Opinion ID: 1963911
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Was the Board's finding of appropriateness supported by substantial evidence?

Text: The D.C.Code 1973, § 25-115(a) (6) provides that before issuing a liquor license, the Board must determine: That the place for which the license is to be issued is an appropriate one considering the character of the premises, its surroundings, and the wishes of the persons residing or owning property in the neighborhood of the premises for which the license is desired. Accordingly, the Board made findings of fact upon the evidence and concluded that: The premises qualify as appropriate for the issuance of a Retailer's License Class CRestaurantunder Section 14(a) 6 of the Act (25-115(a) 6, D.C.Code, 1973 Edition) . . . . [3] In considering whether the Board's finding of appropriateness is correct, the court is again confined to the substantial evidence standard. See Citizens Association of Georgetown v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, supra . Examination of the record reveals evidence which the court finds to be sufficient to sustain this conclusion. It appears that the proposed restaurant will be located in an area which has been characterized as commercial, [4] one whose W-1 zoning provides for the operation of a restaurant, among other businesses, as a matter of rights. [5] The proposed facility will seat only seventy-four persons, and off-street valet parking will be provided for patrons. No live entertainment will be offered, and ample arrangements have been made for the collection of refuse. A cinder bock wall surrounds the premises, dividing it from the commercial properties which it abuts. Six persons, including three local property owners or their agents, testified in favor of the intervenors' application. In contrast, although protests to the proposed license were registered with the Board in the form of a petition bearing fifty-nine signatures and through five detailed letters, the petition was never proved and the authors of four of the protest letters did not appear at the hearing. The only protestant to enter an appearance was the Association, which cited, among other reasons, a policy of opposing the issuance of all new liquor licenses in the Georgetown area. Under these circumstances, the Board's findings of appropriateness is supported by substantial evidence. D.C.Code 1973, § 1-1510(3).