86-7247R21
RESOLUTION N0. 7247
RESOLUTION DENYING SPECIAL
USE PERMIT FOR RESTAURANT
SERVING LIQUOR AT
1200 EAST 78TH STREET
BACKGROUND
The City Council accepts the following statements as background.
1. Restaurant Ventures Two, Inc. (Applicant) has requested
that the City grant it a special use permit to permit a
restaurant serving liquor by the drink at 1200 East 78th.
2. The proposed restaurant, Two Pesos, would be located in a
building containing approximately 5,000 square feet which
would be constructed on the site. The building would have
seating for 185 patrons. The proposal also includes
drive-up service which would be provided by two drive-
through service lanes. The drive-through order boards
would be located on the east side of the building and the
pick-up window would be located on the north side of the
building.
3. Parking for 81 vehicles is proposed to be constructed on-
site. Access to the parking areas would be from a 26 foot
wide curb cut from 78th Street in the southeast corner of
the site; and a 26-foot wide curb cut onto 12th Avenue on
the northwest corner of the site.
4. The site is bounded by East 77th Street on the north, 12th-
Avenue South on the west, East 78th Street on the south
and abuts privately developed property on the east. The
land north of the site (across 77th Street) is zoned and
used as single family residences. The north portion of
the land to the west of the site (across 12th Avenue) is
zoned MR and used as apartments. The south portion of
that land is zoned C-2 and used as a gasoline service
station. The land to the east of the site is zoned C-2
and used for apartments. The land to the south (across
.78th Street) is within the I-494 right-of-way.
5. According to information provided by the Applicant, the
food and beverage service concept would be similar to that
employed in restaurants frequently referred to as fast
food restaurants. Two focd and beverage service options
would be available:
a) Customers could o der food and beverages from their
vehicles at an or~er board, drive to a drive-through
window to pay and pick up their orders.
b) Customers could order food and beverages at a counter
inside the restaurant and pick up and pay fori their
orders at the counter.
Whichever option would
would be prepared and
Counter customers coul
for consumption there,
orders elsewhere. Dri
their orders either in
beverage orders would
customers purchasing a
consume them within th
6. The requested special
liquor by the drink.
has not yet been made
appropriate, in the co
special use permit, to
rant would qualify for
subdivision 1(3) defin
is used in determining
establishment for an o
part of that paragraph
be used, the food and beverage order
ackaged by restaurant employees.
either take their orders to tables
or leave the building to consume their
e-up customers generally would consume
the parking lot or off-site. Alcoholic
my be purchased at the counter; and
coholic beverages would be required to
restaurant building.
se permit is for a restaurant serving
lthough a liquor. license application
y the Applicant, it is nonetheless
text of the application for the
examine whether the proposed restau-
a liquor license. Section 11.06,
s the term "restaurant" as that term
the qualifications of an eating
-sale liquor license. The relevant
reads as follows:
The term 'restaurant' means. an establishment .
where in consideration of payment therefore, meals.
are regularly served at tables to the general
public, and which employs an adequate staff for
the usual and suitable service to its guests.
7. Evidence has been presented to the City Council to suggest
that the proposed use, if permitted, could have an adverse
impact upon the neighboring properties; such impact could
include noise, odor, traffic and litter.
FINDINGS
Based upon the foregoing, the City Council makes the following -
findings:
1. Two Pesos does not qualify for the issuance of an on-sale
liquor license because it is not a "restaurant" as that
term is defined in the liquor provisions of the ordinance.
code.
2. Even if Two Pesos met the literal definition of a restau-
rant, the Council would be disinclined to give favorable
consideration to the granting of a liquor license because
the proposed activity does not appear to contain suffi-
cient and reliable controls to assure that liquor would
not (i) be consumed by persons who are not qualified to
consume or (ii) be removed from the premises to be
consumed elsewhere. '
3. The City Council views the granting of liquor licenses to
be appropriate. in situations where it will foster and
promote developments which among other things enhance the
tax base and thereby serve the economic well-being and
general welfare of the community. The City Council is
not inclined to issue such licenses in situations where,
as here, the proposed development, although meeting the
City's minimum market value criteria, poses potential
adverse impacts upon the neighborhood which might well
be mitigated if the property were put to other uses having
equal or greater positive effect on the City's tax base
and general economic strength and vitality.
4. Evidence has been presented suggesting that the proposed
restaurant would constitute a nuisance and annoyance to
adjacent properties. We believe that because the
application is for a restaurant serving liquor by the
drink, our findings with respect to the inappropriateness
- of the service of liquor are controlling, and we do not
at this time make any other findings with respect to
Applicant's request.
1~FC TST(~N
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota that the request by Restaurant
Ventures Two, Inc. for a special use permit to permit a restau-.
rant serving liquor by the drink at 1200 East 78th Street is
hereby DENIED.
Passed by the City Council of the Cit of Ri
13th day of October, 1986. ~
ATTEST:
,,yy''
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
Hami
ld, Mi:nnesota th.i:s
Mayor