HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.e. Lquor License Ordinance AmendmentsCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Work Session Date March 9, 2005
AGENDA ITEM.
Ordinance Amendment City Code
AGENDA SECTION:
3 -1 -2, Paragraphs B and L, Relating to
Liquor Regulations
�JSC�cSSlo�/
PREPARED BY:
Gary Kalstabakken, Chief of Police
Kim Lindquist, Community Development
AGE
an
1#0W 02 E
Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Exec Summary February 15, 2005 and
Proposed Amendments
Meeting Minutes CC January 19, 1999,
CCWS February 11, 1999, CC March 2,
APPROVED BY:
1999, Exec Summary February
1999, Exec Summary March 2, 1999 99
�y
Memorandum January 22, 1999
RECOMMENDED
ACTION: Provide direction to staff on restrictions on location of Class A
liquor license holders and the number of liquor licenses permitted for on -sale licensees in
the City
ACTION:
BACKGROUND
The proposed ordinance amendments were brought before the Council at the February 15,
2005 meeting This was the first reading and after discussion Council asked to have this
issue further discussed at a Work Session
SUMMARY
Rosemount's current ordinance restricts the number of on -sale liquor licenses to six (6) This
is more restrictive than Minnesota state statute, which allows twelve (12) and excludes
hotels, restaurants, theaters, bowling centers and veteran's clubs The amendment would
bring Rosemount's City Code in line with state statute
The current ordinance includes a provision which restricts the bar type on -sale liquor
licensees from being located on or within 300' of County Road 42 At the February 15, 2005
meeting, Council asked for more background information regarding this restriction along
County Road 42
The attached minutes are from the Council Meetings and Work Sessions in 1999 when this
section of the code was added Unfortunately, the minutes do not include much information
on the rationale for restricting the location of Class A license holders It appears that the
direction of the Council at that time was simply to prohibit bars on County Road 42
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Meeting Date February 15, 2005
AGENDA ITEM:
Ordinance Amendment City Code
AGENDA SECTION:
3 -1 -2, Paragraphs B and L, Relating to
New Business
Li uor Re ulations
PREPARED BY
ry Kalstabakken, Chief of Police
im Lindquist, Community Development
AGED O.
Director
ATTACHMENTS.
Ordinance, August 11, 2004 Work
APPROVED BY
Session Minutes
RECOMMENDED
ACTION: First reading of ordinance No action
required at this reading,
only discussion
ACTION:
BACKGROUND
The proposed amendments were discussed with the Council at the August 11, 2004 Work
Session These changes are proposed based upon changes that have occurred in
Minnesota State Statutes regulating liquor licenses and based upon the anticipated and
desired growth in the City's restaurant variety
SUMMARY
City Code 3 -1 currently is more restrictive than state statute in the number of liquor licenses
permitted The total number presently allowed is six (6) in city code State law allows twelve
(12) on -sale liquor licenses, while also providing exclusions for restaurants, hotels, theaters,
clubs or congressionally recognized veteran's organizations, establishments licensed for wine
sales and bowling centers The provision excluding the, listed types of establishments was
passed by the legislature in 2003
The City-has five (5) on -sale licenses issued at this time, leaving only one (1) license
remaining for issuance under the current language of City Code This could become
problematic if additional restaurants express an interest in locating within Rosemount
because many restaurants have liquor licenses to allow serving of alcoholic beverages to
their customers The change in state law excluding restaurants and the other establishments
listed seems to acknowledge that alcohol is not the primary product being offered by the
establishments and, therefore, the exclusion from license limits.
The current City Code does have two (2) categories of on -sale licenses and staff is
recommending that this provision be retained The two (2) types of licenses are based upon
the amount of revenue generated by the sale of alcoholic beverage compared to food and
other nonalcoholic beverages. Class A licenses are issued to those establishments that
derive less than fifty- percent of their sales from non alcoholic products, in other words,
establishments that are more of a bar or night club in nature than an eating establishment
In discussions with Council at the Work Session, consensus seemed to be that the City Code
should limit the number of Class A licenses, thereby, controlling the number of bars operating
within the city At this time, Class A licenses are held by Shenanigan's Pub and Celt's Irish
Pub and Grill Shenanigan's has held a Class A license since the two license system was
adopted, while Celt's had held a Class B license until they expanded their game /recreation
area in 2004
The proposed language limits the number of Class A licenses to two (2) Because Celt's and
Shenanigan's already hold Class A licenses, if the proposed amendments are adopted, no
additional Class A licenses would be available for issuing However, liquor licenses would be
available for issuance under the Class B type The proposed language allows Class B
licenses to be issued in accordance with Minnesota Statutes
The changes are proposed in an effort to continue to control licensed liquor establishments
but puts a greater emphasis on controlling the establishments that are bar type
establishments versus restaurants
City Attorney LeFevere has reviewed the proposed changes and has approved the proposed
language
A letter outlining the proposed changes was also sent to each of the five (5) current on -sale
liquor license holders
2
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE RELATING
AMENDING ROSEMOUNT
PARAGRAPHS B AND L
TO LIQUOR REGULATIONS,
CODE, SECTION 3 -1 -2,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA ORDAINS THAT THE
CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS
Section I City Code, Section 3 -1 -2, paragraph L is amended as
follows
L Apportionment Of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses
2. Two (2) Class A intoxicating liquor licenses may be issued within the city of
Rosemount
3 Off -sale intoxicating liquor licenses may be Issued dependent on the
population of the city of Rosemount One off -sale license may be Issued for
each six thousand five hundred (6500) of city population attained, as
determined by the most recent Metropolitan Council population estimates
Section City Code, Section 3 -1 -2, paragraph B2 is amended as follows
2 Class A licenses may be issued to hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor stores and
aie unrestricted as to the percentage of revenues derived from the sale of food and
nonalcoholic beverages Class A licenses may not be issued for any premises
vd rrhthat is on a lot, piece or parcel of land whichihat is adjacent to County Road
42 or for any premises wh chthat is within three hundred feet (300') of the right of
way of Country Road 42 c
Sect,nn I This Ordinance shall be in effect following its passage and publication.
T tndeflin,ng indicates new material Lrimtg t1awagh indicates deleted material
CLL-258228v1
RS215 -6
ADOPTED this day of
Rosemount
ATTEST
Linda Jentxnk, City Clerk
2005, by the City Council of the City of
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
William Droste, Mayor
CLL258228v1
R8215.6
B. On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses On -sale licenses shall be issued only to
hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor stores and shall permit on -sale of liquor or
wine On -sale licenses shall be of two (2) classes (Ord XVI 40, 3 -2 -1999)
1 Class B licenses maybe issued only to hotels and restaurants where fifty one
percent (51 or more of total revenues are derived from the sale of food and
nonalcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises during hours when the
sale of alcoholic beverages is allowed In the case of class B licenses issued to
restaurants operated in conjunction with a bowling center, twenty five percent
(25 or more of the total revenues must be derived from the sale of food and
nonalcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises "Total revenues" is
defined as all revenues from the sale of food, alcoholic beverages and
nonalcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises during the hours when
sale of alcoholic beverages is allowed (Ord XVI 46, 3 -2 -2001)
2 Class A licenses may be issued to hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor
stores and are unrestricted as to the percentage of revenues derived from the sale
of food and nonalcoholic beverages Class A licenses may not be issued for any
premises which is on a lot, piece or parcel of land which is adjacent to County
Road 42 or for any premises which is within three hundred feet (300') of the right
of way of County Road 42 All on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses will be issues
as class A licenses unless application is made for a class B license (Ord XVI.40,
3 -2 -1999)
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Meeting Date August 11, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Liquor License Regulations
AGENDA SECTION:
Discussion
PREPARED BY:
Kim Lindquist, Community Development
Director,
Gary Kalstabakken, Police Chief,
I AGENDffW
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
Excerpt June 11, 2003 City Council
APPROVED BY:
Minutes, Staff Memo from June 11, 2003
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide Staff Direction.
ACTION:
ISSUE
One of the Council goals for 2004 is to increase the diversity of restaurants in the community.
Often restaurants need liquor licenses to operate The City currently regulates the number of
on -sale liquor licenses permitted Due to the Council goals and changes in State law, staff felt
a discussion about liquor licensing would be appropriate.
BACKGROUND
The current ordinance permits issuance of °on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses [that] shall be
issued only to hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor stores and shall permit on -sale of
liquor or wine There are two classes of liquor licenses
Class B
Class B may only be issued to hotels and restaurants where 51% or more of total
revenues are derived from the sale of food and nonalcoholic beverages for
consumption on the premises Restaurants in bowling centers are required to have
25 the-total-revenues. derived from the sale food and nonalcoholic beverages
from consumption on the premises
Class A:
Class A licenses may be issued to hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor stores and
are unrestricted as to the percentage of revenues derived from the sale of food and
nonalcoholic beverages. Class A licenses may not be issued for any property adjacent
to County Road 42 or within 300' of the County Road 42 right -of -way
The ordinance also notes that all on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses will be issued as class A
licenses unless an application is specifically received for class B license.
The City ordinance restricts the number of on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses to six (6) State
statute limits the number of liquor licenses for Class 3 cities (Rosemount) to 12 However,
during the last legislative session the State made modifications to the liquor licensing
standards It adopted an exclusion for certain businesses, meaning that "licenses may be
issued to the following entities by a city, in addition to the number authorized by this section.
1. clubs or congressionally chartered veterans organizations;
2. restaurants,
3 establishments that are issued licenses to sell wine under section 340A 404
subdivision 5,
4 theaters that are issued licenses under section 340A 404,
5 hotels, and
6 bowling centers
DISCUSSION
On -Sale Liquor Licenses.
The impetus for this discussion centered on the Council's desire to attract different types of
restaurants into the community Presently, the City ordinance limits the amount of on -sale
liquor licenses to 6 The four establishments that currently have liquor licenses are
Shenanigans, Celts, McDivots, and AMF City Limits With the anticipation that Applebee's
would receive approval for a liquor license, there would only be an opportunity for one more
restaurant establishment with liquor in the community Staff initially was going to ask the
Council to reconsider the limitation of 6 licenses to permit additional restaurant opportunities
in the community. The question of liquor or no liquor would obviously have an impact on what
food establishments would want to come to the City
The City Clerk noted that changes in state law exempt restaurants and bowling centers from
the number of licenses permitted by the statute, meaning they are exempt from the total 12
licenses permitted oy the State Potentially ail liquor licenses currently issuea oy the City
would fall into the exemption category The State statute defines restaurants as "an
establishment, other than a hotel, under the control of a single proprietor or manager, where
meals are regularly prepared on the premises and served at tables to the general public, and
having a minimum seating capacity for guests as prescribed by the appropriate license
issuing authority That means there-may be additional liquor licenses available for-non-
restaurant uses The change in State law could address the economic development issue for
Rosemount of having a limitation on restaurant liquor licenses, so long as the Council is
comfortable applying this State change to the local ordinance.
Staff wanted to ensure that the Council was aware of the changes in State law and that there
was a formal policy discussion to change the interpretation of the City ordinance It is staffs
opinion that the City, as it has been in the past, can be more restrictive than the State, and
therefore the changes at the State level do not automatically ensure additional liquor licenses
will be issued for restaurants This interpretation has been confirmed by the City Attorney
Therefore staff has several questions for the Council
2
Would the Council like to adopt the exclusion permitted in State statute for restaurants,
bowling centers, etc?
This recognizes that the exclusion by the State would address the staff concern about
attracting additional restaurants within the community and allowing them the
opportunity to serve liquor Without this change, or without increasing the number of
licenses permitted by local ordinance, it will be difficult to attract many additional
restaurants to the community.
If the Council does not want to consider the exclusion, does it want to increase the number of
on -sale liquor licenses available in the City?
One option, to address a concern over bars versus restaurants, is to limit the amount
of Class A licenses and not restrict or set a different limit for the Class B licenses (As
currently written, the license issued is a class A license unless specified otherwise by
the applicant) By making some modifications to the liquor licensing section of the
ordinance, the emphasis could be placed upon restaurant establishments, those
where 51 or more of total revenues are derived from the sale of food and
nonalcoholic beverages, rather than on the unrestricted sales found in the Class A
license
Is the Council interested in restricting the amount of Class A licenses that would be
applicable to land uses that are not considered restaurants, hotels, bowling centers, and
other uses listed above? In other words would the Council like to limit the amount of liquor
licenses establishments whose primary function is to serve liquor, for example a bar versus a
restaurant
Similar to the response above, Class A licenses would be issued to properties that
function more like a bar man a restaurant Tne Council may wish to conunue limiting
the number of licenses and may in fact choose to reduce the current number available
from 6 to some lower figure.
Off -Sale Liquor Licenses.
.The City also restricts the number-of-off-sale liquor_licenses dependent upon population of
the City "One off -sale liquor license may be issued for each 6,500 of the city population
attained, as determined by the most recent metropolitan council population estimates The
State does not restrict the number of off -sale liquor licenses allowed for class 3 cities, rather
noting that the limit shall be determined by the governing body of the city
Under the City ordinance two off -sale licenses are allowed. Staff just received the Apnl 1,
2003 population estimate for the City which was determined to be 16,794 Given the
methodology the Met Council uses to determine the population, staff concurs with the
estimate (Staff does not necessarily concur with accuracy of the methodology, however)
Therefore the City would not permit another off -sale establishment until the population
increased by 2,706, which would probably be in another three to four years.
3
t
Staff is not necessarily advocating increasing the number of off -sale liquor licenses available
in the community However, the Council should be aware that we have received several
inquiries about obtaining a liquor license to open another store in the community The
Community Development Department received an inquiry as part of a discussion about
redevelopment in the Downtown
SUMMARY
The overarching question is whether the Council would like to permit additional liquor
licenses to be available for certain land uses within the community Staff would recommend
that additional licenses be made available for restaurants, which means amending the city
code
There are several ways to implement that change either increasing the number of licenses
made available through the local code or recognizing the State statute that exempts
restaurants, bowling centers and other listed uses from the total number of licenses
permated Or some combination of the two could be accomplished.
The Council may also wish to look at the current licensing structure with the Class A and
Class B licenses If the main interest is to limit exclusive liquor stores (on -site
establishments), it could limit the number of those licenses or modify the requirements for
receipt of an on -sale liquor license to have some type of percentage of total revenues derived
from the sale of food and nonalcoholic beverages.
Finally, the Council may wish to discuss whether to modify the off -sale liquor license
apportionment from the current standard
El
Excerpt from the City Council Work Session of August 11,2004
Liquor License Regulations.
Community Development Dire�tor Lindquist led a discussion regarding tl�e proposed �
changes in the ordinance that governs on-sale liquor licensing. The current City
ordinance restricts the number of on-sale liquor licenses to six{6j. State sta.tue places the
.limit at 12. Recent State modifications allow exemptions for elubs, restaurants,hotels,
bowling centers,and theaters. Staff recommended that the City amend the ordinance to
allow exemptions for restaurants.
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 19, 1999
Public Works Director Osmundson noted that this alley way was ttlized by the City prior to the
construction of this former grocery store building west of th d north of Lower 147th Street, but
no longer provides a public purpose The block building the site actually was built over a 10 foot
portion of the old alley in 1977 This vacation will c n up the title for resale of the vacant business
building No public testimony was received
MOTION by Edwards to close the P he Heanng for An Alley -Way Vacation Second by
Wippermann Ayes Five Nays NoX Motion carried
MOTION by Carroll to adopt RESOLUTION CAUSING A PUBLIC ALLEY VACATION
ON LOT 61, AUDITOR'S.9UBDIVISION NO.1. Second by Carroll Ayes Edwards, Cisewski,
Wippermann, Busho, Ca oll Nays None Motion carried
Tayern_OnA2_LiquDrl,ic2ense Application
Assistant to the City Administrator Walsh reviewed information about the liquor application which
had been tabled from the January 5th City Council meeting John Ursmo presented a floor plan with
dimensions and seating arrangements Ursino said they were willing to change the name of the
restaurant to "Ursmos Ursmo also presented several petitions with signatures of residents in favor
of the new restaurant The liquor license period would be from March 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999
Mayor Busho noted that other states require proof of food to liquor sales percentages and suggested
that Rosemount should also In Montana it is a 70/30 percentage split and Washington has a 60/40
percentage split City Attorney LeFevere noted that this would not apply to this applicant if approval
was given tonight because it would require an amendment to the existing liquor ordinance Mayor
Busho wanted assurances that this business would not be primarily a bar
Councilmembers Carroll and Wippermann were in favor of an additional choice for a local
restaurant Councilmembers Edwards and Cisew ski had concerns about the liquor sales as did Mayor
Busho
Mayor Busho opened the meeting for public comment
Dick Heinen, 3110 145 Street West, said he was a fifth generation Rosemount resident and he urged
City Council to grant the requested liquor license
Ed McMenomy, 4122 143rd Street West, said given the plans and specifications this food based
family run restaurant would be a welcome addition to Rosemount McMenomy supported the
approval of a liquor license
Steve Kopel, 13757 Danbury Path, said the concept is great, it would be good for residents Kopel
is a business owner near by and would like to see a family style restaurant rather than a vacant
building
3
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 19, 1999
Janet Oster, 14793 Dodd Boulevard, said she is related to Fluegels (part owner of the applicant) and
knows that they are family oriented and that they would keep their promises as to promoting a
"family" style restaurant
Glen Urtdenbogerd, 14625 Chippendale Avenue, said he was retired and felt this type of restaurant
would be used by seniors extensively Rosemount has many parks and ballfields for youths but the
seniors would like some amenities also Urtdenbogerd said, "If you want to keep people in
Rosemount, give them more choices
John Kaye, 13768 Danbury Path, said he didn't know the owners, but he has lived here ten years and
would like to see a family restaurant with liquor Kaye thought it was unfair to suggest to change the
liquor ordinance now, after the application has been made
MOTION by Wippermann to approve the issuance of an Intoxicating Liquor License and Special
Sunday Liquor License to Tavern On 42 (or Ursmo's) for the period of March 1, 1999 through
December 31, 1999 Second by Carroll Ayes Wippermann, Carroll Nays Cisewski, Busho,
Edwards Motion failed
Mayor Busho invited the applicant back for future discussion and directed staff to be prepared to
discuss adding food to liquor percentages at a future work session
Camprehenstxe Guide -PlamAmendment-D Cou ntyAlRPiand- M&H-Inc.
Community Development Director Rogness reviewed thXCity e b} akota County HRA. and
M &H, Inc which had been continued from the Janua ncil meeting The property
would have two separate develop ments with the HRA d managmg the southern side
including 40 or 46 rental townhomes and the northern owner occupied twinhomes
developed by M H, Inc Rogness presented two opeed Option A would include
HR(High Density Residential)/UR(Urban Residential) C endments and zoning for R -2
and R -3 with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) an no variances Option B would include only
a UR Comp Plan Amendment, zoning to R -2, a P and two variances 1) rental inclusion and 2)
allowing single car garages
Mark Ulfers, Director of Housing and Red elopment, noted that they do not have any program for
single family housing The Family Hous g Partnership Program is resource driven and has funding
available this year for braid out nex year This is a long term commitment for managmg this
complex The public housing by th central offices (2496 145th Street West) has been managed by
HRA since 1981, when they wer uilt Affordable housing is needed in Dakota County Families
with incomes under $24,000 ould be eligible for these rentals People do struggle to make ends
meet and try to improve o eir education or employment at the same time
Council voiced conce s for unit density, nearness of railroad tracks, guarantee of property value,
the concentration ofAffordable housing, the location of this project, the need for more single family
detached units wi in Rosemount, and the proposed mix of housing types Councilmember Carroll
no he was in avor of the project and saw a need as industries look to develop in Rosemount to
have affordabl housing for their employees
4
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING DATE FEBRUARY 11, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: LIQUOR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
AGENDA NO.:
PREPARED BY. SUSAN WALSH�
ASSISTANT TO ADMINISTRATOR
ITEM
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
111emp
Attached is the memorandum and draft ordinance provided to Council on January 29, 1999
MEMORANDUM
DATE. January 29, 1999
TO- Mayor Busho
Counctlmembers Cisewski, Wippermann, Carroll Edwards
FROM Susan Walsh, Assistant to Administrator
SUBJ Liquor Ordinance Amendments
Attached for City Council review is a draft of an ordinance that would amend the existing liquor
ordinance for the purpose of establislung two classes of licenses —Class A License and Class B
License
Class A licenses would be issued only to hotels and restaurants where a certain percentage of
total revenues would be derived from the sale of food and non alcoholic beverages Also
included in the Class A license are bowling alleys with restaurants, and the percentage of total
food and non alcoholic beverage sales could be equal to or lower than the percentage established
for restaurants under a Class A license
Class B licenses would only be issued to the city's existing on -sale liquor license holders —City
Limits, Shenanigan's and MCDlvots If the licenses for these businesses would be revoked or
lapse for more than 60 days, then any new license would have to qualify for the Class A license
category Class B license holders would not have to meet a certain percentage of food sales
Rather than a "grandfather" provision for existing license holders, another option could be
issuing three Class A and three Class B licenses for the total of the six on -sale licenses allowed
by code Most likely Shenanigans, McDivots and City Limits would qualify for the Class B
The provision for bowling alleys under the Class A definition would be for future bowling
centers that have restaurants Staff is suggesting that City Limits be included in the Class B
You may want to have a lower percentage for food sales for bowling alleys since staff found that
Bloomington requires 30% food sales and Brooklyn Center requires as low as 40% food sales
from total revenues I have discussed this proposed revision with Jean Doyle, owner of City
Limits, and she said she would provide me with a breakdown of food and liquor sales
percentages on Monday, February 2 1999 I plan on contacting the owners of MCDlvots and
Shenanigan's today to advise them that the City Council may consider revisions to the liquor
ordinance
You have received Brooklyn Center's classification of licenses, which range from 40 to 80%
food sales Bloomington's ordinance requires a minimum of 40 percent food sales for all license
holders except for bowling alleys and nightclubs that are required 30 percent food sales The
nightclub provision was included for license holders at the Mall of Amenca —like Hooters and
Planet Hollywood
Section 2 of the proposed ordinance provides that license holders must submit a statement signed
by an independent certified public accountant attesting to the percentages for the previous year
At this time staff is not recommending that the on -sale license fee of $2,750 be changed
Bloomington's on -sale liquor license fees are all the same except for the licenses at the Mall of
America and they are almost double ($18,000(yr Brooklyn Center license fees range from
$8,000 (80% food) to $14,000 (40% food) Rosemount's fees are slightly lower than other cities
comparable m size and it may be appropriate to discuss later this year
Mayor Busho advised me that this would be on the February 10 committee of the whole agenda
Also for your information, Don Fluegel called Thursday morning and indicated his desire to
proceed He also indicated that they are facing a deadline with the owners of the Tom Thumb
building and expressed his desire that this matter proceed as quickly as possible
Cc Thomas D Burt, City Administrator
Charles LeFevere, City Attorney
Attachment Draft Ordinance
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
FEBRUARY 11, 1999
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a Committee of the Whole meeting was duly held on
Thursday, February 11, 1999, at 6 30 p in in the Council Chambers at City Hall
Mayor Busho called the meeting to order with Councilmembers Wippermann, Edwards, Carroll
and Cisewski present Also present were City Administrator Burt, Assistant to City
Administrator Walsh, Community Development Director Rogness, Public Works Director
Osmundson, and City Planner Pearson
Strategic Plan
Mayor Busho updated the City Council on having an upcoming strategic planning session She
has been in contact with two facilitators to conduct the sessions and she will inform the City
Council who she selects at a later date The dates of Friday, March 19th and Saturday,
March 20th were selected for the event and the location will be determined soon
Sign-Orslina
Community Development Director Rogness summarized an application from Ron Kraus, new
owner of the Dairy Queen, for an amendment to the city's sign ordinance This proposed
amendment would allow "off- premises business signs" to be allowed within Commercial,
Bushiness Park and Industrial zones Such signage would be used by any business to add to
another business' existing freestanding sign within 1000 feet Many controls have been
recommended by the planning commission, ranging from overall design compatibility to size
limitations Concerns were raised by Councilmembers related to enforcement, sign proliferation,
and the need for such a change After further discussion, the Council asked that staff prepare a
motion for denial at the upcoming City Council meeting
U-1
Assistant to Administrator Walsh reviewed proposed amendments to the liquor ordinance that
would provide for two classes of on -sale liquor licenses After discussion by the City Council,
staff was directed to put together an ordinance that would include the following provisions (1)
Class B license would require food and non alcoholic beverages to be 51% of the total revenues
for restaurants and hotels, (2) bowling alleys would have to meet a 25% food sale requirement
for a Class B license, (3) Class A license would be prohibited along CR 42 or within a certain
distance of CR42, (4) Class B license holders would have to provide documentation that they
meet the food revenue requirements, and (5) Class A licenses would not have to meet food
revenue requirements City staff was also directed to begin reviewing liquor license fees since the
Council agreed that fees may have to be increased, and a Class A license fee should be higher
than a Class B license fee
Oompxeltensiye
Community Director Rogness summarized the main issues that remain for the draft 2020
comprehensive plan prior to its submission to the Metropolitan Council for formal review The
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE MARCH 2, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: LIQUOR ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
AGENDA SECTION:
OLD BUSINESS
PREPARED BY: SUSAN WALSH
TO ADMINISTRATOR
AGENDJXQ. ®A
CMS
ASSISTANT
ATTACHMENTS LIQUOR ORDINANCE
APPROVED BY:
For City Council consideration and adoption is an ordinance that would amend certain sections of the City Code
pertaining to liquor regulations The attached ordinance is the final draft based upon discussions and input at
previous City Council meetings In summary, the amendments will provide for two classes of on sale intoxi-
cating liquor licenses Class B will require hotels and restaurants to certify that 51 percent or more of total
revenues are derived from the sale of food and non alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises
Bowling centers may be issued a Class B license if they meet a 25 percent requirement Class A license holders
will not have to meet this provision but are restricted from having a license for any premises that is located on
or adjacent to County Road 42 or within 300 of the right of way.
Upon adoption of this ordinance city staff will begin researching liquor licenses fees and present recommenda-
tions prior to sending out license renewals for the Year 2000
RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO XVI 40, AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO LIQUOR LICENSES, AMENDING ROSEMOUNT CITY CODE SECTIONS 3 -1 -2 AND
3 -1 -8
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
ORDINANCE NO XVI 40
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LIQUOR
LICENSES, AMENDING ROSEMOUNT
CODE SECTIONS 3 -1 -2 AND 3 -1 -8
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1 Rosemount City Code Section 3 -1 -2, paragraph B is amended to read as follows:
B On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses On -sale licenses shall
be issued only to hotels, restaurants and exclusive liquor stores and
shall permit on -sale of liquor or wine On sale licenses shall be of
two classes
1 Class B licenses may be issued only to hotels and restaurants
where 51 percent or more of total revenues are derived from
the sale of food and non alcoholic beverages for
consumption on the premises In the case of Class B licenses
issued to restaurants operated in conjunction with a bowling
center, 25 percent or more of total revenues must be derived
from the sale of food and non alcoholic beverages for
consumption on the premises Total revenues is defined as
all revenues from the sale of food, alcoholic beverages and
non alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises
2. Class A licenses may be issued to hotels, restaurants and
exclusive liquor stores and are unrestricted as to the
percentage of revenues derived from the sale of food and
non alcoholic beverages Class A licenses may not be issued
for any premises which is on a lot, piece or parcel of land
which is adjacent to County Road 42 or for any premises
which is within three hundred (300) feet of the right of way
of County Road 42 All on sale intoxicating liquor licenses
will be issued as Class A licenses unless application is made
for a Class B license
Section 2 Rosemount City Code Section 3 -1 -8 is amended by adding new paragraph N as
follows
N Certification No Class B on -sale intoxicating liquor license
shall be renewed to a licensee that has failed to submit a statement
signed by an independent certified public accountant attesting that
51 percent or more (or 25 percent in the case of restaurants operated
in conjunction with bowling centers) of total revenues of the
CLL- 157203
RS215 -1
establishment was derived from the sale of food and non alcoholic
beverages during the twelve (12) month period preceding the
licensee's application for renewal The licensee shall provide access
to its books and records during business hours on reasonable notice
by the Chief of Police and shall provide such additional information
as the Cluef may require to demonstrate that the information on
revenues derived from food and beverage sales is accurate In the
event the Chief of Police determmes that an audit by an outside
auditor is appropriate, the expense of such audit shall be paid by the
licensee Failure to comply with limitations on percentage of
revenues derived from food and non alcoholic beverage sales
applicable to the relevant class of license is ground for revocation or
for suspension and the imposition of such conditions as are deemed
appropriate by the Council
Section 3 Tlus ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication
according to law
ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this 2n day of March, 1999
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
Cathy Busho, Mayor
ATTEST-
Susan M Walsh, City Clerk
Published in the "Rosemount Town Pages" this day of 1999
CLL- 157263
RS215 -1
ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCCEDINGS
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 2, 1999
Liquor Ordinance Amendments
Council reviewed the final draft of a liquor ordinance that would amend certain sections of the
City Code pertaining to liquor regulations City Clerk Walsh explained the differences between
a Class A and a Class B on sale liquor license Walsh advised that staff would begin researching
license fees and present a recommendation prior to sending out the Year 2000 renewals
MOTION by Edwards to adopt Ordinance No XVI 40, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
LIQUOR LICENSES, AMENDING ROSEMOUNT CITY CODE SECTIONS 3 -1 -2 AND 3 -1-
8 Second by Busho Ayes Busho, Carroll, Edwards, Cisewski Nays None Motion tamed
Rosemount Market Square Planned Unit Development Amendment
Discussion wa held on an application received from Peter Linder of Linder's Greenhouses,
Garden Center a d Flower Marts to amend the Rosemount Market Square PUD The
amendment woul allow Linder's to place a flower mart in the parking lot in front of Knowlan's
Community Devel merit Director Rogness informed Council of the Planning Commission's
recommendation to a prove the amendment by a 3/2 vote The City Council had several
questions which included size, location, signs, electricity, water supply, terms of lease parking
lot traffic, customer park[ g, and types of products to be sold Members of the Council
requested that the PUD am dment include a condition that the flower mart be approved on a
one -year trail basis and that o er conditions such as site layout, signage, and hours of operation
also be included as operating c dihons
MOTION by Carroll to authorize sluff to prepare a proposed amendment, with specific
conditions, to the Rosemount Market uare Planned Unit Development to permit the Linder's
Flower Mart in the parking lot as shown the attached exhibit and to be reviewed by Council at
a future meeting Second by Cisewski A s Carroll, Edwards, Cisewski, Busho Nays
None Motion carved
Community Development Director Rogness presentarr request from Solberg Aggregate to
renew their mineral extraction permit for property owned by Koch Refining Co The property is
located on the former Solberg site west of STH 52 which was sold to Koch and leased back to
Solberg for continued mineral extraction operations on a yea to year basis Rogness explained
how the revised grading plan would taper downward resulting i a two percent slope and
extending the operations approximately three to four years Lau n Howard of Solberg
Aggregate addressed questions from the Council with regards to th story of the Solberg
operation and reclamation plans He also advised that if the grading odification was not
approved, there was enough mineral extraction for this year's constructi season, but that the
company would need additional time for reclamation It was noted that th City Council will be
discussing mining issues at a future work session, and it was the consensus o the Council to only
approve the extraction permit renewal and not the grading plan modification
MOTION by Busho to approve the mineral extraction permit renewal for Solberg Aggregate for
1999 without modification to the grading plan Second by Edwards Ayes Edwards,
Cisewski, Busho, Carroll Nays None Motion tamed
2
MEMORANDUM
DATE January 22, 1999
TO Mayor Busho
Counctlmembers Cisewski, Wippermann, Carroll, E wa
FROM Susan M Walsh, Assistant to Administrator
SUBJ Tavern on 42/Ursmos
On Thursday, January 21 I contacted the Ursmos to see if they were interested in pursuing their
attempt to get an on -sale liquor license with the understanding that the city liquor ordinance
would be amended to include classifications of on -sale licenses I talked to Suzanne and John
Ursmo individually, and both were under the impression it would take 6 months to a year to
change the ordinance I assured them that it shouldn't take more than one month and possibly
less On Thursday both Ursinos were somewhat receptive to pursing the liquor license per our
telephone discussions
This morning, Friday, January 22 Suzanne contacted me and advised via voice mail that they
are going to move on and pursue other things She went on to state that if the ordinance does get
changed and they can be assured that the city council will approve a license, that staff can let
them know but they are not going to focus on Rosemount
Prior to this telephone call, Attorney LeFevere and I discussed possible revisions to the liquor
ordinance and timelines for getting this accomplished We agreed a draft ordinance could be
provided to the City Council as early as the February 2 Council meeting or at the February 10
committee of the whole Mr LeFevere also stated the Ursmo license could also be granted at
the same time or assurances could be given to the Ursmos that the license would be approved at
the February 16 regular meeting
I have not called Suzanne since her voice marl this morning I thought it would be best to
contact her next week after staff has received direction from the Council on whether or not the
ordinance should be amended and when the Council would like to address the proposed
revisions
We think the proposed ordinance amendments would include two or three on -sale liquor license
classifications —one for bars and one for restaurants (Caution this is all very preliminary) The
restaurant classification would require 50% or up to 70% food sales (depending on Council
direction) We also discussed limiting the number of classifications based on the six on -sale
licenses currently allowed in our City Code For example, allow 3 bar (limited food sales)
licenses and 3 restaurant licenses After the 2000 census, this number could increase to 12 if the
Council wanted it to Attached is an excerpt from Brooklyn Center's liquor ordinance, which
describes the different classifications they have I noted in the column what types of restaurants
are approved for a particular type of license
Excerpt from the City Council Work Session of August 11, 2004
Liquor License Regulations
Community Development Director Lindquist led a discussion regarding the proposed
changes in the ordinance that governs on -sale liquor licensing The current City
ordinance restricts the number of on -sale liquor licenses to six (6) State statue places the
limit at 12 Recent State modifications allow exemptions for clubs, restaurants. hotels,
bowling centers, and theaters Staff recommended that the City amend the ordinance to
allow exemptions for restaurants,