In Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1519, the appellate court found that, while the city had presented evidence of complaints from neighboring residents and businesses, there was substantial evidence supporting the trial court's decision because the business's owner also presented "a great deal of evidence," and there was no showing by the city to distinguish complaints about Goat Hill Tavern from other possible causes, including another bar next door. (Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa, supra, 6 Cal.App.4th at p. 1531.) The owner's evidence in Goat Hill included: (1) a petition signed by about 1,035 persons, supporting CUP renewal; (2) numerous letters from residents, area businesses, and civic and charitable groups supporting CUP renewal; and (3) declarations from its janitorial company indicating the bar had expanded its cleanup area. (Id. at p. 1524.) Goat Hill also presented evidence that the complaints were caused by homeless persons who congregated in a nearby parking lot, or by another bar directly adjacent to Goat Hill. (Ibid.) Finally, Goat Hill submitted police reports of incidents at all "similar establishments," and over half of those had a higher number of incidents during the same timeframe. (Id. at pp. 1524-1525.)