Laserfiche WebLink
City Council minutes <br />-5- January 26, 1976 <br />The regular Council meeting was reconvened at 9:15 p.m. <br />Administrator Achen presented the minor subdivision request of <br />Patrick Novak, 8368 Groveland. It was originally an uneven lot <br />split and the Planning Commission recommended that the Council <br />approve a lot split that was even. Otherwise no problems and <br />the staff has no further recommendations. <br />MSP (Shelquist- Hodges) that the Council approve the minor subdi- <br />vision request of Patrick Novak, 8368 Groveland, as recommended <br />by the Planning Commission to create two even lots subject to <br />a utility easement of 5 feet on each lot on the back lot lines, <br />if not already taken, and subject to park deduction. 5 ayes <br />MSP (Shelquist- Baumgartner) that the Council approve the <br />minor subdivision request of Delmar Ford, 8378 Groveland, <br />as recommended by the Planning Commission to create two even <br />lots subject to a utility easement of 5 feet on each lot on the <br />back lot lines, if not already taken, and subject to park <br />dedication. 5 ayes <br />MSP (Johnson - Shelquist) that the Council approve the minor <br />subdivision of Janice Michael, 8330 Groveland, as recommended <br />by the Planning Commission and as drawn on Exhibit A which was <br />received from Janice Michael. 5 ayes <br />Administrator Achen explained the request of Wayne Speczka, <br />7634 Groveland, minor subdivision, stating that it involved a <br />variance because there was a garage that prevented dividing <br />the original lot in half. The Planning Commission approved a <br />variance allowing 5 -foot setback on the rear lot line for the <br />garage. <br />MSP (Hodges - Pickar) that the Council accept the recommendations <br />of the Planning Commission to approve the minor subdivision <br />request of Wayne Speczka, 7634 Groveland, allowing a 5 -foot <br />variance on the lot line. 5 ayes <br />Attorney Meyers introduced the proposed ordinances amending <br />intoxicating liquor, cabaret and restaurant license fees. He <br />stated that the Council, according to Minnesota Statutes, has <br />the right to do this. The annual license fees shall be fixed <br />in advance. A municipality may revoke a license for cause. <br />In this particular city licenses are issued as of July 1 every <br />year. The city can issue up to the number authorized by Statute. <br />The licensee has no vested right in the liquor license. The <br />city takes each one as it comes, reviews it and issues or denies <br />the license. It does not have to issue any liquor license and <br />is in full authority to establish the liquor license fee based <br />on the criteria that would be appropriate. The ordinary license <br />fees of any business should be related to administrative expenses <br />but the legislature has allowed municipalities to use other <br />criteria, i.e. amount of services that would be necessary, such <br />as police services. The city has wide discretion, but it should <br />be clarified clearly and the court would interpret it as reasonable. <br />