PL MINUTES 09071982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-4- Mr. Zinner asked whether. the concerns expressed about the billiard parlor operation had been directly related to the categories of -business • which would be affected by the proposed ordinances and Mr. Soth told him his instructions in. preparing the ordinance -amendments had been to find any business which is open to- ,the public and where the public congregates and where disturbances. and noise might be generated in the early morning hours_. The - Rein attorney questioned whether there had been resident input- regarding -those other categories and Mr. Soth told him the' Council had also based its decision regarding those businesses on the findings of a Minneapolis study which related entertainment/ amusement establishment location to increase in crime rates , decrease in property values- and -other adverse impacts on the adjacent areas . He conceded the study had -been based on the socio-economic character- istics .of the Minneapolis neighborhoods . Dor. Springfield said the original petition .which 409 persons had signed had been against the beer license .and not against the 24 hour operation of the..billiards parlor and - it is his personal belief that . "you can get most people to sign almost -anything you ask them to sign" . Mr-. Kozlak disputed this assumption about this particular petition saying he lives in the area and knows almost everyone who signed the petition-.and believes their prime consideration was the hours of operation since they already knew: beer was served in.- the bowling alley until 1 :00 A.M. Mr. Rhoades was admant in saying the petition was only against the beer license and the woman who was .the spokesperson for the group who appeared, - was very upset because she had not been informed that license application had been _withdrawn . so she could go to the Eastside • parade- with. her husband and children. He perceived that "when the neighbors who showed up to . argue against the beer - license had nothing else to fight about,. they started to complain about the hours of operation" . The Chairman told Pyr. Rhoades the minutes for- that meeting show substantial input against the hours of operation for this type of business in a residential area. and .this was a prime consideration of the Council when they directed entertainment-type businesses be made conditionally .permitted uses so .conditions could be placed on such operations which would protect the residents from early morning disturbances . Mr. Springfield told .the Commission -members that, during the few times he has visited the store which is being remodeled for Chick 's , he has been approached by 15 adults who wished him success in his business venture including a bank representative, a Legion Club member, and one of the men who had originally been against the business . The Chick ' s owner insisted- "seventy people don't represent the City" . When Mr. Rhoades reiterated that none of the first testimony was concerned with the hours of- operation , Mr. Childs told him the fact that this would be an all-night operation was not generally known or understood at that time and the. residents found out about that during the meeting. The Manager does not believe there is a valid basis for the belief of the Chick' s owners that the new ordinance is directed solely against them, but, rather, that the City believes any recrea- tional use should not- be run for 24 hours a day because of the expense • of additional police protection which would -be required and the need is therefore for tightening up the existing ordinances so the City won't have to go through this process ever again.