Loading...
08-1367Council File # �� /�� 7 Green Sheet # } (}( y }j �j Fj RESOLUTION Presented OF, SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ��J WHEREAS, adverse action was taken against the Liquor On Sale — 2AM Closing license application submitted by Dara Thai, Inc. d/b/a Dara Thai (License ID #20070001876) for the premises located at 769 Milton Street North in Saint Paul, by Notice of Intent to Deny License and Request for Modification of Existing License Condition, alleging licensee had several complaints from neighbors regarding disturbing noises coming from the establishment in violation of Saint Paul Legislative Code §293.02;and 8 WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing Officer conducted a site visit of the establishxnent and based 9 on her observations recommended that the license application and request for modification of license 10 condition #12 be forwarded to the City Attorneys Office for adverse action; and 11 12 WHEREAS, the Notice of Intent to Deny License and Request for Modification of Existing License 13 Condition was sent to the licensee on November 6, 2008, requesting a response by November 17, 2008; 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 WI the licensee did not respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny License and Request for Modification of Existing License Condition to contest the allegation, request a public hearing or withdraw the license application by the stated deadline; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the 2AM Closing license appiication submitted by Dara Thai, Inc. d/b/a Dara Thai is hereby denied and license condition #12 will remain for this establishxnent. Requested by Department oE � L BY' l .-te� �} �� Adoption Certified by Council Secretary BY� /� �1,�PSor� ApprovedbyMayor: Date f�s�a :�GG�Q �,�/_ ,�} � / B Y� �C�L-����1 f: /0G°.�/7�--�-✓ Form Ap ved by City Attorney B __��� i , Form �prov d bv��ayor ub sion to Council I � BY� �1 f Adopted by Council: Date j'��7f�j/p� � Green Sheet Green Sheet �� /3�7 Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet L � � DepartmenUOffice/COUnci1: Date Initiated: 51 _Dept.ofSafety&lnspections p¢DEC-08 Green Sheet NO: 3064878 I CoMact Person & Phone: Deoartment Sent To Person InifiaUDate � RachelTiemey y o e torsai'e s�ins 'on: ( ----- i � 266-8710 � 1 e t of Safe & Ins "ons Deosr�ent Director Assign � 2 �(.StvAttornev II i � Must Be on Council gentla by (� te): Number � 3 or's O&ce Ma or/Assistant i 17-DEG-08 For RoUting 4 oa¢cil [ ------� Doc. Type- RESOLUTION Order 5 CLt'ty Clerk CS Clerk i EDOCUment Required: Y I DocumentConWct: �ulieKraus � Contact Phone: 266-8776 I Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All lowtions for SignaW re) Action Requested: Approval of the attached resolution to take adverse action against the Liquor On Sale 2AM Closing license appiicarion submitted by Daza Thai, Inc., d(bJa Daza Thai (License ID#20070001876) foi the premises located at 769 Milton Street North in Saint Paul. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contrects Must Answer the Foliowing Questions: Planning Commission 1. Has this person�rm ever worked under a conVact for this departmeM? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has ihis person/flrm ever been e city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person�rm possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach So green sheet. Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Licensee had several complaints from neighbors regazding disturbing noises coming from the establishment in violarion of Saint Paul Legislative Code Section 293.02. After a site inspecrion, the Legislarive Hearing Officer requested the application go to the Ciry Attomeys Office for adverse ac6on. After norificarion, the licensee failed to respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny License and Request for Modification of Existing License Condition. Advantages If Approved: Denial of ticense and request for modification of existing ]icense condition #12. Disadvantages If Approved: None. Disadvantages If Not Approved: ToWI Amount of CosflRevenue Budgeted: Transaction: Funding Source: Activity Number: Financial Information: (Explain) December 4, 2008 10:01 AM Page 1 ��-i��� OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY John J Chor, Ciry Anorney SwtNT PAUL � AAAA CITY OF SAINT PAUL ChristopherB Colemars, Mayor CivilDivision 400 City Ha11 ]5 West Kel7ogg Blvd SaintP¢ul, Minnesota SSIO2 Tetephone: 651 2668710 Facsimile' 657 2955619 November 6, 2008 NOTICE OF INTENT TO DENY LICENSE and REQUEST FOR MODTFICATION OF EXISTING LICENSE CONDITION Owner/Manager Daza Thai Restaurant 769 Milton Street North St. Paul, MN 55104 RE: Liquor On Sale — 2AM Closing license application submitted by Dara Thai, Inc. d/b/a Dara Thai Restaurant for the premises located at 769 Milton Street North in Saint Paul LicenseID #20070001876 Dear Sir/Madam: The Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI) has recommended adverse aetion against ihe Liquor On Sale-2AM Closing license application submitted by Dara Thai, Inc., d/b/a Daza Thai Restaurant far the premises located at 769 Mflton Street North in Saint PauL The basis for the recommendation is as follows: On August 15, 2008 a Legislative Hearing canducted regarding your request for Liquor On Sale-2AM Closing license and request for removal of existing license condition #12. At the hearing, DSI recommended denial of the license and your request to modify license condirion #12 which states: "This establishment must close for business no later than 12:00 midnight each night of the week. The licensee may request a review of condition after siz months". At that hearing, neighbors of your establishment offered evidence of disturbing noise comin fr m establishment. g o your On August 28, 2008, at 3:00 p.m., the Legislative Aearing Officer conducted a site visit at your establishment. She noted the following: 1) the predominance of the stage and the entertainment atmosphere that was thereby created; 2) the audible sound of amplified music at the boundary of the property if the doors were open, especially the kitchen door; 3) the influence of ambient traffic noise from the streets Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer 0� ���7 Daza Thai Restaurant November 6, 2008 Page 2 surrounding the shopping center complea in which your establishment is located; 4) the presence of signs at all of the tables in the establishment reminding patrons that food must be purchased with wine and beer; 5) the presence of two (2) young men playing a board game at a table, both of whom were drinking beer and neither of them had a visible food order. Based upon these observations and the staff recommendations she recommended that the City Council refer your application for adverse action to the City Attorneys Office. Then on 5eptember 21, 2008, St. Paul Police were sent to your establishment on a noise disturbance complaint. When police arrived, they noted that the mnsic was so lond that they could hear it from inside tLeir squad car. Police met with neighbors who lived nearby. Both neighbors stated that every weekend your establishment has large parties and the music is played at a high volume which they are able to hear from inside their homes nearly 200 feet away. The neighbors also stated that there are several neighbors in the area who had similar complaints regarding the noise levels. Police spoke to the on duty manager and let him know of the complaint and he said he wouid keep the music down. This is a violation of Saint Paul Legislative Code §293.02 (Noise Ordinance). Therefore, based on this violation and the recommendation of the Legislative Hearing Officer, the licensing office recommends denial of your Liquor On Sale — 2AM license application and your request to modify license condition #12. At this time you have three options on how to proceed: 1. If you wish to admit the facts but contest the penalty, you may have a public hearing before the Saint Paui Ciry Council, you will need to send me a letter with a statement admitting the facts and requesting a public hearing. We will need to receive your letter by Monday, November 17, 2008. The matter wili then be scheduled before the City Council for a public hearing to determine whether to deny your license and your request to modify license condition #12. You will have an opportunity to appeaz before the Council and make a statement on your own behalf. 2. If you dispute the above facts, you can request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. At that hearing both you and the City will be able to appeaz and present witnesses, evidence and cross-examine the other's witnesses. The St. Paul City Council will uitimately decide the case. If this is your choice, please let me know by Monday, November 17, 2008, and I will take the necessary steps to schedule the administrative hearing. Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer ��1-i.��� Daza Thai Restauzant November 6, 2008 Page 3 You may withdraw your IScense application. Send a written statement to that effect to the Deparhnent of Safety and Inspections, 375 Jackson Street, Ste 220, St. Paui, Minnesota 55101-1806 no later than Monday, November 17, 2008. Information should be directed to the attention of Christine Rozek. Any request for a refund of the license application fee must also be made in writing to DSI. If I have not heard from you by that date, I will assume that you do not contest the denial of your license and your request to modify license condition #12. In that case, the matter will be placed on the Council's Consent Agenda for approval of the recommended penalty. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (651) 266-8710. Sincerely, 2 a�,,,� ��",� Rachel Tierney Assistant City Attomey ca Christine Rozek, Deputy Director of DSI Song Thao, 1521 Cumberland Street, St. Paul, MN 55117 Tait Danielson Castillo, Exec. Director, Thomas-Dale/District 7 Planning Council 533 North Dale Street, St. Paul, MN 55103 AA•ADA-EEO Employer ��-i��� LICENSE HEARINCS MINiJ'PES Dara Thai Restaurant at 769 Milton Street Friday, August 15, 2008, 10:00 a.m. 330 Ciry Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevazd West Mazcia Moermond, L.egislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 10:08 a.m. StafF Present: Christine Rozek and Kristina Schweinler, Department of Safety and Inspec6ons (ASI); and Jean Birkholz, Council Research Others Present: Song Thao, president; Chris Yang, restaurant manager; Jeff Arnold, property manager; Tate Danielson Castillo, Thomas-Dale / District 7 Planning Council; Grace Ngeh, neighbor; and Paul Holmgren, neighbor Repuest for License: 2 AM Closing; also a request to remove the following condition: This establishment must close for business no later than 12:00 midnight each nigkt of the week. The licensee may request a review of this condition after suc months. Ms. Moermond stated that this is an informal legislative hearing for a license applicarion. This is a Class N nolification which means that the neighborhood gets notified and has a chance to voice its concerns. If anyone has a concern, it automatically triggers a hearing. Other Class N Licenses include: auto sales, auto repair, cabazet, etc.—things that have an immediate impact on the neighborhood. The City received three (3) letters of concem regazding the issuance of this license. Ultimately, there aze three (3) possible outcomes from this hearing: 1) Ms. Moermond may recommend to the City Council that they issue this license without any conditions; 2) she may recommend to the City Council that they issue this license with agreed upon condiuons; or 3) she may tecommend to the City Council that they not issue this license but refer it to an administrative law judge for a further hearing and findings. Ms. Moermond will begin with a staff report. Staff will be asked to explain their review of the application and will also explain theiz recommendation. Then, she will ask the applicant to talk about the business plan. Next, she will hear from those who aze here in support of the issuance of the license and those with concerns about the issuance of this license; and, she will review the letters / emails that were sent regazding this application. Ms. Kristina Schweinler, Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI), reported that the usual reviews by Building, Environmental Health, Fire, Licensing and Zoning aze not applicable because this is an existing business. Existing conditions aze as follows: L The sale of Wine and Beer will take piace only in conjunction with the sale and service of food. 2. The kitchen shall remain open and food service shall be provided at all times that wine and beer aze being served. 3. Licensee will provide annual copies of gross receipts from the sales of food, wine and beer, showing at least sixty (60) percent attributable to the sale of food, 4. Any remodeling or expansion of this facility must be reviewed by DSI prior to beginning a project. 5. Licensee will not allow any loitering behind the building of the licensed business. 6. The licensee shall build an interior service azea in the back of his business (along Chatsworth Street) that would include a sound-proof wall which would prevent music being played inside to ��%�i3�y be heard by those outside. The entertainment license, if approved, wIll not be issued until this condition is met and the building permit is finalized. 7. The licensee must never prop open back doors during business hours (on the Chatsworth Street side). 8. The licensee may not dispose of beer bottles into his dumpster between the hours of 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. 9. Trash collection for this business is allowed to take place only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. 10. The licensee must maintain video surveillance cameras in the front and back of the licensed premises. The number, quality and placement of cameras must be approved by the Saint Paul Police Departrnent (SPPD). License holder will keep the video surveillance cameras in good working order. Tapes/recordings must be maintained for a minimum of thirty (30) days and must be available immediately upon request by a license inspector of the Saint Paul Police Department (5PPD). 11. The license holder shall make sure that all exterior refuse, glass and trash that is on the premises, from the front door of the business to Chatsworth Street, is removed from the licensed premises on a daily basis. 12. This establishment must close for business no later than 12:00 midnight each night of the week. This licensee may request a review of this condition after six (6) months. ? The Departrnent of Safety and Inspections recommends: 1) Denial of the application for a 2 AM � Closing license; and 2) Approval of the request to remove existing license condition #12. Ms. Moermond asked staff if there has ever been a liquor license at this location. Ms. Schweinler replied that there has not just wine and beer. Ms. Moermond asked the applicant why he wants to change from closing at 12 midnight to 2 AM. Mr. Yang replied that they want to stay open later on Fridays and Saturdays and special holidays, not the week nights. Customers come in later and want to eat later. A special hollday would be like Thanksgiving. Also, there are a lot of out-of town people in Saint Paul for the Fourth of July. Ms. Moermond asked about the business' peak hours. Mr. Yang responded that currently, because of day light saving time, most customers don't come in until 9:30-10 p.m. Mr. Yang commented that certain things have happened that have gotten them on the wrong side of the neighbors. Grace had requested that bottles should not be picked up before 8 a.m.; sometimes they had been picked up at 5:30 a.m. Mr. Yang requested that they not come before 8 a.m. He got a letter from the management saying that bottles would not be picked up before 8 a.m. Tn June, 2008, they moved the garbage cans inside the building towazds the back door but the back door isn't sealed very tightly, and so, the sound of taking out bottles was heard. Now, they just put everything on the ground unul morning. Also, the neighbors complained about noise. Mr. Yang handed out a sheet of sound readings taken by Brian Raykowski. Ramsey County Sheriff Deputy, Kou Vang, requested him to come out to do the readings. Mr. Kou Vang does off-duty security for Daza Thai on Fridays and Saturdays. Mr. Raykowski took the readings while the music was playing. His reading results are: Outside front door: 68 dec. At the end of the restaurant by the window: 71 dec. Back of the building by said complainer's house: under 60 dec. Inside restaurant: 88-94 dec. His readings were taken with a Radio Shack Sound Level Meter model# 33-2050. �� �1�7 Mr. Tait Danielson Castillo, Director, District 7 Planning Council reported that their meeung was held at the restaurant on July 16, 2008. A total of 50 people were present, 40 of which actually live 1 work f oi own property in District 7. The meering ouflined what people thought were pros and cons about the restaurant. There was some confusion about what people thought they were voting for. The first question they voted on was to grant the 2 AM Closing, to which there was a solid "No" vote. 'I`he second question was a compromise to allow Dara Thai to stay open until 1 am. but to put a condiuon on the license to stop all entertainment, food service and alcohol at midnight (a compromise that developed from discussion regarding Destiny Cafe at 995 University Avenue, as well). That question received the most support votes: 16. Most people there were looking for some sort of compromise, realizing that Dara Thai is in a mall — a business azea but close to residents. There were still a lot of problems with noise and whether they were abiding with the closing ume. Also, there was a question about whether there had been any police reports or violations up to this point. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Danielson Castillo how the neighborhood discussion went for Destiny Cafe as opposed to Daza Thai. Mr. Danielson Castillo responded that it went the same way. Attendance was lower, 20 — 30 people. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Danielson Castillo to chazacterize the mixed vote with a lot of abstentions (16 in Support / 14 in Opposition / 20 in Abstenrion). Mr. Danielson Casullo responded that the best way to chazacterize it is to say that it's a very frustrating situation with a lot of opinions. Everyone wants to see business thrive in the mall; at the same time, they're seeing a business that is not your average business. The dish council recognizes that and has struggled with the idea of restaurants operaung as nightclubs for a while (Destiny Cafe; Dara Thai). The district council also recognizes the problems they've had in the North End with Asian Cuisine that also operated in that fashion. The district council is happy that the City Council passed an ardinance that doesn't allow Entertainment B licenses or beer and wine licenses; it does allow the 2 AM Closing. Enforcement is what the dishict council struggles with the most with a lot of licenses. The neighbors don't know if the police aze responding properly or quickly enough to actually see what's going on. The City is stuck in a situation where if there's no violation and no police reports, iYs hazd to know exacdy whaYs happening. As much as the district council likes long condiuons lists, it's stuck in a situation where if the police azen't catching and enforcing it, then iYs just a condition listed on a piece of paper. Many times, an abstention means that someone doesn't want to get involved anymore; they'd just rather see how it plays out. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Danielson Castillo to talk about neighborhood/site configuration with respect to the layout of Destiny versus that of Data Thai. Ms. Danielson Castillo responded that they are similaz in how they are configured to the neighborhood. There's a slightly larger distance between Destiny Cafe and the residents; there's a pazking lot, a chain link fence and Sherburne Avenue between them. Destiny Cafe opens up to the pazking lot; it doesn't open up to University Avenue. Daza Thai is closer. Dara Thai is at the end of the mall, next to the bowling alley which is now closed. Daza T`hai opens up to the front but there's a door in the back. T'hat door opens up to the alley, a boulevazd, Chatsworth Sueet, a boulevazd, then, Grace's house. Mr. Danielson Casullo expressed that the district council feels stuck in the middle. IYs a di�cult type of scenario. Ms. Moermond returned to the vote situauon. She asked if there was a sunilar vote distribuuon in neighborhood feelings about Destiny Cafe as with Daza Thai. Mr. Danielson Castillo replied that he didn't recall the actual vote distribution but he assumes that it was pretty similar. There's a strong concern among neighbors about any ldnd of nightclub — the enter[ainment, especially, which brings more noise at later times. DB�I�I�� Ms. Grace Ngeh, Daza Thai's closest neighbor, addressed the hearing in opposition. She stated that she is concerned about noise and about calling the police about noise because by the time the police get there, the noise may be stopped. Also, she thinks that the sound readings may have been taken when there was no music there. (The readings were taken at approximately 1130 p.m., Friday, July 25, 2008.) Mr. Yang responded that he was with Mr. Raykowski when the readings were taken and he instructed staff to turn the music to the max. Ms. Ngeh stated that the readings were not done on the day that she called the police, so, she doesn't think there is any value in the readings. She thinks that iY s Mr. Yang's job is to follow the conditions on his license. Mr. Yang responded that he is trying everything he can to comply. Ms. Ngeh wanted to clarify that Mr. Yang said that dumping the bottles happened before the hearing; it happened after the heazing. She actually talked to the truck driver who picks up the bottles; it was 5:30 a.m. and she was in her nightgown. She told him that ihere were conditions on the license that said he was not supposed to pick up the bottles at 530 a.m. The truck driver said that he Mr. Yang had not informed him. On July 16, 2008, Mr. Yang said in the meeting that after Ms. Ngeh spoke with him, he spoke with them and they haven't been picking up the bottles that early. Ms. Ngeh had asked Mr. Yang if that was not a violation of one of the conditions. Mr. Yang had not responded. Ms. Ngeh wanted all to understand that the neighbors are in favor of businesses. T'hey want their neighborhood to grow like other neighborhoods. There aze more than fifteen (15) businesses in the mall and the neighbors are not having a problem with any of them because they close at or before 10 p.m. Theix businesses do not produce noise; Daza Thai is the only one that produces noise. Ms. Ngeh stated that she was surprised to heaz at the meeting that one of the events at Dara Thai includes bringing in young girls to do modeling shows. Other people told of going there to dance with their families. Mr. Yang had explained to them that Daza Thai's entertainment would be just light music but he failed to tell them that it could involve dancing, singing, modeling shows, renting it out for special events, etc. At the meeting, Mr. Yang stated that his security officer goes out to monitor sound levels. She asked the security officer how often he goes out to monitor sound levels. The officer responded that he goes out four (4) times. 5he asked now long he stays out. The off'icer replied that he stays out for three (3) minutes, going out to his squad caz waiting to see who will come out to dump things in the gazbage. Ms. Ngeh went on to say that most people who were at the district meeting in support of Dara Thai do not live within a block of Daza Thai. These people were not able to testify about the noise coming from Dara Thai. The last time that Dara Thai had a hearing here, the engineez commented that something should be done with the ceiling because the ceiling was not soundproofed. The noise leaking out could be from the ceiling and the roof but nothing has been done about this problem. Soundproofing was done on only 1/3 of the wall facing Chatsworth Street. She thinks that violates one of the condiuons. Ms. Ngeh stated that Daza Thai behaves as a club not a restaurant. Loud noise, dancing and shows make it appear as a club, not a restaurant. They may have good intentions to promote social gatherings, including dancing and modeling shows but that goal is best set in an area that is not in very close proximity to residential dwellings. The noise and commotion from Daza Thai on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights greatly impacts those who live very close to the restaurant. The 2 AM Closing would mean that neighbors would have to live with that noise unti12:30 a.m. or 3 a.m. Daza Thai is not able to follow the conditions for a 12 midnight closing, how is it going to follow the conditions for a 2 AM Closing. Who would monitor Dara Thai's compliance late at night? Ms. Ngeh stated that she has talked with Mr. Yang about reducing the noise level and bottle emptying but he never listens to the neighbors' lJ�' f�,7 concerns. She has called and taiked with Christine Rozek many times about her complaints. Sha also has spoken with Ted Dennison, who directed her to Commander Tina, who told her to call the police. She is not aware of the outcome from calfing the police but she was told that one of the outcomes was cailed "unfounded." Once she heard bottles being emptied at 1225 a,m.; she called ttie restaurant and told them that they were supposed to close at 12 midnight and they were not supposed to be emprying bottles at this time. At 12:27 a.m., someone from Dara Thai called back and when she answered the phone, no one spoke to her. Her caller I.D. noted that it was from Daza Thai. She is concemed about what might happen to her neighborhood due to constant lack of sleep because of the noise from the restaurant. Crime might increase due to their late closing time. She stated that it was not fair that some of the people at the district meeting worked at the restaurant; they don't live in the neighborhood, but they voted. Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Ngeh for a copy of the notes that she has bezn reading from for the record. Mr. Tait Danielson Castillo clarified that no one who works at Daza Thai was allowed to vote at the district meeting. They are part of the abstention count. Ms. Ngeh added that the reason that she is the only one here testifying today is because she is directly behind the business. Her doctor recommended that she should have eazplugs because she isn't getting enough sleep because of the noise from Dara Thai on the weekends. She doesn't think that she should have to sleep with earplugs because someone else wants to make a profit. She has put a lot of money into her home and she pays taYes. This is not fair to her. The neighbors aze fed up. They say that no one listens to them; no one cares. There's no need to come. They don't think that coming here will make a difference; it hasn't in the past. Jonathan Green would have been here, too, but he just had major surgery and cannot drive. Ms. Moermond reviewed the letter of concern from the Tagues. They indicate that they have kept a log of times and dates that they have had to listen to loud music, which their letter lists. Ms. Moermond heard from those in support. Mr. Jeff t�rnold, property manager, noted that Daza Thai has been a tenant for Yhe past four (4) yeazs; however, it has had different managers, some of them were quite bad. They were very disrespectful of the neighbors' concerns. He feels that since Chris has taken over, he has been genuinely trying to accommodate the neighbors. He put in some sound proofing, which Mr. Ainold witnessed being installed; it is very well built. He has monitored noise at 1130 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays at Ms. Ngeh's house and he has never heard noise. He aiso had Mr. yang dump botUes while he stood near Ms. Ngeh's house. He heazd that quite clearly. He advised Mr. yang to move the bottle container somewhere else or to not dump the bottles at all. He added that he wanted everyone to be happy; however, he didn't know how to make that happen. Mr. Paul Holmgren stated that he didn't want to speak either in support or opposirion. He appealed for common sense. He added that Daza Thai is abiding by ail of the conditions. The culture is much different from the American culture. Ae noted that he shares the noise concerns. He has stood on the west side of Chatsworth, however, and has heard nothing. He supports Chris and the Daza Thai business; he'd like it to remain in Saint Paul instead of them taking it out to the suburbs. Ms. Rozek asked Ms. Ngeh whether she had air conditioning in her home and whether she sleeps with her windows closed. Ms. Ngeh responded that she does have air conditioning and she sleeps with her windows closed. Ms. Rozek said that she didn't know Mr. Raylowski, who did the noise readings, but that the 60 decibels recorded at Grace's house is loud; iYs a violation after 10 p.m. If a police officer D� i�7 measured at Grace's house and the measurement was 60 decibels, he could write a criminal citation. The ordinance says that if you can heaz it over normal speech, it's a violation; and normal speech is 55 decibels. Ms. Moermond referred Mr. Yang to The Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 293.02b Noisy Assembly or AmplificaUOn. That whole section relates to noise issues. Mr. Yang stated that in regazd to the letter citing dates and times of loud music, he never had music playing that late. On one of those dates Officer Mohr came to Dara Thai at approximately 1226 a.m., when no music was playing. He just peeked into the door and left. In reference to the sound proof wall, he did have it re-built with an engineer from Chaska, who recommended the solid bricks. Sound will not travel through it. A building inspector came out to approve it. He also put a door-stopper on the door. There are no leaks. Ms. Ngeh added that on July 4, 2008, Dara Thai was open until 130 a.m. Mr. Yang keeps saying that they close at 12 midnight but they do not. Ms. Rozek asked Ms. Ngeh if there were people there at that time or was the music playing at that time. Ms. Ngeh responded that there were a few people there and there was music noise. Ms. Moermond asked about police calls and validation of concems. Ms. Rozek responded that a list of the police calls for a yeaz from July 14, 2007 to August 14, 2008, produced 11 calls, The disturbance calls were all marked "unfounded" by the pol3ce department except for one where there was a fight; and they advised on that, which means a report wasn't written. Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Rozek to explain what "unfounded" means when the police respond. Ms. Rozek replied that for the most part, "unfounded" means that an officer responded to a disturbance call and didn't find any disturbance at the time that he arrived. Ms. Moermond added that it doesn't mean that the event didn't happen. To a neighbor, that might read as an insult. Ms. Rozek commented that it doesn't report the time lapse — between the time the call was made and the time when the officer responded. Ms. Moermond opined that at that hour of the night, a disturbance call is going to get less priority than other kinds of calls. Ms. Rozek stated that DSI gets all the po]ice reports on license establishments; and if there was a police report that indicated a disturbance, for instance, music, she would have gone forwazd with adverse action. Ms. Moermond stated that noise disturbances, usually of limited duration, aze hazder to document for enforcement staff (police or license inspector, etc.). Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Rozek if there were any new procedures with zespect to neighbors possibly filing �davits with the City that could assist DSI in developing an adverse action. Ms. Rozek responded that based on past adverse actions and the attomey that the City has now working on license issues, despite the fact that there might be numerous complaints from neighbors, those complaints need to be verified by a license inspector or a police officer in order for DSI to move forward. Ms. Moermond asked if that was consistent with the way dog barking is handled. Ms. Rozek replied that dog bazking is different. The process for dealing with barking dogs has to do with duration and citizens (2) must verify the event. They have to sign a criminal cita6on in the DSI office; the citation is forwazded to the City Attorney. This is considered a criminal action. The noise code violarion after 10 p.m. is enforced by the Police Depariment; they can come out and write a criminal citation. Ms. Rozek went on to say that DSI has a police officer, who works for VICE, assigned to licensing, who goes out to check on issues that DSI has with businesses. Ms. Moermond asked staff if DSI followed-up after the sound-proofing wail was erected. Ms. Schweinler responded that the sound-proofing wall was a condirion on the former licensee; however, the former licensee did not pull a building permit, so the building inspector was not alerted to make an inspection. As faz as noise mitigation, DSI is not an expert. � /J� i3�7 Ms. Moermond asked staff about the City and district council's role in reviewing license applications. Ms. Schweinler explained that D5I policy and City ordinance require that DSI notify the dishict council and every property owner within 350 feet when there is a Class N license application. It's a 45-day norice. ThaPs the comment period. When comment is received, a legislative hearing is held and the legislative hearing officer makes a recommendation to the City Council, which makes the final decision. Ms. Moermond added that everything leading up to and including the legislauve hearing is all advisory to the City Council. Ms. Moermond asked what the hours for an establishtnent like this would be without either condition #12 or the 2 AM Closing. Ms. Schweinler responded that it would be a 1 a.m. closing; and everyone has to be out of the establishment by 130 a.m. Ms. Rozek added that there can not be a bar set-up while there's dancing. The kitchen must remain open. The hearing was paused for ten (10) minutes. Ms. Moermond asked whether there are liquor licenses available for ttus establishment. Ms. Rozek responded that there aze liquor licenses available in Wazd 1. Ms. Moermond asked if this particulaz location would qualify for a liquor license. Ms. Rozek said that it would. Mr. Yang reminded them tlaat he had indicated that he did not want a hazd liquor license. Ms. Moermond asked because Dara Thai is leaning more to an entertainment focused crowd instead of a food focused crowd and the liquor license allows for that. Dara Thai seems blended – a litfle on the gray side of both which means that the conditions need to cover more rather than inteipret on the line. Ms. Moermond added that she really wants their business to flourish and she needs to find accommodations that can be reached because there are profound neighbor concems; she has a long history of profound neighbor concems which she needs to respect. In this particulaz case, the magnitude of neighbor concems is significant. Staff thinks Daza Thai should not get the 2 AM license; it's too close to that line of having a night club environment as opposed to a restaurant environment. Ms. Moermond thinks there aze tYungs that Daza Thai could do to address neighbors' concems; perhaps one could be to seek help from Dispute Resolution. Mr. Danielson-Castillo believes that iYs more about what can be enforced and what can't be enforced, Ms. Moermond replied that if it can't be enforced, her concern is how to get Daza Thai to self police as part of a negotiated agreement. Ms. Schweinler asked if anyone has considered sound mitigation such as landscaping oz fencing; something on the outside that might help to block noise. The license holder, Daza Thai, might be able to work something out with the landlord. Ms. Rozek commented that one of the bazs on Grand Avenue put of an 8-foot insulated wooded fence along the property line to help with neighbors' concems. Since that fence has been up, she hasn't received any neighborhood complaints. Ms. Moermond stated that she as inclined to recommend to the Council that they take adverse acuon on the application to change the license; essentiaily, she would recommend denial. She wili, howevez, tay it over for three (3) weeks to give management time to check into the landscaping oprion. She wants to give the applicant a chance to check into the landscaping option and to talk again with haulers and staff about the botfle dumping and the gazbage, etc., because there aze still complaints—time to mitigate the problems. Mr. Xang contended that he has talked with staff and the garbage haulers haven't been there before 8 a.m. There are, however, three (3) different sets of garbage in the back, including the mall management gazbage. He doesn't laiow what time the others are picked-up. 4�-/��y Ms. Moermond statad that she would like the applicant to tatk with property management to do an aznendment to the lease about the gazbage behind the place; that there won't be collection of that gazbage between 8 p.m. and 8 am. It will also give the applicant a chance to discuss landscaping with the property manager and things that would help with sound mitigation. It might also be helpful to take a look at the insulated noise fencing put up at the edge of the parking lot at Wild Onion on Grand Avenue. Ms. Rozek added that she thinks the proper[y manager would be willing to discuss some of these issues. Ms. Moermond stated that she needs some type of assurance that these things will be taken caze of. Ms. Moermond stated that a meeting be set up for Friday, September 12, 2008, to tallc about conditions. She added that she will not approve the 2 AM Closing; she may approve lifting the 12 midnight closing and negotiating the 1 a.m. closing. The hearing was adjourned at 12:06 p.m. A site visit and demonstration of sound levels with different combinations of doors both open and shut was held at Daza Thai 3:00 p.m., Thursday, August 28. On this site visits, Ms. Moermond noted the configuration of the restaurant, its patrons at the time of the visit, and the sound levels with the various combinations of doors both open and shut. Ms Moermond noted the following: 1) the predominance of the stage and the entertaintnent atmosphere that was thereby created; 2) the audible sound of amplified music at the boundary of the property if the doors were open, especially the kitchen door; 3) the influence of ambient tr�c noise from the streets surrounding the shopping center complex in which Dara Thai is located; 4) the presence of signs at all of the tables in the establishment reminding patrons that food must be purchased with wine and beer; and 5) the presence of 2 young men playing a board game at a table, both of whom were drinking beer, and neither of whom had a visible food order. Based on these observations and the staff recommendation to not grant either the 2 a.m. license or the modificauon in the existing condition, Ms Moermond recommends that the City Council refer this application for adverse action through the City Attorney's Office. /jab �i�-13�, Counci! File # Green Sheet # 30(e0335 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 22 13 14 ZS 16 1'J 18 I9 2� 21 22 z3 24 2$ 26 27 2$ 29 30 31 32 33 RESQLUTlON MINNESOTA Presemed by �� WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing Officer notecF the foIlowing conditions exist on the Wine On Sale, Malt t3n Sale {Strong), Entertainment (B), Restaurant (B)—more than 12 seats, Ca�ring Add-on and Food VehicIe license(s) held by Dara Thai Inc., doing business as Dara Thai Restaurant (Song Thao, President), 769 Milton Street: t. 2. 3. 4. 5 6. �. 8. 9. �o. i �. �z. Ti�e sale of Wine and Beer wi1S take place only in conjunccion with ihe sale and service ofiood. 7'he kitchen shall remain open and food urvice sha11 be provided aF al{ times thai wine and beer are being served. Licensee wilt provide annually copies of goss receipts from the sales of food, wine, and bcer, showing az least sixty (6Q} percent attributable to the sate of food. qny remodeling or expansion of this faciliry mpst be reviewed by D51 prior to beginning a project Licensee will not allow any loitering behind the building of the licenstd business. The Iicensee shall baiid an interior service azea in the back of his business (atong Chatswmtt3 Street) that would include a sound- proof wail which would prevent music being pleyed ivside to be heard by [hose outside. T7�e entert2itunent license, if approved, wilt not be iss¢ed unti] this condnion is met and the building peimit is finaled. The licensee mvst never prop open back doors during business hours (on tl�e Chatsworth Sb'eet side). T'he licensee may not dispose of beer bottles into his dampster between the hours of 8:06 p.m. to 8:00 am 1Yash collection for this busmess is allowed to take place only beriveen the hours of 7:00 a,m. and 9:00 p.m. The licensee must maintain video surveillance cazneras in the front and back of the licensed premises. 'Fhe number, quality, and placement of cameras must be approved by SPPD. License holder will keep the video swveillance camefas in good working order. Tapes/recordings must be maintained for a minimum of 30 days and mus[ be available immediately upon myuest by a ticense inspector or ihz St. Paul Police Dept. The license holder shall make sure thaz all exterior refuse, glass and trash thet is on the Qremises, from the front door of the business to Chatsworth Street, is removed from the licensed premises on a daily basis. This esiablish`nent must close for business no later than 12:00 midnight, each night of the week The lieensee may request a review of this condition after six months; and WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends that the application for a 2 AM Closing license and that the reqnest for the removal of Condition # 12 from ahove stating that This establishment must close for business no tater ilum 12: 00 midnight each night of the week The licensee may reguest a review of this condition after six months, should be referred to an Administrative Law Judge; T'HEREFORE, BE IT RESQLVED that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby refers thts license agplicatioa to an AdminisRative Law Judge. Requestad by Depaztrnent oE � Adopted by Council: Date �djJS�Q� Adoption Ce�rt by Council Secretary BY� !1 /�Di ' Appmved c� Date �° � Q B Y1�� ,� Form Approved by City Attorney By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Covncil By: Chapter 243. Noise Regularions* Chapter 293. Noise Regulations* Page 1 of b ��-%a�7 *Administrative Code reference—Procedure for public hearing regarding pub{ic nuisances, Ch. 91. Sec.293.01. Definitions. As used in this chapter, the fo4lowing terms shal{ have the meanings ascribed to them in this section. (1) PCA definitions adopted. Pursuant io Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.62, the definitions contained in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Air Quality Division Noise Pollution Control Rules, Section 7�30.0020, are hereby adopted by reference. (2) Construction. Any site preparation, assembly, erection, substantial repair, alteration or similar action, but excluding demolition. (3) Demolition. Dismantiing or intentional removal of structures, utilities, public or private right-of-way surfaces or similar property. (4) Department. The city department of safety and inspections. (5) Domestic power tools. Any mechanically powered saw, drill, sander, grinder, lawn or garden tool, lawn mower, or powered snow removal equipment, or other similar device commoniy used outdoors, except for the manufacture, commercial repair or prolonged testing of such tools. (6) Sound level (or noise level). The A-weighted sound pressure level, expressed in dBA, obtained by the use of a sound level meter having characteristics as specified in the ANSI Standard S1.4-1983. (Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; Ord. No. 17586, § 1, 9-1-88; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 07-149, § 68, 3-28-07) Sec. 293.02. Noise as a public nuisance. (a) Generally. (1} It shall be unlawfui for any person to make, continue, permit or cause to be made, continued or permitted within the city, any loud, disturbing or excessive noise which would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities in the area. (2) The characteristics and canditions which shall be considered in determining whether a noise is loud, disturbing or excessive for the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, shall include, without limitation, the foilowing: a. The time of day or night when the noise occurs. b. The duration of the noise. c. The proximity of the noise to a sleeping facility and/or a residential area. http://library3.municode.com/4472/DocView/10061/1/299/313 11l6/2008 Chapter 293. Noise Regulations* Page 2 of 6 �� �3�� d. The land use, nature and zoning of the area from which the noise emanates and the area where it is perceived. e. The number of people and their activities that are affected or are tikely to be affected by the noise. f. The sou�d peak pressuse fevel of the noise, in comparison to the tevel of ambient noise. (b) Noisy assemb/y. (1) Defined. The term "noisy assembly" shali mean a gathering of more than one person in a residentially zoned or used area or buiiding that would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities present in the area, considering the time of day and the residential character of the area, due to loud, disturbing or excessive noise. (2) Permitting noisy assembly. It shall be a violation of this section for any person having dominion, care or control of a residentiaily zoned or used area or building knowingly to permit a noisy assembly. (3) Remaining at a noisy assembly. It shail be a violation of this section to participate in, visit or remain at a gathering knowing or having reason to know that the gathering is a noisy assembly, except any person(s) who has/have come to the gathering for the sole puspose of abating the noisy assembiy. (c) Animals. It shall be a violation of this section to own, keep, have in possession or harbor any animai or animals which make any noise to the reasonable annoyance of another person or persons. The phrase "to the reasonable annoyance of another person or persons" shall include, but is not limited to, the creation of any noise by any animal or animals which can be heard by any person, including the animal control officer or a law enforcement officer, from a location outside of the building or premises where the animal or animals are tocated and which animal noise occurs repeatedly over at least a five-minute period of time with no more than a one- minute lapse of time between each animal noise during the five-minute period. (d) Ampli�ed sound. It shall be a violation of this section to play, operate or permit the playing, use or operation of any radio, tape player, disc player, loud speaker or other eleetronic device used for the amplification of sound, unless otherwise permitted by law, located inside or outside, the sound of which carries to points of habitation or adjacent properties, and is audible above the level of conversational speech at a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the point of origin of the amplified sound. (e) Motor vehicles. (1) Generally. {t sfiall be a viofation of this section to use any automobile, truck, motorcycle or other vehicle which causes or wouid be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities present in the area due to loud, disturbing or excessive noise. (2) Amplified sound from motor vehic/es. It shaH be a viotation of this section to play, operate or permit the playing, use or operation of any radio, tape player, disc player, loud speaker or other electronic device used for the amplification of music or other entertainment, which is located within a motor vehicle on a public street or alley, or in a commerciai or residential parking facility, which is audible by any person from a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the motor vehicle. When sound violating this section is produced or reproduced by any such device that is located in a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle's owner, if present when the violation occurs, is guilty of the violation. If the motor vehicle's owner is not present at the time of the violation, the person who has dominion, care or control of the motor vehicle at the time of the violation is guilty of the violation. In addition to an owner or a driver, any person who controls or assists with the production, http://library3.municode.com/4472/DocView/10061/1(299(313 11l6/2008 Chapter 293. Noise Regulations* Page 3 of 6 ��-13�7 reproduction, or amplification of sound in violation of this section is guiity of the violation. (3) Homs and other signals. It shall be a violation of this section to sound any hom or signal device on an automobife, motorcycle, bus or other vehicie, except as a danger signal or traffic waming, which would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a seasonable person of ordinary sensitivities in the area. (4) Application of the MPCA rules. No person shall operate a motor vehicle in the city in violation of the motor vehicle noise limits of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Rules, Sections 7030.1000 through 7030.1600. (� Pena/ties. (1) A violation of any section of this chapter is a misdemeanor, and a sentence of not more than ninety (90) days in jail, or a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or both, may be imposed. a. Each day a violation of this ordinance is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense and may be punished separately. (C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 05-264, § 2, 4-27-05) Editor's note: C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, adopted August 14, 2002, amended the Code by repealing former §§ 293.02--293.04, and adding a new § 293.02. Former §§ 293.02-293.04 pertained to noisy assembly; motor vehicles; and horns and audible signaling, respectively; and derived from Ord. No. 16915, adopted May 20, 1982; and Ord. No. 17448, adopted Aprii 28, 1987. Sec.293.03. Reserved. Note: See editor's note, § 293.02. Sec. 293.04. Railroad locomotives, sounding whistles. (a) Statement of legislative finding intent and purpose. The council finds that the sounding of railroad locomotive whistles at grade crossings is on the increase. The increased use of railroad locomotive whisties at grade crossings throughout the city and especially in residential neighborhoods near railroad grade crossings has created an atmosphere that is conducive neither to the quiet enjoyment of property nor to the peace and dignity of the city. For the purposes of protecting and promoting the safety, welfare and convenience of the public, and the safety, welfare and convenience of the railroad employees operating locomotives in the city, and in conformance with Minn. Stat. §§ 219.567, the council finds it necessary to establish the following noise regulation pertaining to railroad locomotive whistles. (b) Unnecessarily sounding whistles. No person shalV sound or bfow any whistle of any locomotive within the city limits, except as a warning of imminent and immediate danger to life os property. The sounding of any locomotive whistle shatf be prima facie evidence that it was sounded by the engineer operating the locomotive. (C.F. No. 98-522, § 1, 7-8-98; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02) Editor's note: C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, adopted August 14, 2002, amended the Code by renumbering former § 293.04.1 as a new § 293.04. Sec.293.05. Exhaust. No person shail discharge or permit the discharge of any steam engine, stationary intemal combustion engine, motor boat, motor vehicle or snowmobile except through a muffler or other device http://library3.municode.com/4472/DocView/1 006 1/1/299/3 1 3 I 1/6/2008 STATE OF MTNNESOT" ` ��-/3107 , ss. AFFIDAVTl' OF SE._ JICE BY U.S. MAIL COUI3TY OF RAMSEY ) Julie Kraus, being fust duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 6`�' day of November, she served the attached NOTICE OF INTENT TO DENY LICENSE AND REQUEST FOR MODIF'ICATION OF EXISTING LICENSE CONDITION by placing a true and correct copy thereof in an envelope addressed as foliows: Owner/Manager Daza Thai Restaurant 769 Milton Street North St. Paul, MN 55104 5ong Thao 1521 Cumberland Street St. Paul, MN 55117 Tait Danielson Castillo, Exec. Director Thomas-Dale/District 7 Planning Council 533 I3orth Dale Street St. Paul, MN 55103 (which is the last known address of said person) depositing the same, with postage prepaid, in the United States mail at St. Paul, Minnesota. � J Julie Kraus Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6�' day of November, 2008 ` ���lt�sc� i'%'l - ,.����.,€i� Notary P� ublic RITA M. BOSSARD NOTARY PUBLIC-MMNESOTA MY COMMISSION FJ(PfRESJAN 31,261 G � w�- v-a =a