ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1994) and S.C.
Code Ann. § 1-23-310 et seq. (Rev. 1986 and Supp. 1994) upon the application of Roshan
Vallimohamed for an on-premise beer and wine permit for a convenience store located on Leesburg
Road in Columbia, South Carolina. After notice to the parties and protestors, a hearing was
conducted on November 29, 1995. The primary issue considered was the suitability of the proposed
business location. Based upon the evidence presented, the application for an on-premise beer and
wine permit is denied.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I make the following findings of fact, taking into consideration the burden on the parties to
establish their respective cases and taking into account the credibility of the witnesses:
1. The applicant, Roshan Vallimohamed, is over the age of twenty one and is a resident
of South Carolina and a legal resident of the United States.
2. She currently holds an off-premise beer and wine permit for this location at 1704
Leesburg Road, Columbia, South Carolina. She also holds another beer and wine permit at a
convenience store that allows the sale and consumption of beer and wine both on and off premises.
3. The only violation against her permit occurred in 1990 for the sale of beer to a minor.
4. The applicant does not have any criminal convictions and is a person of good moral
character.
5. The applicant's son operates the business. He does not have any criminal convictions
and is a person of good moral character.
6. The location is a gas station and convenience store located on Leesburg Road. It is
currently licensed for the sale of beer and wine to go. The applicant expresses a desire to sell beer
for on-premises consumption based upon the request of customers who patronize the store to play
the video poker machines. Leesburg Road is a commercial thoroughfare with residences located just
behind the businesses.
7. The store operates seven days a week from 6:00 a.m. to midnight. There are five
video poker machines located in a separate small 20 foot by 20 foot space inside the store. The store
also sells hot dogs and other snack foods. No complaints from the community have been voiced
based upon the operation of this store.
8. There are no schools or playgrounds in the vicinity. A church is located approximately
560 feet from the location in the next block. A day care center is located adjacent to the business
separated by a fence. According to the investigative report prepared for the Department, the day care
is located approximately 200 feet from the proposed location. Its hours of operation are Monday
through Friday, 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Children aged from infancy to twelve years are served by the
facility. The owner of the day care did not oppose or support the application.
9. Another gas station convenience mart is located across the street from the proposed
location. It sells beer and wine for off-premises consumption. One block away next to the hair stylist
shop is a building in which there is a video store which rents videos and a Chinese food restaurant that
sells beer and wine for on-premise consumption. The owner of the building also lives in the building.
10. Residents in the area protest the application for on-premises consumption based upon
the number of calls to the police department, exposure of youth to drinking and gambling; and traffic
congestion on Leesburg Road. The police responded to 22 calls for this location of which seven
resulted in written incident reports. None of the incident reports written by police involved the sale
or consumption of beer or wine. At least one resident was burglarized several times by persons who
used the convenience store as a place to observe the activity at his home. The residents fear that the
location will no longer be a gas and convenience store but a place to play video poker and drink beer
that may cause loitering. There have been motor vehicle accidents near the location in which
consumption of beverages containing alcohol may have been a contributing factor.
11. Notice of the application was posted at the location for fifteen days and published in
The State newspaper for three consecutive weeks.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law:
1. The Administrative Law Judge is vested with the powers, duties and responsibilities
exercised by the former Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and hearing officers pursuant to
Chapter 23 of Title 1. 21-S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1994).
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1994) provides the statutory requirements for the
issuance of beer and wine permits. It provides in part that the location must be a proper one.
3. Although "proper location" is not statutorily defined, broad discretion is vested in the
trier of fact in determining the fitness or suitability of a particular location. Fast Stops, Inc. v.
Ingram, 276 S.C. 593, 281 S.E.2d 118 (1981).
4. As the trier of fact, the Administrative Law Judge is authorized to decide the fitness
or suitability of the proposed business location for a permit to sell beer and wine using broad, but not
unbridled, discretion. Byers v. South Carolina ABC Commission, 281 S.C. 566, 316 S.E.2d 705 (Ct.
App. 1984).
5. The determination of suitability of the proposed location is not necessarily a function
solely of geography. It may involve an infinite variety of considerations related to the nature and
operation of the proposed business and its impact on the community within which it is to be located.
Kearney v. Allen, 287 S.C. 324, 338 S.E.2d 335 (1985).
6. Proximity of a location to a church, school, playground, or residence is a proper
ground, by itself, on which the location may be found unsuitable for a permit to sell beer and wine.
Byers v. S.C. ABC Commission, 305 S.C. 243, 401 S.E.2d 653 (1991).
DISCUSSION
The proposed location is suitable and proper for the sale of beer and wine to go. The business
activity as a gas station and convenience store is conducive to the off-premises sale. The sale of beer
and wine for on-premises consumption changes the character and nature of the business from one in
which there is a flow of activity for a limited period for a specific purpose (i.e. to buy gasoline,
purchase cigarettes, milk or other items as a convenience) to one which encourages people to stay
and socialize. This change would adversely impact the neighborhood, the residents and affect the day
care.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the application of Roshan Vallimohamed for an on-premise beer and wine
permit for 1704 Leesburg Road in Columbia is DENIED.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
January ____, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina. |