Alright, I think I understand this, but will someone correct me if I'm wrong:

ABC 1: Establishment can sell only 3.2% ABW beverages.

ABC 2: Establishment can sell beverages in excess of 3.2% ABW, but those beverages may not account for more than 50% for the restaurants revenue.

ABC 3: Establishments can sell beverages in excess of 3.2% ABW, but they may not be located within 300 feet of a church or a school. I am unsure if there is a restriction of food (I would assume none)

Assuming an establishment has an ABC-2, is it necessary for them to provide documentation that alcohol is not contributing to more than 50% of revenue? I'm not sure of its license, but the Speakeasy serves food, and probably makes a little bit of money doing so. If they are operating under an ABC-2, there's just simply no way that food accounts for anywhere near 50% of their revenue.

Other places I would assume are similar: RePUBlic, TapWerks, Saints, WSKY, McNellie's, etc. These are places that sell food, and I would bet that at least a few of them are using an ABC-2 (I'm 98% positive Saints is) but no way is 50% of the revenue food based.

I think you've got it right. TapWerks is a tricky one - Bricktown is the only place in the City where ABC-3 is allowed by right, so their controls are more related to ABLE Commission than OKC's zoning laws.

ABC-3 is allowed everywhere. To be ABC-3 you must be 21+ to enter, must do more than 50% of sales in alcohol, and must not be within 300 ft. of a church, school, or residence.

With that being said, I should explain how I operate an ABC-3 license in a neighborhood, clearly not being 300 ft. from a residence. Our legal counsel filed for an ABC-3 overlay and variance for the downtown business district which included the block at 2nd and Central where WSKY is located. In order to do this, we had to go in front of the zoning department, the planning commission, and the city council.

The Deep Deuce Grill on the other side of the street is ABC-2 which requires no restrictions or overlays. They are a bar at night but I assume their lunch offsets their percentage to a degree, putting them either over or close to the 50% mark.

The ABLE commission does not require documentation of food sales monthly but can come in and audit at any given time. There are plenty of "restaurants" in OKC that are operating under a ABC-2 license but sell far more alcohol than food.

ABC-2 must also be either smoke free or have a designated smoking area where as ABC-3 has no restrictions. Those are the biggest differences.

I never knew ABC-3 wasn't allowed within 300 ft of a residence either. The state needs to create away to get exceptions to that rule. This explains why neighborhood bars (not restaurant/bars) are less common here than in a lot of cities and with the trend moving towards mixed use development this rule is going to stifle business and vibrancy.

Alright, I think I understand this, but will someone correct me if I'm wrong:

ABC 1: Establishment can sell only 3.2% ABW beverages.

ABC 2: Establishment can sell beverages in excess of 3.2% ABW, but those beverages may not account for more than 50% for the restaurants revenue.

ABC 3: Establishments can sell beverages in excess of 3.2% ABW, but they may not be located within 300 feet of a church or a school. I am unsure if there is a restriction of food (I would assume none)

Assuming an establishment has an ABC-2, is it necessary for them to provide documentation that alcohol is not contributing to more than 50% of revenue? I'm not sure of its license, but the Speakeasy serves food, and probably makes a little bit of money doing so. If they are operating under an ABC-2, there's just simply no way that food accounts for anywhere near 50% of their revenue.

Other places I would assume are similar: RePUBlic, TapWerks, Saints, WSKY, McNellie's, etc. These are places that sell food, and I would bet that at least a few of them are using an ABC-2 (I'm 98% positive Saints is) but no way is 50% of the revenue food based.

SHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

I never knew ABC-3 wasn't allowed within 300 ft of a residence either. The state needs to create away to get exceptions to that rule. This explains why neighborhood bars (not restaurant/bars) are less common here than in a lot of cities and with the trend moving towards mixed use development this rule is going to stifle business and vibrancy.

There is a way. It just costs quite a bit of time and money. For a variance, you must have an attorney send notices to all owners within a certain radius, file with the proper offices at the city, and present your plans in front of the officials.

All in all, it took about 2 months and around $6,000 to get it rezoned BEFORE applying for my ABLE License (another $7,000 or so).

The Thread Title slipped a Jackson 5 song into my noggin.

Are there differences in parking requirements for these various licenses?

I never knew ABC-3 wasn't allowed within 300 ft of a residence either. The state needs to create away to get exceptions to that rule. This explains why neighborhood bars (not restaurant/bars) are less common here than in a lot of cities and with the trend moving towards mixed use development this rule is going to stifle business and vibrancy.

OK, here is partly where the confusion sets in. The residential setback requirement is a City of OKC zoning requirement, not state law. There are also CITY zoning restrictions on locating near schools and churches. But city zoning can be changed fairly simply, as Jarrod points out. The church/school radius limitation, however, is also STATE LAW. This is the law that was amended a couple of years ago, allowing SCHOOLS to waive the restriction on a case-by-case basis, if they so choose. This was specifically in response to ACM@UCO locating in Bricktown and accidentally stifling new BAR (not restaurant) licenses in the district. ACM@UCO championed the change, because they did not want to create this consequence.

I would still point out that churches were not addressed in the change, and are not given the option to waive the restriction. Therefore, a storefront church (becoming more popular in urban areas, especially among the younger crowd) could create the unintended consequence of stifling nearby bar development. Or in the case of a more conservative church that actually WISHED to stifle bar development, they could rent a storefront and move into an area, creating a bar "dead zone," precluding new licenses without any input from the surrounding neighborhood or community. Of course, an ABC-2 establishment would not be affected.

"Schools". For the purpose of the state law change only included colleges and university's in a BID