HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - On-Sale Liquor License for Jazz Company Cafe
O~ PR104>
~ ("
t ';P
u ~
I't1
I\rlNNESO~~
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
April 5, 2010 @
8A
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Public Hearing to Consider Approval of the Issuance of an On-Sale
Liquor License for Jazz Company Cafe.
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to have the City Council conduct a pub-
lic hearing to receive information about the Jazz Company Cafe application
for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license..
Historv
Camille Myser, dba Jazz Co. Cafe, 4616 Colorado, was granted an on-sale
beer and wine license by the City Council on April 8, 2009. The license
was conditioned upon the construction of a wall and door separator in the
common foyer of the building. The separation was constructed, the permit
was issued and beer and wine has been served at the Jazz Company Cafe
since July 1, 2009.
Current Circumstances
Jazz Co. Cafe has applied for a full on-sale liquor license which would au-
thorize them to serve beer, wine and mixed drinks. Prior Lake City Code
Section 301.503 provides that with respect to a liquor license request, the
City Council "shall hear testimony from any person who requests to be
heard for or against the granting of the license. After investigation and
hearing the Council shall, in its discretion, grant or deny the issuance of the
license."
The purpose of tonight's hearing is to receive comments from the public on
the application and then consider whether the Council desires to issue an
on-sale liquor license for Jazz Co. Cafe.
The license requirements for an on-sale liquor license are the same as for
an on-sale beer and wine license which Jazz Co. Cafe has already been
granted. Accordingly, the City already has on file a police background re-
port, insurance certificates and other relevant documents.
If issued, the on-sale liquor license would be valid from the date of approv-
al (April 5 or 19) to June 30, 2010. Pursuant to ordinance, the $6,300 an-
nuallicense fee has been prorated and the applicant has paid $1,050 as-
suming a May 1, 2010 start date. All taxes for the property in which the
Cafe is located are current and there are no financial obligations that either
the property owner or liquor license applicant has to the City. The Police
Department has completed the background investigation as well.
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phqne95Z,447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
Conclusion
The Council should receive the staff report, open the public hearing, re-
ceive testimony, close the public hearing and then take action on the re-
quest.
ISSUES:
When the beer and wine license was approved, it was conditional upon the
construction of a separator wall in the common entry foyer so patrons of
other portions of the building would be separated from the alcohol service
area. The wall and door remain in place and appear to be effective for the
intended purpose.
There is a common restroom on the first floor. It is possible that a patron
could order an alcoholic drink, beer or wine and bring it into the restroom.
The Council may wish to consider as a condition of the license approval,
the addition of a sign that says, "No Alcohol Allowed in Restrooms" or out-
side of the Jazz Company Cafe.
The Prior Lake Police Department has reviewed the Jazz Co. Cafe plans
for alcohol storage. The Department has concluded that the plans can be
relied upon to reasonably and effectively allow liquor access only to Jazz
Co. Cafe employees who are granted access to the storage area.
The proposed license DOES NOT include a request for an outdoor service
area for on-sale liquor pursuant to Section 301.1500. If it did, the applicant
would have to come into compliance with all applicable sections of the City
Code. Therefore, liquor sales and consumption mav onlv occur within the
licensed oremises and not outside.
The Police Department has reviewed its files and noted that there has
been only one incident since Jazz Cafe began serving beer an wine on July
1, 2009. The incident occurred on the evening of Ladies Night Out. Aside
from this incident (alcohol consumed outside the licensed premise) the Po-
lice Department is not aware of any other issues related to the on-sale li-
cense application and Jazz Co. Cafe has passed all "sales to minor testing"
which have occurred since it received its license.
There has been ongoing friction between the owner of the building, where
Jazz Co. Cafe is a tenant, and Jazz Co. Cafe. This friction resulted in a
considerable delay between the approval of the beer and wine license and
its actual issuance because of disagreement regarding the sale of liquor on
premise and the design of the wall. There are numerous other examples
of the friction; many of which have impacted the City, and staff under-
stands that the parties are considering steps to address this matter. A sim-
ilar issue could arise regarding the on-sale liquor license vs. the beer and
wine license. The City may only address the license application to the ex-
tent it is found to impact the public health, welfare and safety. In and of
itself, the on-sale liquor license is not seen by the staff as being a greater
risk to public safety, health and welfare than a beer and wine license.
2
The City Attorney and Building and Transportation Services Director visited
the facility this week. It is their opinion that with the exception of adding
signage to the restroom, the configuration and operation of the facility ef-
fectively separates the liquor service area from non-service area.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Approval of the license does provide a prorated license fee which will help
defray costs of compliance checks.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council has the following alternatives:
1. Adopt a motion directing the staff to prepare a resolution with findings
of fact supporting the approval of the on-sale liquor license request to
be placed upon the April 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
2. Adopt a motion directing the staff to prepare a resolution with findings
of fact opposing the request to be placed upon the April 19, 2010 Con-
sent Agenda.
3. Close the hearing and defer any further action pending receipt of spe-
cific additional information by the Council.
RECOMMENDED Unless new information is supplied at the public hearing, Alternative #1.
MOTION:
3