 <br />SUBJECT: Request for Board Direction on County Alcoholic Beverage <br />Regulations <br />It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal <br />consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular <br />meeting of November 5, 1996. <br />BACKGROUND: <br />At its October 1, 1996, meeting the Board of County Commissioners <br />considered different requests from the Sheriff's Office and Lori <br />Fothergill (owner of "The Ultimate Pizza" restaurant) to revisit <br />the county's current alcoholic beverage regulations (see attachment <br />#1). At that meeting, the Board voted 4-0 to direct the County <br />Attorney's Office and planning staff to coordinate with Ms. <br />Fothergill, the Sheriff's Office, and other interested parties <br />(e.g. church and school district representatives) on possible <br />changes to the county's alcoholic beverage regulations. <br />On October 11, 1996, planning staff and the county attorney held a <br />discussion and input meeting attended by persons from: the <br />Sheriff's Office, the School District, The Ultimate Pizza, and five <br />local churches (see attachment #2). At the meeting, staff handed - <br />out a background summary and alternatives for discussion (see <br />attachment #3). Discussion focused on whether or not changes <br />should be made to the county's current 500' and 1,000' separation <br />distances between churches and schools and places where alcoholic <br />beverages are sold and consumed (respectively). Discussion lasted <br />for about 11 hours. <br />ANALYSIS: <br />At the October 11th meeting, planning staff asked if some <br />alternative standards, such as hours of operation, could be used <br />instead of separation distances and still adequately address <br />concerns about use incompatibilities. A summary of some of the <br />concerns and opinions expressed at the meeting are is follows: <br />•Sheriff's Office: Bars in various areas, particularly Gifford, <br />cannot meet current separation distances and will need to be <br />closed -down if regulation changes are not made. Closing down the <br />bars will lead to drinking and congregating in the streets, empty <br />lots, and houses. Regulation changes that will legalize existing <br />78 <br />November 5, 1996 <br />