Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Stonecrest council defers Farrington Road liquor‑store permit after residents protest
Loading...
Summary
At a Dec. 18 council meeting, Stonecrest officials deferred a special‑use permit to reestablish a package store at 5940 Farrington Road after residents raised safety and density concerns; council asked for a written agreement from the property owner and retained several staff‑recommended conditions.
Stonecrest — The City Council on Dec. 18 deferred a request to reestablish a package (liquor) store at 5940 Farrington Road after several residents opposed the move and councillors asked for written assurances from the property owner.
Staff described the property as C‑1 (local commercial) on 1.48 acres with roughly 9,152 square feet of building space and said the business previously operated as a package store until June 2025. Applicant Abdulahi Abdi told council he and family members plan to reopen and have upgraded security, including ADT business cameras, additional cameras and plans for a paid security presence during business hours.
Residents who spoke during the public hearing urged the council to reject or delay the permit. “We don’t need another liquor store in the neighborhood,” said Melissa Patty, who identified her address and said nearby blocks already host multiple package stores and gas stations. Marty Garrison, a nearby homeowner, told the council the businesses ‘do not benefit our community’ and said existing stores have harmed neighborhood quality of life.
Staff recommended approval subject to conditions that include painting and color‑matching fencing and dumpster enclosures, installing landscaping to screen parking, removing a monument sign near the western boundary, and installing high‑resolution exterior security cameras covering all entrances, parking areas and loading zones with footage retained for a minimum of 30 days and made available to law enforcement on request. Staff also recommended signage prohibiting on‑site consumption.
Council members debated whether conditions that affect the parcel’s physical improvements can be imposed on an applicant who does not own the property, and whether the property owner had formally agreed to the conditions. Councilwoman Alicia Washington moved to defer the special land‑use permit until the next council meeting and to require a written agreement from the owner that the listed conditions will be implemented; the motion passed 3–2.
The council’s action defers any final decision until the next scheduled meeting. Staff said written confirmation from the property owner should be submitted before permits are issued and that code enforcement will verify compliance with conditions if and when the application returns to council.
