Proposal for small restaurants in Riverside/Avondale to serve liquor

[Ming The Merciless]

Sentient deserves some kind of civic award.  Seriously. Bang on the money.

I'd just like to see the potential for all businesses and the area realized.  Why can't you get a Bloody Mary on saturday morning in The Fox, but now you can across the street at Mellow, or the Brick or Blufish and will soon at Biscotti's and Casbah?

Answer - because they have 80 seats?  WTF sense does this all make?

And who appointed RAP an meddler in chief on these issues?  RAP is just a strong arm private lobbying group.

I will certainly not disagree with you.  The arbitrary 150 seat/2500sf requirement for an SRX license is foolish.  However, if you are a restaurant owner and spent a great deal of time and money identifying and renovating a space large enough to meet that requirement, you may be a little miffed that the rules are being changed.

Yeah, that's called business.  You don't get a fixed guarantee of your future conditions when you step up to the window and buy your ticket -- odds change.  If you're someone who built out a big space and you're doing well, then more traffic is only going to help, not hurt.  If you're someone who built out a big space and you're not doing well, then you need to look at what you're doing relative to the market -- it's not them, it's you.  So long as the rules are applied to the entire market (and government, quasi-government and the various meddlers aren't involved in picking winners and giving preferences), then that's the way it goes.

[marksjax]

One thing to remember is that an SRX (restaurant type) liquor license requires that the restaurant maintain at least a 51% food to alcohol sales ratio.
It must be a bona fide restaurant that has a menu available the entire time that alcohol sales are taking place. This will differentiate it from a stand alone bar (4COP) license which does not require any food sales.

The fewer the seats the less food will be sold. So the potential problem would be maintaining the 51/49% ratio. Not impossible to accomplish but maybe a reason why the state came up with the number of seats and square footage requirements.

And remember that alcohol is a very heavily regulated industry.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

One thing to remember is that an SRX (restaurant type) liquor license requires that the restaurant maintain at least a 51% food to alcohol sales ratio.
It must be a bona fide restaurant that has a menu available the entire time that alcohol sales are taking place. This will differentiate it from a stand alone bar (4COP) license which does not require any food sales.

Just a question, but are wine sales figured differently?  Is there a way to differentiate from bottle sales v/s BTG?

[marksjax]

With an SRX license wine, beer and liquor sales are counted as one category and not broken down as such.

With a 2COP (beer and wine) license there is no 51/49 rule. With that license you can sell more alcohol than food (I believe it doesn't matter). And beer and wine licenses have a lower bar to pass as regards zoning, etc.

It is the liquor sales that seem to be the trigger for all of these laws and different classes of licenses.

Remember alcohol in general and liquor in particular are still viewed as a negative in many communities. Thus all the zoning laws in place to restrict their location and by doing that limiting the sheer number of places that sell hooch. That is the real motivation.

[Sentient]

Answer me this though....how does lowering the existing requirement of 150 to 100 hurt?

Are you asking me?  Lowering the requirement is Ok... but it is still anti-competition and all the players know it.  So "lowering" it to a bar (heh) only a few can pass by design is wrong.  And doubly wrong to claim this is some boon to small business, it's a boon to only a few.


The entire requirement should be scrapped.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I have to say that I'm in agreement with Sentient 1,000% on this.  Does lowering an arbitrary number of required seats help some?  Sure, but that's trying to fix the results of an ongoing problem rather than fixing the problem itself, if one exists.

Since the SRX licenses are based around a food to alcohol sales ratio, why not focus the attention on the actual kitchen rather than the number of people who can be seated.

You want to open a full service restaurant with alcohol sales that only seats 20 people?  Great.  Here's a list of the basic minimums your kitchen is going to require.  Exhaust fans, grease traps, walk-ins, etc...  You can still fit into existing building stock, but the upfront costs will prohibit the scammers looking to sell $4 shots of Jack Daniels and $20 ham & cheese sandwiches on paper plates.

[marksjax]

At the risk of stating the obvious I will say that the reason behind wanting to upgrade to full liquor service is primarily financial.
The profit margins of restaurants are typically very low. In many cases the old industry adage of 'break even on the food and make your profit on the alcohol sales' is never more true than today.

I have worked for and know other examples of high profile restaurants that originally started with beer and wine only and didn't sell liquor as it was not something they wanted to do. But they finally switched that train of thought when the reality hits that while they were busy places there just wasn't hardly any profit at the end of the year. That changed when they did finally make the switch to an SRX license that allowed liquor sales. In many cases it is the only way to remain open.

The food business is brutal.

[simonsays]

Yeah, that's called business.  You don't get a fixed guarantee of your future conditions when you step up to the window and buy your ticket -- odds change.  If you're someone who built out a big space and you're doing well, then more traffic is only going to help, not hurt.  If you're someone who built out a big space and you're not doing well, then you need to look at what you're doing relative to the market -- it's not them, it's you.  So long as the rules are applied to the entire market (and government, quasi-government and the various meddlers aren't involved in picking winners and giving preferences), then that's the way it goes.

+ 1 This stuff should be obvious, America.....

[Know Growth]

RAP is involved in hopes of reducing future large scale proposals.

But it appears not much more insight will appear on a Forum. We rarely, if ever see here posts from Dr. Wood, RAP directors, board members and countless Rappers who are ready to respond, check book in hand, in the event Land Use & Zone decision Appeal is in order.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

RAP is involved in hopes of reducing future large scale proposals.

But it appears not much more insight will appear on a Forum. We rarely, if ever see here posts from Dr. Wood, RAP directors, board members and countless Rappers who are ready to respond, check book in hand, in the event Land Use & Zone decision Appeal is in order.

Damn, KG, that was....  coherent and to the point.

I'm gonna take a wild guess, but you must already be at about....  8 fingers? 

[Know Growth]

RAP is involved in hopes of reducing future large scale proposals.

But it appears not much more insight will appear on a Forum. We rarely, if ever see here posts from Dr. Wood, RAP directors, board members and countless Rappers who are ready to respond, check book in hand, in the event Land Use & Zone decision Appeal is in order.

Damn, KG, that was....  coherent and to the point.

I'm gonna take a wild guess, but you must already be at about....  8 fingers? 

No hard stuff, only one (middle) finger 

I was going to utilize the word "propensity" but opted out,no doubt some would stumble, assume the poster was "In Coherant".