Opinion
Rehearing Denied July 1, 1975.
Edward B. Towey, James J. Zak, Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
Max P. Zall, City Atty., Lloyd K. Shinsato, Asst. City Atty., Denver, for defendant-appellant.
KELLY, Judge.
Defendant, George A. Canjar, Director of Excise and Licenses for the city and county of Denver, appeals from a judgment of the trial court reversing his decision denying the issuance of a 3.2% Fermented malt beverage license to National Convenience Stores, Inc. We reverse.
The trial court found that the director's denial of the application was arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion, and ordered him to issue the license. The director's appeal is based on his contention that the applicant's evidence failed to establish that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood were not being met by the existing outlets. We agree.
Under s 12--46--105(1)(c), C.R.S.1973, the licensing authority must consider both the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood and the desires of the residents. Here, the applicant submitted petitions with 227 signatures in favor of issuance of the license. In addition there was testimony that there were approximately 860 houses located within the designated area, and that the proposed outlet would be open three to six hours daily after all but one of the existing outlets had closed. The director found that applicant's evidence established a desire for this outlet, but had not shown a need for the additional outlet.
A licensing authority is vested with broad discretion and all reasonable doubts as to the correctness of its rulings should be resolved in its favor. See Board of County Commissioners v. Salardino, 138 Colo. 66, 329 P.2d 629. Findings of a local licensing authority may not be disturbed on review unless they are arbitrary and capricious. See Quedens v. J. S. Dillon Co., 146 Colo. 161, 360 P.2d 984; Board of County Commissioners v. Salardino, Supra. To warrant setting aside a decision of a licensing authority, there must be no evidence in the record to support it. See Jennings v. Hoskinson, 152 Colo. 276, 382 P.2d 807.
Here, there was evidence before the director that there were five existing outlets already in the designated area of six blocks. The proximity of existing outlets to the proposed outlet is an important factor to be considered by the licensing authority. See Big Top. Inc. v. Hoskinson, 158 Colo. 400, 407 P.2d 26. Moreover, the number of licenses already existing in an area is a factor which may support denial of an additional license, and where, as in this case, the applicant fails to show that the existing outlets are not adequately serving the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood, a license application is properly denied. See Jennings v. Hoskinson, Supra.
Judgment reversed.
ENOCH and SMITH, JJ., concur.