Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Events topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers withdraw open‑container request for 5th Street market after council concerns about notification and liability
Summary
Applicants for a weekly 'Market on 5th' open‑container permit withdrew the application after council and public concerns about whether nearby business owners had been notified, inconsistencies in the application, expired business tax receipts and liability/insurance questions. Staff asked the applicant to resubmit a corrected application following DRC review.
Radley Williams, Parks & Recreation director, asked the council to consider a recurring open‑container permit that would allow customers to carry beer and wine within a defined event footprint on Fridays for a weekly event on 5th Street organized by Propagate Social House (doing business through CoPackingUSA). Staff noted the request must come to council under city code and that the DRC had reviewed the special‑event permit.
Council raised multiple concerns: whether all businesses along the proposed open‑container boundary (including the North side and properties whose BTRs had expired) had been contacted, whether the event application listed the correct event organizer and dates, whether allowing open containers in adjacent privately owned parking lots required landowner permission, and whether the city would face added police or emergency services liability. Multiple business owners and property owners testified—some in support, some opposed—citing liability and notification gaps.
Brandon Segarion, a 5th Street Plaza business owner representing applicant interests, said he had recently met with several plaza businesses and that "every single business in that plaza possesses at least, a beer and wine license," arguing the arrangement would facilitate patron movement among establishments. Other speakers disagreed about notification on the north side and private‑property boundaries. Staff recommended the applicant withdraw, correct inconsistencies, verify active business tax receipts and obtain written consent from landowners where the event footprint extended onto private property.
The applicant agreed to withdraw the current application at the council's request and to return with a perfected application after DRC review and written business/landowner consent. The council did not vote to deny the concept; it required a corrected application and additional outreach before reconsideration.
Next steps: Applicant to collect written landowner consent, update the application (dates, organizer names, BTR status), return to DRC for review and then to council.
