Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Neighbors win continuance as supervisors ask development services to investigate Solana Guest Ranch liquor license
Loading...
Summary
Neighbors and an attorney opposed a liquor-license request for Solana Guest Ranch citing noise, unpermitted structures, light pollution and water impacts; Development Services will investigate alleged violations and the board continued the hearing and asked staff and the property to address outstanding permit and outreach issues (vote to continue 5–0).
Neighbors from the Kimberly Road/Corona de Tucson area and an attorney for an adjacent homeowner urged the Pima County Board of Supervisors to deny a liquor license for Solana Guest Ranch, saying the property has operated as an event venue without required permits and has caused noise, water drawdown and light-pollution problems.
John Anderson, an attorney representing Christina Brooks, the southern neighbor, told the board the property relied on an old conditional-use allowance but had periods of nonuse that, in his view, caused that nonconforming status to lapse. “There have been multiple instances where it hasn't had any nonconforming use whatsoever,” Anderson said, arguing the property has been used as a wedding venue without proper approvals.
Neighbors reported that a koi pond installed without permits appears to be lowering local wells and that amplified music and light beams disturb wildlife and nearby households. “I can't see stars anymore,” one neighbor said.
Development Services staff (Mr. Droszkowski) told the board the owner had an application for legal nonconforming use approved in August 2025 and confirmed there is a track record of prior commercial uses; he said the county will investigate complaints about permits, lighting, the koi pond and other potential violations and will work with code enforcement.
Board action: Supervisor Christie moved to continue the liquor-license item until Development Services and the property owner have investigated and addressed the neighbors' concerns and confirmed permit compliance; Supervisor Hines seconded and the motion passed 5–0. The board asked staff to return within roughly three months with an update and emphasized that the state liquor license process can proceed without a local recommendation but that the local investigation and neighborhood outreach should be completed before the item returns to the board.
Representative quote: “The liquor license would only apply to areas where a tenant improvement or commercial permit and the standards that apply for building code and zoning standards are already met,” said the Development Services representative, promising code-enforcement follow-up.
Ending: The board did not grant the liquor license at this meeting; instead the board paused its decision and requested Development Services complete inspections and report back with findings and evidence of compliance and neighbor outreach before reconsideration.
