HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.b. Amendment to TOPS Pizza & Hoagies On-Sale Liquor License Class B and Special Sunday Liquor License RosEmouNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Regular Meeting: February 6, 2012
AGENDA ITEM: Amendment to TOPS Pizza & Hoagies AGENDA SECTION:
On -Sale Liquor License Class B and
Special Sunday Liquor License Public Hearing
PREPARED BY: Amy Domeier, City Clerk, Kim Lindquist, AGENDA NO 7.b.
Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, 3 -1 -16: Outdoor Patio
and Decks, Building Official Memo,
Executive Summary for the Board of APPROVED,BY:
Appeals and Adjustments Meeting of
June 28, 2011 D �
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the
On- Sale - Liquor License Class B for TOPS Pizza & Hoagies subject to conditions.
ISSUE
Markos and Steven Chouliaris have requested to amend their Application for an On -Sale Liquor License
Class B for TOP Pizza & Hoagies located at 14533 Dodd Blvd. The proposed amendment would allow
for the sale and consumption of alcohol on the patio located on the west side of the currently licensed
premise. Patrons would only be able to access the patio from the inside of the building. If the City
Council approves the liquor license amendment, it must be filed with the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety's Alcohol and Gambling Division. The City fee for obtaining the liquor license amendment is
$175.00.
BACKGROUND
At the June 28, 2011 Planning Commission meeting the applicants received a side yard setback variance to
allow for the construction of an outdoor patio. The patio has been used as a smoking patio for patrons
who wished to smoke outside. There was no seating and no liquor service proposed. With this application
there is no additional seating proposed for the patio. However, any additional seating that is added to the
patio would require the applicants to pay additional SAC charges as required by the Metropolitan Council.
Additional seating would not require any City permits so if staff notices the installation of tables and chairs
on the patio, the Metropolitan Council would be notified.
At the time of variance, the applicants were aware that liquor could not be carried outside or served-on the
patio without receiving an amendment to their liquor license. It was also noted that a condition to allow
for the sale and consumption on the patio was to install a fence consistent with the ordinance
requirements for outdoor patios. Since that time, a fence made of faux wrought iron was installed.
However, the City has no record of a permit for the fence. The Building Official inspected the fence on
January 25, 2012. As stated in the attached memorandum from Building Official Strand, the gates of the
patio enclosure need to latch on the interior side and must swing out in the direction of egress travel. The
patio gates must also be equipped with'panic hardware to meet the requirements of the liquor ordinance
and building codes.
The location and design of the patio meet the standards of the outdoor patio ordinance for the liquor
licenses except for the trash receptacle. The patio is located directly adjacent to the west side of the
building, opposite the parking lot adjacent to a residential use. There are shrubs and landscaping installed
on the west and north side of the patio. There is a light on the exterior of the building within the patio
area and the door to the patio is glass that would allow monitoring of the patrons per the ordinance
standards. There is a five gallon bucket located next to the door for trash and cigarette butts. Similar to
other outdoor patio approvals, where there has been discussion about the outdoor furniture, a more
acceptable trash receptacle should be placed on the patio.
One issue of note is that the recently installed trash enclosure does not have gates. Although not
specifically related to the outdoor patio, often the City tries to bring properties into compliance with
ordinance standards when additional approvals are granted. Since the enclosure is new, there is no
grandfathering of its non - conforming status. Therefore staff is also recommending conditioning the liquor
license amendment to bringing the trash enclosure up to zoning code standards.
The applicant will be subject to follow all regulations set forth in the City Code under Ordinance Section
3 -1 -16. The applicant must submit a Certificate of Liability insurance including the patio area in the
premise coverage. Staff is also requesting that applicants submit the following fees: $175 for the liquor
license amendment and $75 for the fence permit.
RECOMMENDATION
Upon holding the public hearing, staff recommends approval of a Motion to Adopt a Resolution
Approving an Amendment to the On -Sale Liquor License Class B for TOPS Pizza & Hoagies subject to
the conditions outlined in the attached draft resolution.
2
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
TOPS PIZZA & HOAGIES CLASS B ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
AND SPECIAL SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSE
WHEREAS, Markos and Steven Chouliaris have submitted a request to have their Class B On -Sale
Liquor License and Special Sunday Liquor License applications for TOPS Pizza & Hoagies, 14533
Dodd Blvd., Rosemount, amended to include the outdoor patio located on the west side of the
premises.
THEREFORE, BE IT`RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves the amendment to
the license applications for the Class B On -Sale and Special Sunday Liquor Licenses subject to the
following conditions:
1) The applicants will be required to follow all regulations set forth in the City Code 3
2) The applicants must submit "a Certificate of Liability Insurance including the patio area in
the coverage;
3) The applicants must provide appropriate receptacles for rubbish, garbage, cigarette
paraphernalia, etc.
4) The applicants obtain the proper fence permit to ensure that the required fence
standards meet code upon final inspection by the Chief Building Official.
5) The applicant submit the $175.00 Liquor License Amendment fee.
6) The applicant install gates on the existing trash enclosure
7) If seating, including tables and chairs, are added to the outdoor patio, the applicant will
be required to pay the SAC charges required and as determined by the Metropolitan
Council.
ADOPTED this 6th day of February, 2012 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
' 3 -1 -16: OUTDO PATIOS AND DECKS: , ;
b .
v r
A
f r s `4 : a n E
A. Conditions Under Which Permitted:,Service and consumption of alcohol on outdoor patios and deck in_
c` onjunction`with an intoxicating liquor "on- sale" license, an "on- sale" wine license, a special club license,
'a special license for Sunday sales or a 3.2 percent malt liquor license may be permitted by the city
council under the following conditions:,
., 1. The patio or deck °area must be compact and contiguous to the licensed. premises and shall be
enclosed with a wrought iron railing that meets standards`set forth'in this' code and final inspection by
. ` '" the chief building official.
2. Appropriate receptacles for rubbish, g arbage; cigarette paraphernalia, etc., mu be provided.
t.
3:° Lighting must be sufficient to promote public safety, directed downward, and compatible 'with the ,
surrounding area. `'
4. A' buffer zone should be provided b ' e tweenrthe patio or deck "area and adjacent } parking lot. Th area
surrounding a patio or deck area must be fenced so as to not allow entrance from'outside the fenced
,; area onto the patio or deck�area. . �' "�, • i
5. Smoking may be allowed on the patio or deck area,` provide it is in compliance with the Minnesota
"freedom to breath act of 2007 ". (Ord. XVI.57, 12 -18 -2007)
y .
• 6. Music, televisions, bands, amplified sound or any activity that would disturb the peade of the
surrounding area is prohibited on the outdoor patio or deck area. Background music that does not
disturb the peace of the surrounding area is.permitted during hours when service of alcoholic
beverages is permitted. (Ord. 2010 -04, 4- 6- 2010) .
7. The patio or decka`rea shall be controlled and monitored continuously during the hours of operation �,
'and unruly patrons-shall be removed immediately.
»'8 The hours and days of sale of alcoholic beverages shall "be in accordance with this code.
9.. Patrons shall not leave'the premises with a drink nor can drinks, be taken onto a public sidewalk:
10. The amendment to the licensee's licenses for the outdoor patio. or deck area shall be approved on a
provisional basis. The council may revoke, suspend or decline to `renew the license for the patio or
deck area portion of the licensed 'premises on the grounds of failure to comply with the conditions
outlined in the resolution or undue annoyance or burden on nearby residents.
11. The outdoor patio or deck area must be included in the required liquor liability insurance for the
premises. , -
12. The city council may im any additional conditions it deems necessary in the interest of the public'
health, safety and welfare at the time of initial approval or'any renewal of the license for a patio or
deck. The conditions set forth allowing the patio or deck shall be reviewed duringthe *yearly renewal
period. (Ord. XVI.57, 12 -18- 2007) ..
4
. '4,
■
i 'er
4 ROSEMOUNT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
To: Kim Lindquist,. Community Development Director
From: Alan Strand, Building Official
Date: January 25, 2012
Subject: Top Pizza Patio
The fence enclosing the patio on the west side north corner of the Tops Pizza building is
constructed of faux wrought iron. The enclosure fence has two gates one in the south
section and one in the northeast corner. Both gate swing into the enclosure with the
northeast corner gate wired open. The gates are presently equipped with garden variety
latches. The enclosure, with the one gate wired open, does not encumber the path of egress
travel from the required rear exit of the restaurant, and does not pose a building code
violation at this time. The gates of this patio enclosure will have to latch on the interior side,
swing out (the direction of egress travel) and be equipped with panic hardware if it is to be
compliant with both the liquor license ordinance and building code.
The dumpster enclosure to the south of the property did not appear to have doors that
screened dumpster.
The city has no record of 'a for the dumpster enclosure or the patio fence.
� s
}
4 ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SU MMARY
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
Board of Appeals and Adjustments Meeting: June 28, 2011
City Council Meeting (If Appealed): July 19, 2011
AGENDA ITEM: Case 11 -25 -V Markos Chouliaris (Tops
Pizza). 14531 Dodd Boulevard. The
Applicant is Requesting Approval of a Side
Yard Setback Variance from 10' feet to 2' to AGENDA SECTION:
Allow Placement of a Smoking Patio Public Hearing
Approval of Both a Front Yard Setback
Variance From 30' to 17' and, a Side Yard
Setback Variance from 10' to 8' to Allow
Placement of a Trash Enclosure.
PREPARED BY: Jason Lindahl, A.I.C.P. AGENDA NO. 5.a.
Planner
ATTACHMENTS: Site Location Map, Site Plan, Aerial Photo. APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Board of Appeals and Adjustments
makes the following two motions:
1. MOTION to approve a side yard setback variance from 10' feet to 2' to allow
placement of a smoking patio, subject to the condition that the applicant obtain a
permit in conformance with all applicable standards for a smoking patio.
2. MOTION to approve a front yard setback variance from 30' to 17' and a side yard
setback variance from 10' to 8' to allow placement of a trash enclosure subject to the
condition that the applicant obtain a building permit in conformance with all
applicable standards for a trash enclosure.
SUMMARY
Applicant & Property Owner: Markos Chouliaris (Tops Pizza)
Location: 14531 Dodd Boulevard
Property Size: 1.31 Acres
Comp. Guide Plan Desig: C - Commercial
Current Zoning: C -1, Convenience Commercial
The applicant, Markos Chouliaris of Tops Pizza, requests approval of three setback variances. The first is
a side yard (west side) setback variance from 10' feet to 2' to allow placement of a smoking patio. The
second and third are a front yard (south side) setback variance from 30' to 17' and a side yard (west side)
setback - variance from 10' to 8' to allow placement of a trash enclosure. The applicant has already installed
the concrete for both the smoking patio and dumpster locations. Should the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approve the requested variances, the applicant would be required to obtain permits to enclose
the trash enclosure area consistent with the City Code. The patio °could, as currently installed, be used for
restaurant patrons who' want to smoke outside. However, no liquor can be carried out or served on the
patio without processing an amendment to the applicant's liquor license. At this time he has not applied
for any license amendment. If a liquor license amendment was later approved by the City Council, a fence
would need to be installed around the patio area, consistent with the ordinance requirements for outdoor
patios. Staff recommends the Board approve the variance requests based on the findings detailed below.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is zoned C -1', Convenience Commercial and guided NC — Neighborhood
Commercial by the Comprehensive Plan. The site was first developed in 1971 and includes a multi- tenant
strip commercial building. In 2010, the applicant built a 40' by 50' (2,000 square feet) addition on the
north side of the mall, enlarging Tops Pizza. As part of the review for that addition, the applicant was
notified that the existing dumpster location was non - conforming and a cedar trash enclosure must be built
to house the dumpster in a location that met all required setbacks. Since that review, the applicant
installed a 13' by 40' patio along the west side of the recent addition for a smoking area. The applicant
now seeks variances to allow the smoking patio and desired dumpster locations.
The key challenge to any developmenton the subject property is the fact that is it a double frontage lot.
The northern property line abuts 145 West while the southern property line abuts Dodd
Boulevard. The Comprehensive Plan Classifies 145t Street West as a Major Collector while Dodd
Boulevard is a Minor Collector. Having frontage on two public streets means both sides are considered
front yards and subject to the front yard setback standards. Further complicating this scenario is the fact
that these roads merge approximately 300' to the west creating a narrowing "triangular" development
pattern for the surrounding area.
ISSUE ANALYSIS 1
Currently, the standards for reviewing variance applications are detailed in Section 11- 12 -2.G and are
based on the standards set forth in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, Subdivision 6. On May 6, 2011,
Governor Dayton signed a law amending the standards for reviewing variance. The amendment was
initiated in response to a Minnesota Supreme Court case (Krummanacher vs. the City of Minnetonka) that
narrowly interpreted definition of "undue hardship." The amended law replaces the "undue hardship"
standard with "practical difficulties" and restores more flexibility to local governments when they review
variance applications. The new review criteria and staff's findings for each variance are detailed below.
The first variance request is to reduce the side yard (west side) setback from 10' feet to 2' to allow
placement of a smoking patio. The second variance request is to reduce the front yard (south side) setback
variance from 30' to 17' and a side yard setback from 10' to 8' to allow placement of a trash enclosure.
The applicant has already installed the concrete for both the smoking patio and dumpster locations.
Should the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the requested variances, the applicant would be
required to obtain permits to enclose these areas in accordance with the standards for smoking patios and
trash enclosures found in the City Code.
1. Is the variance in harmony with purposes and intent of ordinance?
Finding According to Section 11- 4 -10.A, the zoning standards for this district are intended to
promote compatibility in form, function and style. The district is intended to be compatible within
- a residential neighborhood context. Therefore, the number of permitted uses is limited`and the
scale of uses is comparatively, small. Given these standards and the fact that the subject property is
a double frontage lot, staff finds`the variance requests are in harmony with the spirit and intent of
the C -1, Convenience Commercial District.
2
i
2. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Finding The subject property is guided NC — Neighborhood Commercial by the Comprehensive
Plan. According to the Comprehensive Plan, this land use designation is intended to provide areas
for commercial businesses that focus their services to the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
The size of each Neighborhood Commercial district is intended to be less than five (5) acres. The
district should be located adjacent to collector or arterial streets, but the access to the commercial
area should be equally focusedon pedestrians and bicyclists as the automobile. The development
of these commercial areas is dependent on an existing or developing residential neighborhood,'a
developed street network, and a system of sidewalks and trails. Typical uses include restaurants,
retail, gas stations, convenience stores, and personal services. Staff finds the proposed variances
are consistent with the purpose, location criteria, development standards and typical uses for the
NC — Neighborhood Commercial District.
3. Does the proposal put property to us'e in a reasonable manner?
Finding subject property g ,
zndin . Given the the subject is a double- fronta frontage lot, staff finds the variance
requests puts the property to use in a reasonable manner. Given the shape of the property, the
principal building was constructed with limited space behind the building for accessory /outdoor
activities like a smoking patio. Similarly, there is little area to locate the trash enclosure behind or
along the side of the building as would typically be on most commercial sites. Staff found the only
location for a trash enclosure without the need of variance would be in the northeast portion of
the parking lot, behind the SA building. While that would meet required setbacks it would be, in
staff's opinion, more visible than what is proposed by the applicant and certainly would detract
from the public views of the site. That location would also be more detrimental to the adjoining
business than the currently proposed location.
4. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Finding The subject property has unique circumstances not created by the landowner that
necessitate the requested variances. The merging of two abutting collector streets creates a
narrowing "triangular" development pattern for the surrounding area. This development pattern is
further restricted by the fact that these collectors abut the northern and southern property lines of
the subject property creating a idouble frontage lot. As a double frontage lot, the property is
subject to the front yard setback standards along both 145`" Street and Dodd Boulevard and lacks a
usable rear yard typically associated with commercial sites.
1
5. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Finding Given the unique development conditions of the property noted above, the variance
requests will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Should the Board approve the
variances, the smoking patio will be located behind the existing building and a substantial distance
from any neighboring structures and the trash enclosure would screen the dumpster from
surrounding view. 1
f 9 f
4
3
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of three setback variances for the property located at 14537 Dodd Boulevard
(Tops Pizza). The first request is fora side yard (west side) setback variance from 10' feet to 2' to allow
placement of a smoking patio. The second and third requests are for a front yard (south side) setback
variance from 30' to - 17' and a side yard (west side) setback variance from 10' to 8' to allow placement of a
trash enclosure. Should the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the requested variances, the
applicant would still be required to obtain permits to enclose the trash enclosure. Installation of the trash
enclosure was•a requirement of the building permit for the recent building addition.
It should be noted that the City encourages obtaining variances before installation of any structures.
Obviously, denial of any of the requested variances would require the applicant to remove recently -
installed pavement. However, in this instance, given the limitations of the property, the proposed locations
are reasonable.
These recommendations are liased on the information submitted by the applicant and the findings detailed
above. It should be noted that decisions made by the Board may be appealed to the City Council by the
applicant, the Zoning Administrator, a member of the City Council or any person owning property or
residing within - three hundred fifty feet (350') of the property affected by the decision. All appeal requests —
must be filed with the Planning Department within ten (10) working days of the action by the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments.
r
1 4