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 & Supp. 1994) upon an application for a retail
liquor license filed with the Department of Revenue and Taxation (hereinafter referred to as
"DOR") by James T. Price, Jr., for 308 Seaboard Avenue, Greenwood, South Carolina. A
hearing was held on May 16, 1995. The license is granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT
By a preponderance of the evidence, I find these facts:
(1) The applicant seeks a retail liquor license for a location at 308 Seaboard Avenue,
Greenwood, South Carolina, having filed an application with DOR, AI #101967.
(2) Notice of the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing was given to
Petitioner, protestants, and DOR.
(3) DOR did not appear at the hearing and did not indicate opposition to the issuance of
the license.
(4) Linda S. Horne filed a written protest to the issuance of the application and was given
notice, sent by certified mail, of the time, place, and date of the hearing, but did not appear at the
hearing and did not communicate with the Court to request a continuance.
(5) The proposed location is within the municipal boundaries of the City of Greenwood.
(6) The proposed location is located on a busy thoroughfare in a predominately
commercial area.
(7) The proposed location was formerly licensed and operated as a retail liquor store by
previous licensees, including Petitioner's father, James T. Price, Sr., from approximately 1968 to
1985.
(8) Adjacent to the proposed location, at 306 Seaboard Avenue, is a retail liquor store
and store licensed to sell beer and wine for off-premises consumption owned and operated by
Ralph "Sonny" Tharpe. Mr. Tharpe opposes the issuance of the license for the proposed location
on the basis that the opening of a business at 308 Seaboard will result in traffic and parking
problems at his stores.
(9) Mr. Tharpe's retail liquor store and beer and wine store are 111 feet and 141 feet,
respectively, from the proposed location, as measured by SLED Agent Ferrell pursuant to
23 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-11 (1976), and shown on a map incorporated into the record as a part
of the application file transmitted by DOR.
(10) The proposed location has parking space available for one automobile in the front
and up to twenty automobiles on the side and to the rear of the building.
(11) Petitioner intends to repave the side and rear parking areas of the proposed location.
(12) No more than twenty customers will normally be at the proposed location at any
given time.
(13) No church, school, or playground is within three hundred (300') feet of the proposed
location.
(14) Petitioner is over twenty-one years of age, is a citizen of the State of South Carolina,
and has maintained his principal residence in South Carolina for more than thirty days.
(15) Applicant has not had a permit/license revoked in the last five years.
(16) Applicant is of good moral character.
(17) Notice of the application appeared in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
of the proposed location for three consecutive weeks and was posted at the proposed location for
fifteen days.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:
(1) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1994) provides that the South Carolina
Administrative Law Judge Division is empowered to hear this case pursuant to Chapter 23 of
Title I of the 1976 Code, as amended.
(2) The issuance of retail liquor licenses are authorized under the provisions of S.C. Code
Ann. § 61-3-410(3) (Supp. 1994).
(3) A permit or license must not be issued if an applicant does not meet the standards of
S.C. Code Ann. § 61-3-730 (Supp. 1994).
(4) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-3-440 (Supp. 1994) dictates that a retail liquor store located
within a municipality must be a minimum of three hundred (300') feet from any church, school, or
playground. 23 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-11 (1976) provides the method for measuring the
distances referred to in § 61-3-440. No schools, churches, or playgrounds are within the
prescribed proximity to render the proposed location unsuitable.
(5) The proposed location is suitable for the purpose of operating a retail liquor store in
light of the commercial nature of the area and the past use of the location for that same purpose
without evidence of violaton or incident.
(6) As the trier of fact, an administrative law judge is authorized to determine the fitness
or suitability of the proposed business location of an applicant for a permit to sell beer and wine
using broad but not unbridled discretion. Ronald F. Byers v. S.C. ABC Commission, 316 S.E.2d
705 (S.C. App. 1984).
(7) Applicant meets the statutory requirements for issuance of a retail liquor license.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that DOR issue the retail liquor license applied for by
Petitioner.
_______________________________________
STEPHEN P. BATES
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
May ___, 1995
Columbia, South Carolina |
